F@H and Rossetta Performance with x2 or am2 3800+ vs 6400 Conroe

[CupCak3]

I?m looking to buy a new system. I was pretty set on getting an x2 with the new price drops but do to power savings; I?ve been looking at an am2 or Conroe. I wanted to save some $$$ and not have to buy new RAM but I figure I?ll either buy it now or on my next upgrade.

If anyone could point me to any data or experience with performance between the amd vs intel option that would be great!


Thanks,
Drew

 

[BlackMountainCow]

I'd suggest either X2 with AM2 socket or Conroe. I wouldn't go with a 939 socket for AMD anymore, as DDR2 really is the future now.

Deciding between X2 and Conroe is a tough one. By bare number, Core 2 Duo almost alway beats the X2 at same clock speeds. Anandtech recently had a pretty good article and comparison on the front page recently and I'd really suggest you read that one to help you decide. I hate to say it, but Core2Duo is a better architecture than the X2 in most cases. But then again, if you're a die hard AMD fan, go for the X2 all the way, especially with the recent monster price drop, they're still really good CPUs, and if power saving is an issue for you, the AM2 won't let you down.

:beer:

 

[CupCak3]

thanks for the reply BlackMountainCow!


Actually I've seen the AT artical along with a couple others. I know the 6400 is a better performer but I'm just wondering how much w/in the different DC projects.

 

[BlackMountainCow]

Good question! I guess that F@H might do better on the Conroe because of the larger cache, but that's just guessing.

 

[Philippart]

rosetta runs better on amd as far as i know

 

[GLeeM]

Someone with a 4MB cache Merom with 2x256MB DDR2 RAM and Win XP Pro SP2 was getting 728 ppd per core running those 364 point bonus WUs in Folding@Home! Imagine 1457.5 ppd on one computer!

Check out Uncle_Fungus's hardware comparison database for how CPUs stack up when running different WUs.

 

[Buzzman151]

I'm definatley interested in this also..

 

[Smoke]

There is still a lot of crunching left in the older systems. $ per credit is always hard to figure and when you throw in the cost of electricity, things really get complicated.

IP address Show IP address
Domain name smoke
Local Standard Time UTC -8 hours
Name smoke
Created 20 Jun 2006 12:48:10 UTC
Total Credit 101,618.14
Recent average credit 1,591.50
CPU type GenuineIntel
Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.66GHz
Number of CPUs 2
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
Professional Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)
Memory 1023.04 MB
Cache 976.56 KB
Swap space 2461.29 MB
Total disk space 98.17 GB
Free Disk Space 84.81 GB
Measured floating point speed 3904.58 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 13271.12 million ops/sec
Average upload rate 7.23 KB/sec
Average download rate Unknown
Average turnaround time 2.02 days
Maximum daily WU quota per CPU 100/day
Results 154
Number of times client has contacted server 1564
Last time contacted server 6 Aug 2006 13:26:56 UTC
% of time BOINC client is running 99.7828 %
While BOINC running, % of time work is allowed 99.9851 %
Average CPU efficiency 0.998239
Result duration correction factor 1.11754

 

[CupCak3]

I definately agree smoke.... there is definately alot of crunching left in the some older machines, but i'm looking into replacing mine and my wife's main machines.

electic costs definately have a big impact on the $/perfomance. I've figured out my costs but now I just need to get a handle on the performances.