Originally posted by: Blain
Nothing, it was only posted as a reference for the information I stated. Which was...Originally posted by: Ichigo
What does that link prove,
"Evaluated on a Price/Performance basis, the higher clocked 45nm dual cores are a much better value than the 65nm quad cores.
There just aren't enough consumer applications that would benefit from the extra two cores, to justify the higher price point of the (45nm) quad cores."
I see that there are basically three CPU issues here.
1. The cheapest CPU that will perform at a basic level for what chess9 needs.
2. The best balanced Price/Performance CPU that maximizes the dollars spent vs performance delivered.
3. The absolute best performing CPU for the tasks listed, regardless of price.
* Is there an agreement here that the QX9770 / 3.2GHz / 12MB L2 cache processor would deliver chess9 the best performance possible?
* I assume those that feel the QX9770 delivers the best performance, would also agree that it's not the best CPU for the build that chess9 has planned... Correct?
LOL. Totally agree there! I've been leaning towards the e84-8600 series, or possible go as far afield as the q9650. The dollar spread is incredible for so little, if any, improvement in frame rates and useability.
-Robert
