New article on dual core with linux

[Shimmishim]

what do you guys think?

i am super impressed with how well the intel 840 holds up against the 4200+.. actually the 840 outperformed it in many of the tests...

i know you guys will say you can't compare the lowest end X2 against the highest end 840 but considering the cost... which the 4200+ and the 840 are about the same... i think it was a very fair comparison (in terms of JUST the cost of the processor... not including mobo/ram/ all that other jazz)

well tested article in my opinion...

mad props to the intel/linux combo

 

[Vegitto]

Yeah, Intel did well in the Linux area (this time).

 

[DrMrLordX]

I thought the article wasn't very good. Why are Kubicki's reviews always so limited? He omitted every X2 from the field except the 4200+, he left out the 840EE, and he ran maybe 1/3rd of the benchmarks featured in dual-core benchmarks run on Anandtech in WinXP. For years, hardware review sites have run bargain-priced AMD chips against expensive Intel chips regardless of the price comparison. Now that AMD has some dual-core CPUs out that are more expensive than most of the Intel dual-core offerings, what justification does he have for completely omitting the higher-priced AMD offerings? If it was fair to run benchmarks of a k6-233 vs a P2-300 back in the day, then it's fair to run benchmarks with an 840D and X2 4800+. Throw in the 840EE and you've got something at the same price-point.

He also failed to run anything but five contrived multitasking benchmarks. Where were the benchmarks of one or two CPU-intensive multithreaded apps? Compare Kubicki's article to this one:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410

And see how many benchmarks they ran under the earlier article that Kubicki didn't even attempt to mimick in a Linux environment.