Featured Articles

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

British chip designer ARM could cash in on the mobile industry's rush to transition to 64-bit operating systems and hardware.

More...
Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Samsung has lost smartphone market share, ending the quarter on a low note and Xiaomi appears to be the big winner.

More...
Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

It looks like Intel will be showing off its 14nm processors, codenames Broadwell, in a couple of weeks at CES 2015.

More...
Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Today we’ll be taking a closer look at the recently introduced Gainward GTX 980 4GB with the company’s trademark Phantom cooler.

More...
Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac has been in the nettop and mini-PC space for more than four years now and it has managed to carve…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Friday, 14 March 2008 21:48

Tri-Core Phenom 8600 tested - 3DMark, Power and Thoughts

Written by Eliot Kucharik
ImageImage

Exclusive Preview: Shocker, almost as fast as Quad



3DMark

We checked out how "gaming" would perform with the inegrated HD3200 on the board. Sorry, only 3DMark was available, but we see clearly there is very little difference between tri-core and quad-core. Phenom based CPUs are clock-for-clock faster than any X2. The X2 4850E is running with 2.50GHz compared to the 2.30GHz of the Phenoms, but they are much faster.

Image

Power-Consumption

For our power-consumption test we allocated two CPUs to LameMT and two CPUs to 3DMark06, while the tri-core got two cores for lamemt and one for 3DMark06. We disabled the onboard IGP and put an HD3870 in to have a little comparison to our Intel testbed. The tri-core is quite disappointing because it used nearly as much energy as the quad-core.

Image


Thoughts

The tri-core is a good improvement for AMD to increase performance, because the X2 is quite outdated and there is still no AMD product which can compete with any Intel Core CPU. We think AMD will sell the tri-cores at the price of an Intel dual-core. While the power-consumption is quite high, the most important for any user is the price. Getting three cores for the price of two will be a nice deal, anyway.

If you've got any thoughts of your own about AMD's new tri-core, feel free to discuss the issue on our message board, here's the thread.
(Page 2 of 2)
Last modified on Saturday, 15 March 2008 00:09
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments