Dual Xeons vs. Single Athlon (Thrax will LOVE this)

[Geeky1]

Refurbished Athlon XP2600m @ newegg: $90
2x brand new, retail boxed 2.8GHz Xeons @ Fry's: ~$700 after tax

Having your dual xeons clocked @ 3.2GHz and still getting their ass kicked by a 2.586GHz 2600m: priceless

:rant:
I think there's something else going on here though, because I've never seen a 3dmark score this low from a 6800GT. I'm going to reinstall windows and see what happens. Need to flash the BIOS too. But still...

[entropy]

Oh shut up. You just wanted to advertise your desktop :p

[Geeky1]

No, actually this stems from the "post your 3dmark03 score" thread over @ techangel. I was gonna post mine, but there's no way in **** I'm posting that Xeon benchmark. I'd die of embarassment. Besides, I'm sure a number of people *cough*thrax*cough* will find the fact that a $90 athlon pwn3d either $350 or $700 worth of Xeons (depending on how you look at it; 3DM is not SMP-enabled, so I suppose you could say it only pwn3d 1 Xeon)

[Thrax]

Is 3dmark hyperthreaded?

Not like it really matters, even the single Xeon CPU got its ass kicked on an 800MHz advantage.. It's still worth asking.

[mmonnin]

A dual machine could have a possible advantage in that 3dmark would have its own CPU and the OS/other stuff could have the other CPU. Could only be a difference of a few points tho.

[dalailama]

how would an AMD ATHLON64 3200 processor compare against a intel processor?

[Gobbles]

what motherboards are you using respectively?

[Leonardo]

how would an AMD ATHLON64 3200 processor compare against a intel processor? That all depends on which Intel processor you wish to compare.

[madmat]

I still think something's not right with that score Geeky1 because my 6800nu at stock speeds gets 9k+ on '03 and at the OC I have it at now gets 10,200 roughly.
I wish I could figure it out though, I still think you should try setting it to have affinity with a specific CPU though and maybe like mmonnin suggested set the OS to run on the other one.

[dalailama]

my processor, amd 3200 is 2.2 ghz, what kind of intel processor would that be equal to, like 2.6.... 2.8

[Leonardo]

More like a P4 3.2/3.0. AMD started using the '+' naming convention on their processors a couple years back due to confusion in the consumer market. Most casual computer users assumed (and still do) that the megaherz rating of a processor is the primary or only gauge whereby one can estimate CPU performance. Not so. AMD countered by giving their processors performance equivalent ratings - "PR" numbers.

Until just recently, Intel would only use MHz measurements to rate their CPUs. Intel is now starting to switch to model numbers. The whole performance rating system in the past would be tantamount to rating cars on their engine RPMs. Is a Honda Accord (with or without fartcan exhaust pipe) at 6000 RPM better than a Corvette at 3500 RPM?