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

Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
edited September 2004 in Hardware
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...

Comments

  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited September 2004
    Oh shut up. You just wanted to advertise your desktop :p
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited September 2004
    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)
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited September 2004
    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.
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited September 2004
    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.
  • dalailamadalailama
    edited September 2004
    how would an AMD ATHLON64 3200 processor compare against a intel processor?
  • GobblesGobbles Ventura California
    edited September 2004
    what motherboards are you using respectively?
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited September 2004
    dalailama wrote:
    how would an AMD ATHLON64 3200 processor compare against a intel processor?
    That all depends on which Intel processor you wish to compare.
  • madmatmadmat
    edited September 2004
    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.
  • dalailamadalailama
    edited September 2004
    my processor, amd 3200 is 2.2 ghz, what kind of intel processor would that be equal to, like 2.6.... 2.8
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited September 2004
    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?
Sign In or Register to comment.