Hi all, it is now my turn to ask for a little help just getting the facts in place for my major system upgrade. Noteworthy is that I have not upgraded my system in the last three years, and even though I have not been "off the hook", I have not had any direct experience with newer hardware since.
So I'll start by asking about these main core components for the bulk of the system upgrade. First off, I've had a hard time deciding which way to go this time. Despite the apparent overwhelming evidence to go Intel this time around (at this point, anything will be an update on my system), here's what I've compiled so far from parts that I can easily get down around these parts:
AMD:
Intel:
Now, all the reviews on the net seem to favor Intel, except for a consistent test: Science Mark. Since I work at a scientific lab on 3D visualization and on occasion take work home I was giving this some thought. However, for all other intents and purposes the Intel systems beat the AMD ones hands down on pretty much all benchmarks. I have not seen any direct comparison of the CPUs in question (at most I've seen comparisons of the E6750 against an FX-62, and the 6000+ is faster than the FX-62.
Now, all the reviews available have one MAJOR flaw: They're done in Windows, and I couldn't find a single meaningful Linux benchmarks/review report. And of course my primary focus is with Linux, NOT Windows. So how would either fair in Linux? I know pretty much any dual core setup would feel leaps ahead of my current system (and the addition of 2Gb of RAM are much appreciated, especially for 64-bit Linux). Are there any significant differences in the CPUs in Linux? One thing I know for certain, the compiler used for test apps DOES have a major impact, more so on Linux than Windows, as the Intel compiler has major boosts of performance on Intel CPUs compared to AMD's, however, it is my understanding, that even -O2 code built in gcc, is slightly faster on AMD CPUs.
Another thing to consider is that the 6000+ is still a K8 at its core (Toledo), and the new K9 (Phaenom or whatever it is going to be called, basically a two-three core CPU based on Barcelona), should be around the corner... And may present the C2D's with more competition than the current sorry state of things.
At any rate there are many technical reasons that make me want to go AMD, due to design purely:
Keep in mind I'll be upgrading from:
So this is indeed a major upgrade. Any insights will be much appreciated! TIA!
So I'll start by asking about these main core components for the bulk of the system upgrade. First off, I've had a hard time deciding which way to go this time. Despite the apparent overwhelming evidence to go Intel this time around (at this point, anything will be an update on my system), here's what I've compiled so far from parts that I can easily get down around these parts:
AMD:
- Motherboard ASUS M2N-SLI DELUXE
- 2 Gb PC6400 DDR2 RAM some or another brand.
- AMD Athlon64 X2 6000+
- EVGA 8600 GTS SuperClocked (720MHz) PCI-E 16x video card.
Intel:
- Abit IP35-E (can't find the Pro version down here)
- Same RAM
- Intel Core 2 Duo E6750
- Same video card.
Now, all the reviews on the net seem to favor Intel, except for a consistent test: Science Mark. Since I work at a scientific lab on 3D visualization and on occasion take work home I was giving this some thought. However, for all other intents and purposes the Intel systems beat the AMD ones hands down on pretty much all benchmarks. I have not seen any direct comparison of the CPUs in question (at most I've seen comparisons of the E6750 against an FX-62, and the 6000+ is faster than the FX-62.
Now, all the reviews available have one MAJOR flaw: They're done in Windows, and I couldn't find a single meaningful Linux benchmarks/review report. And of course my primary focus is with Linux, NOT Windows. So how would either fair in Linux? I know pretty much any dual core setup would feel leaps ahead of my current system (and the addition of 2Gb of RAM are much appreciated, especially for 64-bit Linux). Are there any significant differences in the CPUs in Linux? One thing I know for certain, the compiler used for test apps DOES have a major impact, more so on Linux than Windows, as the Intel compiler has major boosts of performance on Intel CPUs compared to AMD's, however, it is my understanding, that even -O2 code built in gcc, is slightly faster on AMD CPUs.
Another thing to consider is that the 6000+ is still a K8 at its core (Toledo), and the new K9 (Phaenom or whatever it is going to be called, basically a two-three core CPU based on Barcelona), should be around the corner... And may present the C2D's with more competition than the current sorry state of things.
At any rate there are many technical reasons that make me want to go AMD, due to design purely:
- Hyper Transport, is still apparently more efficient for inter CPU communication (though the massive L2 cache of Intel CPUs help them a LOT)
- Integrated memory controller, which means (as demonstrated by many memory benchmarks) better memory access.
Keep in mind I'll be upgrading from:
- K8*800 VIA Platform (motherboard)
- AMD Athlon64 2800+ (S754)
- 1Gb PC2700 RAM
- GeForce FX 5900 (AGP)
So this is indeed a major upgrade. Any insights will be much appreciated! TIA!
Comment