AMD's 65nm Preview Part 2 - The Plot Thickens (Updated with Information from AMD)
by Anand Lal Shimpi on December 21, 2006 12:12 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
3D Rendering Performance & Power Usage
3D rendering performance under 3dsmax 8 continues to be a strong suit of Intel's, but the E6600's advantage is narrowed dramatically by the lower clock speed and smaller cache size of the E6400. Take price into account, and the E6400 is clearly the winner here. Once again, there's no real performance difference between the 90nm and 65nm AMD cores here, which is quite impressive given the significantly higher L2 access penalty with Brisbane.
Average power consumption under 3dsmax 8 is in line with what we've been seeing thus far, and taking both performance and power into account gives us similar results as well.
Performance under Cinebench is closer between AMD and Intel, which also impacts the performance per watt results. There's a slight performance difference between the Windsor (90nm) and Brisbane (65nm) cores, but nothing to write home about.
52 Comments
View All Comments
theteamaqua - Thursday, December 21, 2006 - link
man i hope this thing overclocks like conroe.... otherwise no one will get quad fatherbut i already have E6400 @ 3.4GHz ...
might get Q6600 , Q6400 or Yorksfield or Altair ... ill what see what happens
clairvoyant129 - Thursday, December 21, 2006 - link
Right here,http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...
Nothing special though.
Better to stick with the 90nm X2 then this piece of junk.