Articles: CPU
 

Bookmark and Share

(5) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 ]

Performance

General Performance

As usual we are going to start the performance analysis with SYSMark 2007 results – a complex benchmark that estimates the systems performance in all sorts of real applications.

Judging by this data we can conclude that in terms of average performance low-cost AMD processors look a little more preferable than their competitors from the Intel camp. Single-core Sempron 140 performs obviously better than single-core Celeron 450; dual-core Athlon II X22 215 outperforms dual-core Celeron CPUs including the new generation ones; and Athlon II X2 240 runs neck and neck with Pentium E5200. AMD’s results are especially impressive in E-Learning pattern that emulates creation of flash-presentations with high-quality images, video and audio. However, at the same time, all these processors lose to their competitors in 3D pattern dealing with 3D modeling applications. The remaining two patterns working with HD video processing and editing as well as typical office suites reveal moderate, but not dramatic advantage demonstrated by AMD CPUs.

Besides SYSMark 2007 test for complex performance analysis we decided to use Windows Experience Index built into Windows 7 operating system. The graph below shows the CPU part of this index:

Very familiar picture: the test integrated into Windows 7, just like SYSMark 2007, considers value AMD solutions to be faster than Celeron and junior Pentium models.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 5
Discussion started: 12/04/09 02:36:31 PM
Latest comment: 12/30/09 02:32:37 AM

View comments

Add your Comment