• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

C2Q, C2D and AMD CPUs comparisons using a 4870 X2

#1. Keep things on topic
#2. Don't incite arguments
#3. Don't insult people

If these three simple rules plus any other rule in the TPU rulebook are broken in this thread after this post, infractions will be given, no more warnings. Be good.:slap:
 
Hi guys
Ok if you take what the Intel x2 (3.6ghz) did in the 5 test and than take what the Intel x4
(3.6 ghz)did the Intel x4 wins by 25 fps average . In fact the difference is smaller going form a Intel x2 cpu to the Intel x4 cpu than the same jump AMD x2 cpu to Phenom cpu 37 fps average diff.
 
Hi guys
Ok if you take what the Intel x2 (3.6ghz) did in the 5 test and than take what the Intel x4
(3.6 ghz)did the Intel x4 wins by 25 fps average . In fact the difference is smaller going form a Intel x2 cpu to the Intel x4 cpu than the same jump AMD x2 cpu to Phenom cpu 37 fps average diff.

That's because Athlons are starting to show their age.
 
As someone looking to upgrade their system in the very near term, one of the options I was heavily leaning towards was and athlon 3.0ghz as a cheap option. These results have strongly suggested that would be a waste of time/money to me.

Still not sure wether I will go phenom or core2 or neleham but at least ruled one option out. 37 frames is a lot to give away on current games, not counting future ones.

Thread was worthwhile for that alone in my mind. Thanks.

Tye
 
Something wrong with those intel quad core COH benchmarks. A q6600 at stock is 2.5x better than a x4 9950? Also they are almost double the C2D scores.
 
Something wrong with those intel quad core COH benchmarks. A q6600 at stock is 2.5x better than a x4 9950? Also they are almost double the C2D scores.
Look at the bars in red, that will show you the CPU's at stock. In that review the 9650 is 9 FPS faster then a Q6600 at stock using a 4870 X2.
 
Back
Top