Choosing the Right Client Computing Platform For Public Sector - Intel
Choosing the Right Client Computing Platform For Public Sector - Intel
Choosing the Right Client Computing Platform For Public Sector - Intel
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
* O<strong>the</strong>r names and brands may be<br />
claimed as <strong>the</strong> property of o<strong>the</strong>rs.<br />
Note: Performance tests and ratings<br />
are measured using specific computer<br />
systems and/or components and<br />
reflect <strong>the</strong> approximate performance<br />
of <strong>Intel</strong> products as measured by<br />
those tests. Any difference in system<br />
hardware or software design or<br />
configuration may affect actual<br />
performance. Buyers should consult<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r sources of information to<br />
evaluate <strong>the</strong> performance of systems<br />
or components <strong>the</strong>y are considering<br />
purchasing. <strong>For</strong> more information<br />
on performance tests and on <strong>the</strong><br />
performance of <strong>Intel</strong> products, visit<br />
http://www.intel.com/performance.<br />
intel’s Previous generation Products Supersede<br />
Phenom* in Power and Performance<br />
According to several independent studies, <strong>Intel</strong>’s previous generation products have outperformed Phenom* both in terms of power and<br />
performance. Here is what several reviewers had to say about <strong>the</strong> comparison:<br />
• “The fastest triple-core CPU is on par with <strong>Intel</strong>'s dual-core E4700.” - AnandTech*, 23 April 2008 LINK<br />
• “The three cores simply aren't quick enough, individually, to make this triple-core product look appealing.”<br />
- Tech Report*, 23 April 2008 LINK<br />
• “Today, we're having to conclude that AMD*'s tri-core Phenom* X3 8750 is no match for <strong>Intel</strong>'s Core 2 Quad Q6600, and<br />
barely a threat to <strong>Intel</strong>'s Core 2 Duo E8200.” - Hexus.net*, 23 April 2008 LINK<br />
• "... from <strong>the</strong> economical standpoint new Phenom* X3 family still fails to compete with <strong>Intel</strong> processors."<br />
- X-bit Labs*, 22 April 2008 LINK<br />
Figure 12. SYSmark* 2007 – Overall comparison Figure 13. Load System Power Consumption<br />
SYSmark* 2007 – Overall<br />
Score in SYSmarks (Higher is Better)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E8400 (3.00GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.00GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E7200 (2.53GHz)<br />
AMD* Phenom* X4 9750 (2.4GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E6550 (2.33GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E4700 (2.60GHz)<br />
AMD* Phenom* X3 8750 (2.4GHz)<br />
AMD* Athlon* X2 6000+ (3.0GHz)<br />
AMD* Phenom* X3 8650 (2.3GHz)<br />
AMD* Athlon* X2 5600+ (2.8GHz)<br />
AMD* Phenom* X3 8450 (2.1GHz)<br />
132<br />
126<br />
126<br />
122<br />
122<br />
117<br />
117<br />
111<br />
111<br />
149<br />
143<br />
161<br />
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180<br />
diSPElling COmmOn CliEnt COmPuting miSCOnCEPtiOnS<br />
Load System Power Consumption (WMV Encoding)<br />
Total System Power Consumption in Watts (Lower is Better)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E7200 (2.53GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E4700 (2.60GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E6550 (2.33GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E8400 (3.00GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.00GHz)<br />
<strong>Intel</strong>® Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz)<br />
AMD* Phenom* X3 8750 (2.4GHz)<br />
AMD* Athlon* X2 6000+ (3.0GHz)<br />
AMD* Phenom* X4 9750 (2.4GHz)<br />
86<br />
101<br />
102<br />
104<br />
118<br />
125<br />
148<br />
166<br />
209<br />
0 50 100 150 200 250<br />
Source for graphs: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3293&p=1<br />
15