ArsTechnica has an article that compares AMD’s newest K8L architecture based Quad Core Barcelona against the Intel’s Core microarchitecture based Quad Core Kentsfield. After going through the article it looks like AMD’s K8L architecture has some juice to compete with Intel’s Core microarchitecture. AMD’s Barcelona core is a native quad core whereas Intel’s Kentsfield is not, but Intel’s Yorkfield is a native quad core but not much about it is known.
The conclusion of the article is:
My preliminary conclusion is that Intel has a more powerful core microarchitecture than AMD, but AMD’s die- and system-level integration will be superior when K8L launches. This makes it much harder to predict how Intel- and AMD-based at similar price points will perform on different application types, and it makes it especially difficult for reviewers to interpret benchmark results intelligently after the fact.
Because systems from the two vendors are so different, the most worthwhile way to do a bakeoff will be to pick a price range and benchmark two similarly-outfitted machines within that range against each other. What will most useful for consumers of product reviews will be to see how similarly priced systems stack up against each other in terms of both performance and power consumption (measured at the wall outlet).
The complete article can be read here. I am right now on Intel’s side has they got a winner by their side but it will change if AMD’s K8L matches or outperforms Intel, one more reason for me to be on Intel’s side is that they currently offer the most affordable dual core solution with Intel Pentium D 805.
Did you enjoy this article? Please subscribe to RSS Feed to receive all the updates!
- No related posts found