12 Sep
2006
12 Sep
'06
5:04 p.m.
On Tue Sep 12, 2006 at 08:52:05PM +0200, Alberto Botti wrote:
Il giorno mar, 12/09/2006 alle 19.41 +0300, Sampo
Savolainen ha scritto:
also note that in the benchmarks, somehow AMD still comes out on top in the
'apache' test. which suggests its possibly good at context switching and lots of
threads, compared to Intel. which bodes well for 'nix in general, for all its
interlocking parts.
at the 200 USD price-point, which is sort of a sweet spot, AMD and Intel's offerings
are pretty comparable. i'd start with a video and wireless chip you know are supported
properly on linux, then pick a CPU that will go with it. unless you enjoy lockups, and
proprietary drivers that won't compile with your xorg version, running Windows
installers and copying over SYS files and mucking with NDISwrapper and all of
that..unfortunately this means youre stuck with Intel. the joy of vendor lock-in :/
The bottom line: Core 2 Duo beats anything AMD
can offer. Even the more
cheaper not top-of-the-line Core 2 Duo processors kill the fastest AMD
processors in most cases. Oh, and the AMD processors use almost twice
the energy of a Core 2 Duo.
Though. All of this will change eventually, of course. :)
:)
The lower grade AMDs are still competitive with the comparable ones from
Intel, and are available in two low-consumption models, lower than Intel
(ADO, rated at 65W maximum, and ADD, at 35W). They might be useful to
build a near-silent pc (but you'll might run into issues with NVidia and
ATI chipsets, VIA might be a good choice).
At least according to these tests (note: conducted under Windows)
http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/low_e/