Wow so much response. I definately am going to get and
intel dual
core. Just to fan the flame a little bit, has anyone used the macbook
pros for much linux-audio work. I'm either going to get one of those,
or a laptop from
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:
> 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).
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 :/
At least according to these tests (note: conducted under Windows)
http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/low_e/