Core 2 Duo 64 bit performance

T

ToastMaster

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
483
Has anyone seen any benchmarks for a comparison between the X2's 64bit performance and Conroe's? I'd really be interested in seeing if Intel actually revised their 64 bit instructions, or if it's still the hacked instructions applied to the P4s.

Edit - yes, I realize that 64 bit performance isn't necessarily important right now, but by mid to late next year, I think you'll start to see it playing a larger factor.
 
I think until there is a killer game that uses 64-bit instructions very well along with a great efficient quad threaded (minimum # of threads) code and a memory footprint bigger than 2-4gb, 64 bit will not be a big factor for this crowd.

ETA for those kinds of games? I'd say 2009 for the *first* to show up...


**edit**- to answer your questions, I dont have any links, but I do recall seeing 64-bit benches of the Conroe against Athlon 64s and it performed as good as we could have hoped.
 
i would guess from the perfomace increase that intel did this one *right*
so no screw balls here, their rears where being handed to them on a silver platter so they shapped up...

as for the games hmm.
2005 was the real begining for 64 bit dual core architechture soooo..
plus 3 years minimal development time,
2008 for games and such
 
Well, Microsoft planned Vista as being the true 64-bit system, unlike Windows XP 64 bit edition.

By 2007, almost all retail systems will be 64 bit.

The mainstream versions of Vista will be 64 bit, as well as the enthusiast versions. Microsoft has been saying for probably the last two years that Vista would be 64 bit, and seeing as how developers knew that the industry was moving this way, they'd probably have begun making 3-year projects 64bit compatible. Thus, if it's been going on since mid to late 2004 (given that the Athlon 64 was introduced in the fall of 2003), that means roughly the first high-quality 64 bit games would begin arriving in 2007. :)
 
What I want to know is: EM64T or AMD64; which is better?? I know when Intel first released EM64T chips they were missing some of the features of AMD64. I assume that with the Conroe, it has become just as full featured as the AMD version. Am I correct with this assumption?

The reason I ask is because when I retire my gaming machines they become my server. So sometime in its lifespan, my Conroe system is going to be running 64bit Windows Server and 64bit Exchange. This makes 64bit performance a huge issue for me!!


To the OP. There have been some benchmarks between the new Xenons and Opterons in native 64bit benchmark programs and OSes. Just do a search. However I have not seen any that have compared Desktop CPUs using the same tests. :(
 
EM64T/Yamhill was just a reverse-engineered AMD64 (and the initial flavors lacked some instructions from AMD64.) AMD chips look to get a higher percentage increase in performance when going from 32bit to 64bit than intel chips in some cases, which makes me think that AMD64 simply works better on K8 than anything else (similar to SSE3 being better on the P4 than the K8, except AMD64 has tangible benefits for some ;) ) But there are other parts where 64bit boosts Woodcrest more than it boosts Opteron. Very odd.
http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=5


One thing to keep in mind is that around Woodcrest's launch, there will be the x220 Opteron, which is a dual core 2.8ghz, closing the gap further (this bench shows a 2.6ghz opteron config)
I don't think AMD is in too much trouble on the server side, heh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top