14 DAY TRIAL // Intel's Core 2 Duo CPU architecture clearly wiped the floor with AMD's X2 line-up last year. However, AMD is expected to dethrone Intel's current C2D CPUs with their native quad-cores later this year. But, as Intel is ready to release its own 45nm quad-cores next year, it looks like the supremacy war on the CPU market could go on forever... assuming that AMD is able to withstand the pressure, that is.
The two archenemies were present at Microprocessor Forum this week and presented all sorts of advanced technologies. With AMD strutting Barcelona all over the Forum, Intel decided to counterattack and demoed its V8 workstation running the POV-Ray benchmark. The V8 workstation is equipped with a variety of prototype goodies that should be released in 2008: Intel's Workstation Board S5000XVN, 2 quad-core Xeons 5365 clocked at 3GHz and 16GB RAM. Not bad for a workstation! So, how does this 8-core baby perform? Absolutely astounding: over 4,933 points versus a little bit over 4,000 for AMD's 4 sockets quad-core (Barcelona) system. Intel wants us to smell the decline of AMD, as its 8-core system obliterates no less than sixteen Barcelona cores.
"If you take 16 cores at 1.8Ghz, divided by 2 and add 60% to get to 3.0Ghz, it gives POV-Ray score of 3600 for 8 cores. Meaning that at 3.0GHz, Barcelona still lose by quite some compare to an 8 cores Clowertown system. Why do you need 16 cores, when you can do better with 8. Our 8 core system is 30% faster than the 16 core machine AMD showed to the press yesterday. I just don't understand how they can claim to be 40% faster", said Francois Piednoel, an Intel engineer present at the show.
How about that, AMD? Assuming the results were not somehow manipulated, AMD has some explaining to do. Moreover, at the same show, Intel also demoed a system with a 45nm Penryn quad-core processor, which proved to be 40% faster than the current top of the line quad-core Core 2 Extreme processor QX6800. A rather decent performance boost, I'd say.