Dfx escribió:
Se sabe algo de las placas con chipset 1xxx?
undertaker00 escribió:djohny24 escribió:Justo al revés macho... menos consumo, más rendimiento. En todas las reviews.
Me referia la comparacion contra un quad intel.
Anand Lal Shimpi escribió: Projected Performance: Can AMD Catch up with Intel?
I keep going back to this slide because it's incredibly relevant. It's the only indication we have from AMD of what its future roadmap will look like in terms of performance increases
Each year AMD promised to increase performance of its high-end cores by roughly 10 - 15%. Astute observers will note that, at this rate, AMD will almost never catch up to Intel. AMD at the time was careful to point out that it's talking about 10 - 15% gains in core performance, and it could potentially see even larger increases in total chip performance by pulling other levers. Vishera is an example of AMD doing just that. The Piledriver cores by themselves don't increase performance tremendously, but they do give AMD a little more thermal headroom to work with thanks to some more efficient design decisions and better transistor choice. With Vishera, AMD took the additional power headroom and turned into a frequency advantage. The result is AMD's FX-8350 can operate in the same power envelope as the outgoing FX-8150, yet runs at an 11% higher base clock (turbo frequency remains the same). Through frequency and core level improvements, AMD was able to deliver a bit more than the 10 - 15% performance increased in promised.
seguir leyendo: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the- ... 0-tested/7
TRASTARO escribió:Nuevas comparativas, esta ves no solo entre procesadores sino entre el chipset north bridgede la tarjeta madre. vemos que ahi tambien AMD tiene desventaja en el manejo de la memoria principalmente, lo que en parte seria lo que retenga el rendimiento del procesador en algunas circunstancias.
Con OC
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1 ... usion.html
