 |
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||
Today we are throwing the new Intel Pentium G6950 processor head to head with the AMD Phenom II X2 550. Although both are dual-core processors priced at just $100 US, that is where the similarities stop, as these are two very unique processors. For this reason we are interested to learn how they compare in a number of tests… When we first reviewed the AMD Phenom II X2 550 processor back in May 2009, we suggested that it was the best dual-core processor money could buy, and at just $100 US on launch day it did not take a great deal of money to own one. Since then AMD has not released a faster Phenom II X2 processor, though they do plan to release the Phenom II X2 555 very soon.  Therefore the Phenom II X2 550 has remained AMD’s flagship dual-core processor for about 8 months now. Until recently Intel has had nothing to counter the Phenom II X2 550 with, as the Core 2 Duo E6000 and E7000 series processors are no match, while the E8000 series is far too expensive. Recently Intel did launch a new batch of high-performance dual-core processors in the form of the Core i5 600 and Core i3 500 series. The Core i5 650 is the cheapest processor of its series, though at $195 US it is considerably more expensive than the Phenom II X2 550. Then there is the Core i3 530, which is the cheapest processor in its series, though again at $125 US it is more expensive than AMD’s dual-core flagship processor. There is however one more new Intel dual-core processor, known as the Pentium G6950 which is priced at $100 US. This means the Pentium G6950 is in essence Intel’s answer to the Phenom II X2 550, but can their slowest and cheapest dual-core processor defeat AMD’s most expensive and fastest? The Phenom II X2 550 really is an impressive processor because other than losing a pair of cores, it is identical to the Phenom II X4 955 processor in every single way. The Pentium G6950 on the other hand is a cut-down version of a processor, which is a cut-down version of another processor. Starting with the Core i5-600 series, we have processors ranging from 3.20 – 3.46GHz in frequency with Turbo Mode and a 4MB L3 cache. The next step down takes us to the Core i3 500 series, which includes processors operating at 2.93GHz and 3.06GHz without Turbo Mode, while the L3 cache capacity is still 4MB. Then we have the lone Pentium G6950 which operates at 2.80GHz without Turbo Mode and with a smaller 3MB L3 cache. The memory speed has also been dropped from the 1333MHz of the Core i5/i3 processors to just 1066MHz. However other than these few changes the Pentium G6950 is essentially the same as a Core i3 processor, and clock for clock there should not be a great deal of difference between them in terms of performance. Rather than test these processors on high-end AMD and Intel motherboards that cost upwards of $200 US, we are comparing them on motherboards you are more likely to use them on. This means for AMD the affordable ASUS M4A785T-M/CSM motherboard featuring the AMD 785G with a price tag of $85 US. Representing Intel we have the Gigabyte H55M-UD2H which is priced at $100 US. |
|||||
|
|
xuser |
Posted on: 03/11/2010 04:03 PM
I think the AMD does a pretty good job in the Far Cry 2 test, since Far Cry 2 is Intel-optimized. The same goes for Everest. |
|
ProX |
Posted on: 03/11/2010 10:44 PM
Funny that isn’t it how guys cry about Far Cry 2 being optimized for Intel yet AMD receive one of their best gaming results with it. As for Everest how is that Intel optimized, that’s news to me? It has been used to measure memory bandwidth and shows the exact same results are SiSoft, let me guess that’s Intel optimized as well? |
|
Chris |
Posted on: 04/14/2010 12:34 PM
forleg what are you smoking? That made no sense, I just don't think you understood what you were reading. |
|
Steve Posts: 80 Joined: 2010-02-08 |
Posted on: 04/14/2010 12:42 PM
@forleg - You have got to be joking. Are you serious? You are trying to tell me no tech site highlights the fact that AMD offers a more flexible upgrade path with their AM3 processors which are backwards compatible with AM2 and AM2+ motherboards. I like how you have taken the time to post a rather lengthy comment yet you clearly did not read the review. Here is a quote from the conclusion... “For those already in possession of an older AM2/AM2+ motherboard who are seeking a cheap processor upgrade, the Phenom II X2 550 will be the way to go. However, should you be building a new computer from scratch we suggest going with the Intel Pentium G6950 processor.” Pretty much says it all really but I would just like to add ... while you are at it trying to spread crap about sites being bias towards Intel I would just like to point out that we do not even work with Intel, they do not support us in most of our reviews where as AMD does with loads of review samples. That said we have no interest in favoring any company in our reviews. |
|
forleg |
Posted on: 04/14/2010 08:25 AM
I do not see this review to be a good advice to the majority of the consumer conscious people in the world. Most, or all tech review sites in the world, do exist to help the manufacturers to sell more and more and more, using all imaginable persuasive technicals to lure to consumer to buy. The key conclusion in this review, is that the two cpu's are neck to neck. Now I ask: What does that matter? Let me explain my point. Personal computers are trivial machines, and many families have 2, 3 or more, at home, today. To keep a balanced computer power at home, by certain time it's necessary to swap components, oldest pieces may be deprecated, and some new pieces would need to be bought. Rarely one would have to buy a completely new machine. Now, let's look at the disgrace of a family that has today 4 Intel socket 775 at home, with cpus like celerons, Pentiums and core2duo. How much will they need to spent to update today, and become a little beat future proof? How many CPU's, memory and mobos will they need to buy? Now lets see the same example of that family, if they had instead gone for the AMD brand. Most probable, all they would have to buy today, would be 1 or 2 cpu's. This is the kind of reality that makes a huge difference in a family budget, but we never see it highlighted in any tech review. Maybe due to the financial power Intel is able to spread everywhere. |
|
Code M |
Posted on: 06/16/2010 06:00 AM
Intel is overrated and manipulates the market way too much. AMD is the way to go as the performance gap is trivial and the performance from AMD is way good. Interesting how this article favors Intel over AMD, and it's so obvious as you overclocked the Pentium and included benchmarks for it yet fail to mention that the 550 callisto can successfully be unlocked to a 4 core CPU. Neither did you include any CC benchmarks for the 550. Shame on you! If that isn't favoritism I don't know what is. |
|
Webmaster |
Posted on: 06/17/2010 08:16 AM
@ Code M - hahaha shame on you for being such an obvious and idiotic fan boy! For god’s sake let them have an opinion. If they are not favoring AMD they are favoring Intel, if they are not favoring ATI they are favoring Nvidia. Seriously grow up and get over it, they have to come to a conclusion based on their findings and this time around I think it was fair enough. |
|
bodasactra |
Posted on: 09/14/2010 01:32 PM
Let me say first I am a fan of both Intel and AMD but to be fair your benchmark test results do not match up with any other results I have seen for this chip. I have included a url below as an example of the Everest memory bandwidth results I see on other review sites concerning this chip. Please note the results at the other site are consistent at 10601 with most reviews I have seen on this chip. Why are your results so much lower in the 7000s? You are also testing an overclocked Intel against a factory clocked AMD Black Edition I have never heard of an objective comparison review that has one chip overclocked and one not. In fact, the 550 should be overclocked in the test as AMD Black Edition chips are designed just for that reason. It is much more probable that the 550BE will be used overclocked and other review sites show the overclock numbers for all Black Edition chips for this reason. You also mention that the Intel chip has faster L2 cache. How about the L3 cache? The Intel chip has no L3 and uses L2 as its primary but the Phenom has 6MB of L3 and that is it's primary. You fail to mention the L3 cache when commenting on L2 cache results alone. The Intel chip has nothing near the whopping 7MB total cache the AMD 550BE has. I find it hard to see how the 550, with all that cache, lost the Everest memory bandwidth test. Results from other sites clearly demonstrate what happens when a dual core Phenom II chip has the same L3 as the flagship 965 quad core. Since the shared L3 cache is only divided among two cores on the 550 it has more concentrated memory power (3.5MB per core) than any dual core chip made. It is no wonder that many call this the fastest dual core in the world. It beats many quad cores from both AMD and Intel in applications that use 2 threads or less. These are more impressive facts when one considers that most software is still using two or less threads. That would mean that most people would find the 550BE faster in everyday use than many chips costing several hundred more. The 550BE overclocks to 3.6 mhz with the factory fan in seconds using the AMD Overdrive utility. At that speed the 550 shows an 18-20% increase in performance. Imagine how well it compares to the more expensive chips it already beat at stock clocks when testing with two core designed software applications. It blows them off the test charts. You never mention the fact that the 550 has all four cores found on the deneb die with two disabled by AMD and that they can be turned on in many 550 chips basically making it a quad core 945BE. The 550 is now down to $80.00 and IMO thats the best bang for the buck chip ever made. There are so many really important facts you fail to mention. The numbers don't match up with the rest of the review sites. I find this review to be a very unreliable measure of this chip. I would encourage anyone building a high performance low budget system to choose the Phenom II 550BE chip. Everest results from another review. http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=310&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=4 |
|
Steve Posts: 80 Joined: 2010-02-08 |
Posted on: 09/15/2010 12:56 AM
First of all bodasactra let me just congratulate you on winning the award for “most poorly construced thread of 2010”, an impressive feat. :P The URL you provided showed the processors using DDR3-1600 memory, we used DDR3-1066 for that particular test which was clearly specified in the system specs and you are amazed our bandwidth scores were a little lower? "You are also testing an overclocked Intel against a factory clocked AMD Black Edition I have never heard of an objective comparison review that has one chip overclocked and one not" No we were testing an Intel Pentium G6950 against an AMD Phenom II X2 555 processor. The overclocked results were simply so we could make a clock for clock comparison comparing the architecture. You then go on jumping up and down about cache like those facts had any influence on the outcome of the review? The conclusions were based on the performance and the fact is the 2.80GHz Pentium G6950 was faster than the Phenom II X2 555 in both Excel and Photoshop CS4 and when comparing the processors on a clock-for-clock basis the Pentium G6950 was much faster. The Phenom II X2 555 was faster in games because it was clocked higher. Again when comparing them on a clock-for-clock basis the Pentium G6950 was much faster. Again you bang on about cache but again when comparing the clock-for-clock encoding performance the Pentium G6950 beat the Phenom II X2 555 hands down. Really the only way the Phenom II X2 555 is superior to the Pentium G6950 is its ability to unlock the 3rd and 4th cores. The review was accurate in January and it still holds true 9 months later. |
|
ProX |
Posted on: 09/15/2010 01:11 AM
Core unlocking has become far more user-friendly which helps make the Phenom II X2 processors much more attractive. Back when I first read this review there was only a handful of boards that supported core unlocking where as today all AMD 8-series boards support it and the procedure is extremely easy. I have overclocked my Phenom II X2 555 to 3.8GHz but my mates G6950 goes to 4.2GHz on air. Unless I unlock the other two cores his system is faster. However core unlocking is not a perfect science and sometimes my system will only boot up with 2 cores enabled. On a final note can someone please explain to bodasactra how to use the “Enter” key and what a paragraph is and why he should look into using them. It’s hard to take anyone serious who cannot create a readable post. Haha  |