There is a war going on, and the last battle and still offers the promise of good prices for consumers looking for the best things for your computer.
from the beginning of dual-core processors a little back in the race to see who can get a better chip with the dual-core processor technology.
During the final day of single-core battle, there is a delay between AMD and Intel. Intel had a higher, but were unable to match the speed of AMD managed at lower clock speeds.
The earliest difference between them is their suitability for specific tasks. AMD had the gaming sector in the bag, especially in terms of value for money possible with its lower had chips that could be overclocked to the same speed as the top models. Intel has a crown for the overall performance. When it comes to office tasks, Intel processors are able to outperform AMD's chips in this area.
such as the ability to clock the chips were becoming more and more difficult technically, the next step is to just add more cores, theoretically allows more than double the number crunching in a dual-core processor. It's not exactly how it works, however.
Modern operating systems and programs are not designed with multi-core or dual-core processors in mind. They are designed to be used by one core at a cost of procesor.Veliki which went multi-processor computer system is needed to split the tasks among the processors sharing the cache memory.
Dual-core processors are simply acting as two of the assignments go. Instead of getting individual tasks, Split and running in two different places, as is the case with traditional single core processors, one or be split among the cores. That basically means that each program gets assigned to the core.
Therefore, there is absolutely no increase in speed for gaming than a dual-core processor chips. Only after the games themselves are programmed to take advantage of dual-core processors will be the difference. This is due to the intense nature of games and number crunching needed for intensive graphics, which for now can be divided into multiple cores in a dual-core processors.
So, back to the battlefield.
AMD to introduce its first dual-core processor solution for a desktop computer. It gave them a little water on Intel. Nevertheless, AMD's little surprise people with his new offering.
is always what is well known for giving away more than expected for the price, these new dual-core processors are very expensive. Part of what AMD has managed to give a place in the market previously dominated by Intel, was to put a good price. This shock is not going down well with consumers.
To add insult to injury, Intel's dual-core processor offer was incredibly good value. Both their initial dual-core processors cost less than AMD's lowest priced models. That's right, AMD's cheapest dual-core processor cost more than Intel's most expensive. It definitely put the ball in Intel's court and was really disappointing for AMD fans.
AMD failed to introduce a cheaper model to compete better with Intel offerings. Nevertheless, Intel is still the forerunner in this field.
performance remains an area that is sketchy.
with a relatively new technology involved is difficult to draw any clear conclusion about who was faster. With the operating system has only recently fully oriented towards the use of dual-core processor technology, it is still a new area. Both offer better performance, but who will manage, we'll see.
, meanwhile, would probably be advisable to just watch. Be cautious buyer I prefer to buy in a sure thing, after they settled down, prices will balance out and all the related technologies will be in place. Then we'll be able to get a real opinion about where to put your hard earned money.
No comments:
Post a Comment