Processor comparison

[greenaccord02]

Overkill is exactly right.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

Looking at the CPU charts at www.TomsHardware.com the i3 truly shines even for moderate game playing with a satisfactory add-in video board.

$119 for an i3, about $100 for a m/b. A Propus quad from AMD doesn't match the 'lowly' i3. Impressive job from Intel! A base CPU that is good for more than just word processing. Much more.

 

[Moose016]

It looks like the Athlon II X4 seems to slightly outperform the i3 in most of the following tests, which kind of surprised me. Maybe it shouldn't since it's 4 core vs 2, even though the i3 has HT.

Tom's Hardware - Benchmark 3DMark Vantage 1.0.2 CPU

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

The spec's that matter to me is the iTunes, Lame encoder, and some games. That's where the i3 shines. The other tests, such as the Adobe tests don't apply for the PC i'm looking to build for the kids. Just make the music and the internet fast, the kids are happy.

If I can do it for cheap, Dad is happy.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Moose016
It looks like the Athlon II X4 seems to slightly outperform the i3 in most of the following tests, which kind of surprised me. Maybe it shouldn't since it's 4 core vs 2, even though the i3 has HT.

Tom's Hardware - Benchmark 3DMark Vantage 1.0.2 CPU


Quad's ALWAYS do better in the Futuremark CPU tests. A Q6600 vs a Core2Duo of the same clock speed. The Q6600 would always yield a much higher score.