QUOTE]What a pile of dung... I'm tired of you intel fanboys. You make up these numbers and you defy benchmarks. The Athlon 64 defeats the Pentium 6xx in 70-80% of the tests. I'm not going to check out the 6xx because it is false advertisement and a waste of time. It is not 64-bit. The 6xx is an expensive joke. Additionally overclocking potential amongst these new Pentiums is limited because of the high level of heat they generate. I would recommend you steer clear from this false advertisement ploy. Intel has no personal 64-bit processors out. Itanium are server CPUs. These aren't 64-bit. They support some 64-bit applications but that is very limited.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but I'm afraid I know that the P4 6xx series is fully 64bit (AMD 64_x86) compatible with the exact same benifits as the Athlon 64. This, however is not the focus of this thread. The 64bit instruction set was orignally installed into the 1st Prescott cores, but never enabled until now - hence why the new 6xx series are still based on the Prescott. I have to concur with Jack on this one, you need to go and research. How can you comment on something that "I'm (You're) not going to check out the 6xx because it is false advertisement and a waste of time"? - Sorry, I'm not either a AMD fanboy nor a Intel fan boy. As stated, the only Intel CPU I have personaly laid hands on is a Coppermine Celeron. You are obviously an AMD fanboy, simply by the fact that you ain't going to check the new P4's out and still argue the point with useless and inarcurate information, i.e. "These aren't 64bit". Oh, and they will support ALL the 64 bit applications that the Athlon 64 support.
Check out http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/develope...850.htm?page=2
. Although aimed at the buisness segment, this page outlines the EM64 extensions supported in the Xeons. It also includes the Prescott cores, see title.