Okay, I've heard in the past that a 3.4 Pentium D is comparable to a 2.4 Athlon X2. Is the "exchange rate" among the parts a clean GHz?
Top is Athlon X2, bottom Pentium D. Both of those cost $322. The way I see them measuring up is this:
- The Pentium runs hot and requires a new heatsink and fan. It runs multiple heavy programs easily. Athlon is recommended a heatsink (guessing if you OC it) and boots up things VERY quick - people couldn't even slow their CPUs down.
Athlon Core is a Manchest, the Intel is a Smithfield. Not sure which is better, if it matters.
Athlon is 2.0 GHz, Pentium 3.0 GHz
Athlon FSB is 1 GHz, Pentium is 800 MHz (big difference, anyone?)
The L1 Cache is 64+64 KB on the Athlon, 12+16 KB on the Pentium (does this matter? Athlon seems way ahead here.
The L2 Cache is 2 x 512kb on the Athlon, 2 x 1 MB on the Pentium (Pent seems to win out here...what gives?)
Both have the same process type.
"Hyper-Transport" is supported by the Athlon. I can only guess this mirrors the Pentium's "Hyper-Threading", which isn't supported here.
BOTH have 64-bit support, so the idea of buying an Athlon solely for the 64-pit OSs coming out is off.
Both have a heatsink and fan, Athlon has one or two extra things under the multimedia instruction catergory, and they have three year warranties.
Okay, so from what I see, these parts are basically identical, and it's more a matter of preference. I don't see much showing that Athlon rules out over Pentium in terms of performance. If it is better it seems to me that it's pretty nominal.