Battle for encoding dominance
Subject: Processors | August 28, 2006 - 07:30 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
AMD has held the speed title for a while now, but with the introduction of Core2, the speed battles are much different. LOSTCIRCUITS grabs a handful of the less expensive chips from Intel and AMD to see who can claim the fastest speed, and the most bang for the buck.
"Arguably, the biggest factor driving the computer industry is gaming. However, the home entertainment
sector, especially encoding of audiovisual content, is becoming increasingly important as well.
Ripping and editing software ranges from super-expensive studio editions to free downloads. Each
program has its own quirks, favoring either Intel's or AMD's processors. We took LAME, Dr. DiVX,
NeroVision4 and Monkey's Audio as representatives of the inexpensive (or free software) and ran AMD's
dual core CPUs as well as Intel's Core2 Duos through the paces. One issue to keep in mind is that not
all programs are multithreaded, this is particularly true for audio stream-encoding, however, multiple
cores can take care of multiple audio streams in parallel.
Processors we looked at run from about US$150.- to US$1150.- but is there also an 8 x performance
difference? In other words, which CPU will give the best bang for the money? "
Here are some more Processor articles from around the web:
- AMD AM2 4600+ EE @
- Overclocking the Intel Core
2 Duo E6300 Processor @ Legit Reviews
- Overclocking Intel
Core 2 Extreme X6800 @ NordicHardware
- AMD AM2 3500+ Vs.
AMD 939 3500+ @ OCC
- ntel Core 2 Duo 'Conroe' E6700 & X6800 Benchmarks @ OC3D
- Errata list shows
for Core 2 Duo @ The Inquirer
- Pentium D gives
Opteron run for its money @ The Inquirer
- AMD's Next