Intel --- Important ---

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
D

danica

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2004
20
0
18,510
Hi everyone.

I have a AMD 4800+, ASUS A8N SLi 32, 4 GB Ram (CAS 2,5,3,3,7), XFX 7900 GT, 600W power supply.

Recently I bought a Intel Core 2 Extreme, ASUS P5B WiFi, 4 Patriot 1GB (CAS 4,4,4,12), XFX 7950, 600 W power supply, Same RAID 0 as the AMD with 2 150 MB WD 10000RPM. The X6800 was supposed to be much faster, right? But it is not.

If you try to apply the following filter, you will get the same timing:

--- In Photoshop, make a new RGB white bg 8x10 inches 300ppi document.
--- Open Filter, Noise, Add Noise and set to Uniform, Monochromatic, 400% and click OK.
--- Then open Filter, Blur, Radial Blur, set to Amount 100, Method Zoom, Quality Best
--- As you hit OK, start timing.

Try yourself on your computer, and you will see it is true. The AMD 4800+ is as fast as the Extreme. I updated both BIOS, the Windows XP Pro have both the latest SPs applied, the Photoshop are both the same (9.0.2).

Please do the test, and publish your result. Intel and some sites are trying to fools us all. I have done a lot of testing, and there is something that shoud be investigated.

Thank you



By the way, here are some timings:

P4 1.6 512 MB Ram Sony Vaio 5’ 06”
P4 2.4 512 MB Ram ASUS P4S800MX 2’ 49”
P4 3.06 512 MB Ram Intel 850 EMV2 1’ 40”
Sempron 3000+ 1 GB Ram Asus K8V-MX 1’ 34”
P4 3.2 1 GB Ram HP Notebook MB Quanta 1’ 13”
P4 3.4 2 GB Ram Intel 915 PCY 1’ 10”
AMD 3800 64 1 GB Ram Asus 1’ 10”
4600+ 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 36”
Intel Core Duo 6700 OC 4 GB Ram Asus P5W 4/4/4/10 34”
4600+ 8% 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 34”
4800+ 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 34”
Intel Core Duo X6800 4 GB Ram Asus P5B Wifi 4/4/4/10 34”
4800+ 10% 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 33”
 
The_Abyss

The_Abyss

Distinguished
Mar 24, 2006
1,333
0
19,310
May I be the first to congratulate you on the comprehensive approach you have taken to CPU reviewing, and the wide range of different applications tested.
 
1Tanker

1Tanker

Splendid
Apr 28, 2006
4,645
1
22,780
Hi everyone.

I have a AMD 4800+, ASUS A8N SLi 32, 4 GB Ram (CAS 2,5,3,3,7), XFX 7900 GT, 600W power supply.

Recently I bought a Intel Core 2 Extreme, ASUS P5B WiFi, 4 Patriot 1GB (CAS 4,4,4,12), XFX 7950, 600 W power supply, Same RAID 0 as the AMD with 2 150 MB WD 10000RPM. The X6800 was supposed to be much faster, right? But it is not.

If you try to apply the following filter, you will get the same timing:

--- In Photoshop, make a new RGB white bg 8x10 inches 300ppi document.
--- Open Filter, Noise, Add Noise and set to Uniform, Monochromatic, 400% and click OK.
--- Then open Filter, Blur, Radial Blur, set to Amount 100, Method Zoom, Quality Best
--- As you hit OK, start timing.

Try yourself on your computer, and you will see it is true. The AMD 4800+ is as fast as the Extreme. I updated both BIOS, the Windows XP Pro have both the latest SPs applied, the Photoshop are both the same (9.0.2).

Please do the test, and publish your result. Intel and some sites are trying to fools us all. I have done a lot of testing, and there is something that shoud be investigated.

Thank you



By the way, here are some timings:

P4 1.6 512 MB Ram Sony Vaio 5’ 06”
P4 2.4 512 MB Ram ASUS P4S800MX 2’ 49”
P4 3.06 512 MB Ram Intel 850 EMV2 1’ 40”
Sempron 3000+ 1 GB Ram Asus K8V-MX 1’ 34”
P4 3.2 1 GB Ram HP Notebook MB Quanta 1’ 13”
P4 3.4 2 GB Ram Intel 915 PCY 1’ 10”
AMD 3800 64 1 GB Ram Asus 1’ 10”
4600+ 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 36”
Intel Core Duo 6700 OC 4 GB Ram Asus P5W 4/4/4/10 34”
4600+ 8% 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 34”
4800+ 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 34”
Intel Core Duo X6800 4 GB Ram Asus P5B Wifi 4/4/4/10 34”
4800+ 10% 4 GB Ram Asus A8N Premium 2.5/3/3/7 33”
Click to expand...
Oh no!!!!IMPORTANT!!! You managed to find a test that K8 beats C2D at. Might as well sell the POS. :roll:
 
D

Doughbuy

Distinguished
Jul 25, 2006
2,079
0
19,780
This thread is flamebait... let the wars commence...

One thing... you have some very very specific steps to take... how about overall performance wise... it's much faster neh? Maybe you're only choosing the things that won't make the new proc any faster... it's called leading the audience... why don't you go encode some mp3's and see if the X6800 is faster... or do some video... or do them all at once and see what's faster...

One test does not make or break a processor, especially one test which requires so many rules, parameters, and regulations.
 
rodney_ws

rodney_ws

Splendid
Dec 29, 2005
3,819
0
22,810
This reminds me of my Pentium 150... a friend of mine was bragging about his Cyrix 686 (in all fairness I bought one too) and how much faster it was... and at some tasks it WAS faster than comparable Pentiums... but... we played Quake... that was our obsession... and those Cyrix processors absolutely sucked at that due to their weak FPU.

I guess all I'm saying is that you should buy a processor that's best for what you actually do... if that guy wants to run some fancy filter in Photoshop for the rest of his life, buy the AMD. Doesn't hurt me.
 
Whizzard9992

Whizzard9992

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2006
1,076
0
19,280
This is probably something you want to post on a Photoshop forum.

What version of Photoshop (I'm assuming CS2)?
Is your OS 32 or 64-Bit?
What OS are you running?

If you look at your benches, it seems to cap out at like 33-34 seconds. I would assume it's hitting another bottleneck of some sort that's not related at all to processing power (Memory access, perhaps. Maybe PS is caching to disk?)

Either way, I'd check with Adobe and be careful when accusing the C2D architecture of being overblown based on a single benchmark.
 
D

Doughbuy

Distinguished
Jul 25, 2006
2,079
0
19,780
Heh, thats true, buy what you need. If he only uses that one filter in photoshop, then whatever. I don't want other photoshop users clamoring to buy the AMD just because that one filter is the same speed...

Talking like that reminds me of politics... trying to dupe the unsuspecting layman...
 
rodney_ws

rodney_ws

Splendid
Dec 29, 2005
3,819
0
22,810
I just realized that none of the Intel processors were overclocked... and yet the "winning" AMD processors were... let's be honest, the Intel has more OC headroom and would likely make up the 1 second difference. It's like this guy had an agenda... like he wanted the AMD to win. If I'd just spent nearly $1000 on a Intel CPU I'd be the exact opposite... I'd be looking for ways to make my $1000 investment look more logical... to each his own I guess!

Wouldn't Photoshop support (and utilize) a quad-core CPU? If that's the case, why not buy one of those if you've just GOT to have the fastest.
 
TechnologyCoordinator

TechnologyCoordinator

Splendid
Feb 22, 2006
4,008
0
22,790
This thread is flamebait... let the wars commence...
Click to expand...

Although it is flamebait, I must say that the author has presented maticulously prepared benchmarks for our review. He didn't just post up a poll that says "AMDZ or INSMELLS!?"

I welcome this thread as it challanges what we accept as "truth" by presenting facts.
 
rodney_ws

rodney_ws

Splendid
Dec 29, 2005
3,819
0
22,810
I agree he did clearly define a task that an AMD processor appears to perform best at... can't really fault him for that. However, I think the task is so specific... so limited... that it comes across as if he's saying "Ok, I found one thing AMD does best!"

Although I'm not sure this would harm or help the results, the AMD has DDR in his particular comparison while the Intel has DDR2... a more accurate comparison would have been the Intel against an AM2. And he also threw in some AMD overclocks that further tilted the scales.

Yes, he provided real world data... it just seems the test was designed to have a predetermined outcome.
 
chuckshissle

chuckshissle

Splendid
Feb 2, 2006
4,579
0
22,780
You could have research some review about the cpu different performance across different applications first. Keep in mind that most members here that posts C2D performance results is mostly based on gaming. Overall C2D are still better cpus.
 
D

danica

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2004
20
0
18,510
OK, sorry for the miss understanding. I do have an Intel Core 2 Extreme, and I really would like that it was faster that my old AMD. Remember, I spend good money on it. But unfortunately it is not. I need some assistance.

This is a serious question, with serious facts.

I am a photographer and use Photoshop as my daily basis tool. What is the use of MP3 encoding? I never do this. What is the use of Word search and replace, if I don’t use it? This is the speed test, that I am use to. You can sit on a Mac and do it, or any other computer that runs Photoshop. Adobe is a very conscious software company, and their program runs flawlessly, so why change my standards?

In sites like Toms hardware, they clearly said that it was faster in Photoshop (converting and applying a filter). The difference in speed on the tests, were sufficient to lend me to think that the processor would be faster in all other aspects.

No one reported their timings. Why?

So I found a task that the Intel could not keep up? I am seeking for help, not anger. Perhaps I am doing some thing wrong. I tried to OC up to 3.6, and got better results, but this is not correct. All benchmarks reports that it is faster without OC.

Again, thank you all very much.
 
Whizzard9992

Whizzard9992

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2006
1,076
0
19,280
I've seen a bunch of benches using RadialBlur in Adobe AfterEffects, where the C2D slaughters the AMD lineup. Have you tried performing your benchmark in AfterEffects?
 
W

WR

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2006
603
0
18,980
Core 2 X6800 @3620MHz w/ 329MHz FSB
Photoshop v. 6.0.1
Windows 2000
DDR2-985 4-5-4-7

1 minute 7 seconds w/ single-channel RAM
34 seconds w/ dual-channel RAM

Looks to me like yet another case of memory-bandwidth limited benchmarking.
 
D

Doughbuy

Distinguished
Jul 25, 2006
2,079
0
19,780
I'm still thinking it could be specific filters... maybe the filter he uses won't harness the additional power, which happens sometimes...

But I'm still saying overall photoshop should be much faster either way.

If C2D doesn't like Pr0n... does AMD like Pr0n?
 
1Tanker

1Tanker

Splendid
Apr 28, 2006
4,645
1
22,780
I'm still thinking it could be specific filters... maybe the filter he uses won't harness the additional power, which happens sometimes...

But I'm still saying overall photoshop should be much faster either way.

If C2D doesn't like Pr0n... does AMD like Pr0n?
Click to expand...
Apparently. :wink: **massive exodus to buy AMD now** :p
 
Whizzard9992

Whizzard9992

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2006
1,076
0
19,280
But how often do we need to photoshop Pr0n... unless we want to put our faces on... OH!!!!!!

Damn, now I'm looking forward to 4x4...
Click to expand...
LMAO...true enough.

Batch resize my pr0n directory to 1280x1024....

Or so I've heard..... ;)
 
dean7

dean7

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2006
1,559
0
19,780
If they perform the same on these tests, chances are CPU is not the bottleneck.

Let me paraphrase this in car terms that you can understand:

"I bought a new Porsche, but on my way to work today it took me the SAME amount of time as it did in my friggin' TAURUS! This thing is a POS!"
 
gOJDO

gOJDO

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2006
2,309
1
19,780
WOW!

:trophy:

Congratualtions, you have posted the greatest BS of the month!

First of all, you said that you have two PCs and latter you are pulling out of your ass, 14 different configurations and numbers. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of reputable sites that have benchmarked a lot of K8 and C2 configurations and came to the conclusion: Core2 Duo at lower freqfency outperforms K8
for all versions of Photoshop, as well as for 95% of the software available on planet earth. For example:

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=430&model2=476&chart=186

430-476-187.png

430-476-186.png


photoshop.png

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/07/14/intel_core_2_duo_processors/7.html


photoshopc2dvsk8jc5.jpg

http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/images/intel-core2-duo-e6600/results.xls
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/cpu/intel-core2-duo-e6600.html

00327660.jpg

http://www.clubic.com/article-36354-9-le-pentium-laisse-la-place-intel-core-2-duo.html

photoshop.JPG

http://www.chilehardware.com/review_200607137.html

photoshop.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e6300_13.html

wb-photoshop.gif

http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/core2/index.x?pg=10

Why do you expect that anyone with brain will take your 100% pure crap seriosly?!? :roll:

For Photoshop CS.2, the E6300 outperforms the 4800+, while the E6400 outperforms the FX-62. There is no match for the performance of the XE6800. Even the Pentium4 and Pentium EE for 50% of the tasks in Photoshop are perfroming better than the K8.

I am waiting for Opteron 175(A8N 5X 2GB DDR-500). After few days I will make your benchmark on my Opteron and on E6600(Asus P5B 2GB DDR2-667) and I will post the results on this thread if it is still alive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom