[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;31064357]You should stop arguing about CPUs, because Dr. Egg is apparently more knowledged than you, in this case. No offense, but a Phenom comes nowhere near a 5*** xeon, both in price and performance.[/QUOTE]
what makes the xeon better? comparing the two side by side, the phenom has 400 mhz more processing power but 2 less mb of l3 cache..
i want to learn something today because i havent :(
[QUOTE=wlzshroom;31064379]what makes the xeon better? comparing the two side by side, the phenom has 400 mhz more processing power but 2 less mb of l3 cache..
i want to learn something today because i havent :([/QUOTE]
Architecture, simply put. If you want to see if a CPU is better than another, look up benchmarks, don't just try to compare them spec-on-spec.
[QUOTE=wlzshroom;31064379]what makes the xeon better? comparing the two side by side, the phenom has 400 mhz more processing power but 2 less mb of l3 cache..
i want to learn something today because i havent :([/QUOTE]
The current line of Xeon's are based on i7's, which basically can do more in a clock cycle than any AMD CPU can. A Phenom II might be running 400MHz faster, but if the i7 can do twice as much as the Phenom can in one clock cycle, the i7 will be far more powerful. That, and Xeon's, being server grade CPUs, are designed to run in a hotter environment than i7s are usually rated for for longer, and have Intel's assurance you can trust it's output basically. Same reason why a gaming GPU cost y and a rendering workstation GPU can cost 10y. The rendering GPUs might be just as powerful (or indeed slower than a gaming GPU) but they can run hotter, for longer, and the output is correct. If your GPU fucks up you might get a system crash or maybe just a brief rendering artifact. Those types of things are abolished in rendering GPUs, and server CPUs (to the extent possible) as there could be real life consequences (people dying, bank accounts being emptied etc). This is also why they tend to mandate the use of ECC RAM. To minimise errors in computation.
Also in the case of the Mac Pro, the bottom line Xeon chip can support having another processor being in use, which i7s (and Phenoms) can't do. If you want a real comparison, look at Xeons to Opterons, and you'll see how expensive it is.
[editline]12th July 2011[/editline]
The Mac Pro is very expensive, but so is Photoshop and Final Cut and Oracle. Professional computing is a very expensive industry, and that is what the Mac Pro competes in, not kids playing games (which OP is but w/eee)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
