http://www.nforcershq.com/article3091.html
Intel
John,
In reference to the comment "Intel
Hey DK,
Good to hear from you.
From an architectural point of view the AMD solution is more efficient. I would love to see Intel eat a slice of humble pie and license AMDs HyperTransport point to point technology.
Instead we have Intel up to their same old game of FUD. That disappoints me to say the least. Often times in life the best technology does not win; its the guy who has the money to out market the other.
Thats life i suppose. =)
Be well.
Regards,
john
Where are the Dual-Core AMDs in that comparison on GamePC.
I can only see Single Core AMDs being included in those tests
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050509/index.html
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=141&type=expert
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware.../pentium-d-820/
cool thanks for those links
though i couldn't find the 3dmax test in the tomshardware article even though they listed it
Itd be nice to see some mental ray and maya software benchmarks for it.
shame the AMDs are so expensive.
ooh gamepc has just posted a report on the dual core opterons...
it would seem lots of programs seem to do fine with 2 threads but really got a bit mental with 4 threads..
though they didn't do a maya software test that would have been nice
very interesting indeed!
its a shame they dont run a single one and compare it to athlon and pentium dual cores
Agreed. Said another way, your mileage may vary. 
hi guys,
actually i faced hot of heat problem with AMD processors than intel,as i used to do architecharal walkthroughs having large scenes to render with heavy animation and texturing while rendering those my AMD machine used to shut down atomatically due to overheating but intel processors are more stable in this term... now i m looking for dual proccessor machine so just want both of ur suggestions in this matter should i go for AMS's optron dual processors or for xeon dual processor machine as i chatted with intel technichal guy and they suggested me the motherboard (se7525gp2) which is more suitable for my rendering stuff and cost effective. suggest me what should i order now
in theory the AMD Opteron is a more efficient arch. and should be better with heat issues. Since Intel has more engineering dollars to invest and they have been at it longer, the Intel solution could be better.
Last fall i built a dual Xeon (p4 core basically) with a Tyan motherboard. The included HFS's with it are insanely loud. I have never had any heat issues with it, even under full or prolonged heavy load. I should probably transplant the whole thing into a higher end case, since noise is a result of vibration.
Some of my Athlon 64 boxes do seem to get pretty hot at times and then lockup. AMD keeps getting lots of design wins though from the likes of SUN, HP, IBM and others.
My mileage has varied. I'm looking forward to dual core pentium m's in a few months. They should run cool, quiet and provide a lot of performance. At that point they will have 64 bit support as well.
AMD dual core Opteron runs cooler than Intel Xeon. AMD boxes used to run hotter, but no more.
Another reason (that AMD boxes runs hotter) is that most Intel based 1u box is better designed. Our 1u Xeon node (both MB and chassis) is designed and built and Intel, not some 3rd party chassis manufacturer with low budget.
but in theory at least, AMD boxes should run cooler, just make sure you used some better quality MB and chassis manufacturer. AMD will definetely run cooler.
next dual core Pentium M based Intel Xeon CPU is actually only 32-bit, it won't be till end of next year, that Intel will release a true low voltage Pentium M based Xeon cpus. in the mean time, Intel will ship a regular voltage dual core Xeon (just not Pentium M based) early 2006