Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Athlon x4 620 v E8500 OC




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default Athlon x4 620 v E8500 OC

    The TweakTown review of the AMD chip was impressive with regard to price/performance when OC'd. Getting 3.9Ghz on air without a lot of work is pretty cool.

    But looking at the comparison graphs, the E8500 -- OC'd to 3.7 and I think with two fewer cores -- seems to beat the Athlon all over the place.

    So what makes this cheap new chip more desirable than the E8500?

    Even more interested: How is Intel's chip beating the AMD chip with half the cores???

    Thanks,
    AJ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,470

    Default Re: Athlon x4 620 v E8500 OC

    The last time I checked the E8500 was $80 more than the 620. Price wise you would need to compare it to a E6500
    http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte...ench-test.html
    http://www.gigabyte-usa.com/FileList...ios_qflash.pdf
    Phenom II 945 @ 3.2Ghz w/Thermaltake Big Typhoon Pro 14 CPU Cooler
    Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H rev.1.1 F11
    Sapphire 3870HD / 100225L / 512MB / ddr4
    4GB / Kingston / KHX8500D2K2/2GN / 5-5-5-18 / 1066Mhz
    (2) WD Caviar / WD2500AAKS/ 250GB in SATA RAID-0
    (1) WD Caviar / WD2500AAKS/ 250GB in SATA AHCI
    (2) IDE's 1 8XdualDVDRW 1 52x32x52x CDRW
    Antec /Neo HE550 / 550W
    Mid size ATX case with show through panel
    2) 80x80 front fans (1) 120x120 rear fan and small nb fan
    Microsoft comfort curve USB keyboard 2000 ver.1.0
    Logitech G500 USB mouse
    Monitor: CMV937A
    7.1+2 Channel High Definition ALC889A
    Dual boot Windows 7 32bit home & Windows 7 64bit home


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default Re: Athlon x4 620 v E8500 OC

    I can understand that. I wonder why the review chose to compare it against the E8500 then?

    And technically, it was a review of the new AMD offering, not a comparo, so not a lot to tell us which they chose to compare in the charts and why, but I guess in a comparison-test they would have chose like-priced CPUs.

    Still wondering why, in general, a slower (in terms of clock speed) chip with half the cores was beating the AMD (with twice as many cores running faster). I have heard from a lot of AMD pundits that the AMD chips are measurably faster when comparing same-speed chips. This is so contrary to that, I'm just intrigued!

    Thanks for the reply,
    AJ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •