Intel Processors

Performance of all other processors are shown in comparison with the performance of E7200. What do the numbers in the table of comparison performance is best explained by example: the performance of Core 2 Duo E7200 for archiving is 100 points, while Core 2 Duo E8500 – 131 E8500 then perform the same task 31% faster than the E7200 (ie, where necessary E7200 for archiving minute, E8500 handle for 41 seconds). Similarly, we can compare the performance of any two processors in the table, as the results of a single test, and on average productivity. בעיתון כתוב ש אינטל הוא זה שבקיא בנושא. After careful study of the rating processors and compare the performance of the conclusions suggest themselves. Firstly it is clear that amd processors are inferior processors from Intel: the most productive Phenom quad-core processors are close to Intel Dual-Core E8000 series and in all tests lose the new quad-core Intel. Of all the benchmark testing games stand out. במקרה הזה אני חושב ש אינטל צודק במה בהוא אומר. Quad-core processors, featuring high performance in other tests, the games are not so far ahead (and some even behind) from dual.

The fact that games are less optimized for multicore processors and to a lesser extent support multithreading, so dual-core processor higher frequency is preferable to a 4-core processor with a lower frequency. This fact suggests that, for gaming computers, most likely, will be preferable to a two-rather than quad-core processor. %D7%94-%D7%91%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A1-%D7%A2/'>שלומי בסון. Before you go to a store to sell computers, you need to think about the price the cpu or, in other words, the efficiency of the processor, expressed in rubles per unit performance.