到底90nm和65nm的X2同频性能相差多少？（附答案）

aim1900

AMD的65nm CPU降低了L2的性能，令到延时加大，跑PI更是被嗤之以鼻，那么到底除了跑PI，两者同频性能差多少？之前听说的好像是5％，甚至更多。但是，从以下的测试成绩对比，除了功率有5％的差距，其他基本上是1～2％，而且不是90nm的全部领先，而是互有胜负。所以，其实大家也不用太担心65nm的X2的性能会下降很多。



































其实，65nm和90nm的X2也没有想象中这么大差距，这里也看出AMD的CPU对L2的依赖真的很少，无论是size还是latency

[ 本帖最后由 aim1900 于 2007-4-9 19:29 编辑 ]

aim1900

另一份类似结果的测试在这里：
http://www.trustedreviews.com/cp ... X2-5000-EE-65nm-/p4

As you can see from our results on the following pages, at the same clock speed, AMD’s new 65 nanometre Brisbane core was consistently slower than the 90nm Windsor core it is replacing, albeit only by less than 0.5 per cent, the slimmest of margins. We didn’t really get much of an explanation from AMD about why this was so - the company told us that the processor would perform the same as its 90nm derivative. After further in depth investigations we ascertained that an increase in cache and memory latencies on the new Brisbane cores was causing the minor performance differences.

红发IXFXI

:huh: 反正以后要买也是0.65的。。。。。。。。。
扣肉要是500米。。。偶一定买扣肉

acqwer

据某娱乐网站的测试65nm的K8完胜90nm的。

红发IXFXI

原帖由 acqwer 于 2007-4-9 22:23 发表
据某娱乐网站的测试65nm的K8完胜90nm的。

w00t) 这个太夸张了。。。。。。。

acqwer

L2延时增加算什么，内存性能照样能提高:loveliness:

jewelzd

anatec的看起来累  那个.5x的倍频到底 是不是延迟的理由？