there is no one i guess who is going to buy an Intel PC for Workstation work & AMD PC for gaming, everyone will use a single PC for both the works
This comparision is missing a lot of things like Pentium D, Athlon64 X2, Athlon64 venice core etc
if compared overall, there is really low difference between Intel & AMD in workstation tasks now, when Venice & Manchester cores are used, which run at a very low temprature compared to Intel offering of the same rate
Like in Mainconcept MPEG Encoding, the difference between 3200+ venice & 3.2 GHz prescott is only 7 seconds, Intel wins here
while in 3D rendering, Prescott 3.2 Ghz due to HT gives a difference of about 1 mins, intl wins again
but in Far cry, the difference is 20 FPS, AMD Wins
right now, it's better to go for AMD insted of Intel, not due to performance, but due to reliability & temprature, only if U R getting the venice core, as it supports all the the things Intel Architecture support (SSE3,SSE2)
or better yet, a Athlon 64 3800+X2, is good but it's giving problem in application, including games, as i heard on anandtech
Right now the best & most efficient CPU I find is the Athlon 64 3200+ Venice core, it can be distinguished by the part numbar written on the CPU, which can be seen from the CPU Pack itself without even opening it
AP = C0 Clawhammer, s754
AR = CG Clawhammer, s754
AS = CG Clawhammer, s939
AX = CG Newcastle, s754
AW = CG Newcastle, s939
BI = D0 Winchester, s939
BP = E3 Venice, s939
BN = E4 San Diego, s939
BU = E5 Newark, s754
LD = E0 Lancaster, s754
BV = E6, Manchester, s939
CD = E6, Toledo, s939
the model numbar will be written like
A64 3200+xxxx BVxxxx for venice core,
|