Moderately Confused wrote:

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 19:14:23 -0400, "Moderately Confused"
wrote:


http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=1

Stop comparing apples to oranges. You can't compare a 64 bit processor
to a
32 bit processor. It's like comparing the gas mileage in an electric
hybrid
car and a regular combustion engine. When Intel comes out with their own
64
bit processor, than you can start with the whole benchmark thing.

Reread the linked article, 64 bit is irrelevant as it wasn't
doing anything 64 bit. It is true that eventually Intel will
also have higher performance CPUs, but then so will AMD... world
keeps spinning...

Still, the 64 bit processor will out perform the 32 bit one, although it
will be a minor performance increase. My problem isn't with AMD, it's the
"proof" of JK's claims. Sure, AMD 64 might be better in Business Winstone,
but it's only one piece of software.

Business Winstone is not one piece of software. It is composed of several
applications.

http://www.veritest.com/benchmarks/b...e/s1wsapps.asp

Whoop-de-doo, it out performs Intel in
Doom3, which I heard sucks anyway.

Many other games as well.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2065&p=10

Take a look at this.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2065&p=12

Keep in mind that these 32 bit applications will probably run faster
using a 64 bit OS, and that 64 bit versions of software will probably
run much faster than that.


All of his "arguments" are based on two
links.

The is also Advanced Virus Protection (AVP) when an Athlon 64 chip
is used With Windows XP with Service Pack 2(SP2) installed.

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/a...sp2/35675.html

Another review.
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=65000304


More links.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...on64-3800.html



MC