I know, dual-core is old news, blah blah, but these chips came out, made a splash, and disappeared into the ether. Curious, I wanted to see what some of the big boys say about rendering the subdued elegance of the Windows 2000 UI on pre-production boards. The results? Thus far, dual-core Intel chips aren’t faring much better than slightly faster single-core Pentiums while the AMD Athlon 64 FX-53, a single core chip, is kicking everybody’s asses.
The tests are relatively basic and primitive at this point as its clear that nobody wants their offerings stress tested in things high-end PC buyers really care about—real-time graphics rendering. But that dual-core Intel can really burn through some Office apps. Fabu reviews and links after the jump.
According to PC World we can’t expect dual-core chips to be amazing right off the bat. That would be too easy. Instead, as applications are written to take advantage of dual-core chips then maybe we’ll see some improvement. Add that to the Longhorn list, Bill.
Intel’s Dual-Core Chip Aces First Test [PC World]
The “Why wait for Dual Core” rig: Part II [TheInquirer]
Dual-Core Duel: AMD Tops Intel [ExtremeTech]
Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part I: First Encounter [Anandtech]
