I don't have a Core 2 Duo or a new Xeon (Woodcrest) machine yet, but do have
some observations.
All benchmarks that I have seen put the new Core 2 processors well ahead of any
of the old Pentiums. For several years, the Pentiums have been good as expensive
toasters, but not for running computers (my opinion, of course). The Core 2
processors run faster on almost every benchmark, and are much more energy
efficient (so potentially less noisy).
I've had a Core Duo notebook for half a year now (Core Duo T2400 1.83 GHz), and
it is the fastest machine I currently have. Based on Ox simulations (model
selection, so lots of regressions), it outperforms my AMD Athlon X2 4200+
(2.2Ghz) (not by much) and dual Opteron 244 (1.8Ghz) machines.
There is always something on the horizon, quad core processors in this case. The
dual processor version would give you 8 cores. The challenge now is to make Ox
multithreaded in an efficient way.
Jurgen.
oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox
oxoxoxox 4th OxMetrics user conference 2006
oxoxoxox Cass Business School, London
oxoxoxox 14-15 September 2006
oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox
Dr Jurgen A Doornik
Nuffield College, Oxford OX1 1NF, UK
tel. UK: +44-1865-278610 fax +44-1865-278621
http://www.doornik.com
http://www.oxmetrics.net
oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox
Mavroeidis, Sophocles wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Let me echo a previous question on the speed of Ox using new Intel dual
> core processors.
>
> Does anybody have any experience with Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe
> 2.66GHz (or any of the E6300 to E6600)? I am interested in a comparison
> between this and two single-core processors with higher clock speed
> (e.g. Pentium D at 3.4 GHz, say).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sophocles
>
|