Request for update on CPUs.

Can anyone please point me to a web page, or a few at most,
that presents a good overall view of currently available
processors ? I've been too deeply immersed in other aspects
of my work to stay in touch with CPU development for the
better part of this year and I need a quick update.

It's not that I'm too lazy to do my own research. I just
don't have the time right now or in the near future, but
I do need the information quickly. I'm afraid something
like "Go to Tom's Hardware" would be too vague for my
present situation.

It's not just bleeding-edge stuff I'm concerned with. A
general coverage from the Sempron 64 to multi-cores would
be great. And if someone would be so kind as to provide a
quick run-down right here at ACH, that would be really great.

pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
>
> Can anyone please point me to a web page, or a few at most,
> that presents a good overall view of currently available
> processors ? I've been too deeply immersed in other aspects
> of my work to stay in touch with CPU development for the
> better part of this year and I need a quick update.
>
> It's not that I'm too lazy to do my own research. I just
> don't have the time right now or in the near future, but
> I do need the information quickly. I'm afraid something
> like "Go to Tom's Hardware" would be too vague for my
> present situation.
>
> It's not just bleeding-edge stuff I'm concerned with. A
> general coverage from the Sempron 64 to multi-cores would
> be great. And if someone would be so kind as to provide a
> quick run-down right here at ACH, that would be really great.

There is a "grocery list" here, so you can keep track
of how many types you've reviewed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/08/...006/page2.html

There are plenty of skeleton articles here. But I doubt
very much that is what you are after. These articles don't
compare and contrast the options.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celeron
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon%E2%84%A2_64 (Athlon64)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opteron
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sempron

There is a price/performance chart here, if you want to figure
out what ballpark you want to be in. You have to be careful with
benchmarking sites now, due to the prevalence of dual core friendly
benchmarks. A lot of existing software runs just fine on a single
core, but you will have difficulty finding benchmarks that compare
a single core processor, to a dual making use of just one core.
For my mix of software, a faster single core would do me as much
good as a dual core. But there are lots of multimedia type things
that can benefit from dual cores.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.ht...=464&chart=195

Anandtech sometimes has "buyer guide" articles, and they
can highlight either good price or good performance options.

I can do a 25 words or less for you...

"Intel Conroe/Allendale, if you can afford it.
Athlon64/Opteron for bargain solutions.
Dual core even if you don't need them."

I provided no link to any (soon to be released) quad
cores, because that is really a waste for the average
desktop application. There are enthusiasts salivating
over the possibility, but I think a dual core is the
sweet spot for the next couple years at least.

(OK. Just one link :-) )
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/...n_the_rampage/

Paul

Paul wrote:
> pjdd@rediffmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Can anyone please point me to a web page, or a few at most,
> > that presents a good overall view of currently available
> > processors ?

>
> There is a "grocery list" here, so you can keep track
> of how many types you've reviewed.
>
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/08/...006/page2.html
>
> There are plenty of skeleton articles here. But I doubt
> very much that is what you are after. These articles don't
> compare and contrast the options.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celeron
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon%E2%84%A2_64 (Athlon64)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opteron
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sempron
>
> There is a price/performance chart here, if you want to figure
> out what ballpark you want to be in. You have to be careful with
> benchmarking sites now, due to the prevalence of dual core friendly
> benchmarks. A lot of existing software runs just fine on a single
> core, but you will have difficulty finding benchmarks that compare
> a single core processor, to a dual making use of just one core.
> For my mix of software, a faster single core would do me as much
> good as a dual core. But there are lots of multimedia type things
> that can benefit from dual cores.
>
> http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.ht...=464&chart=195
>
> Anandtech sometimes has "buyer guide" articles, and they
> can highlight either good price or good performance options.
>
> I can do a 25 words or less for you...
>
> "Intel Conroe/Allendale, if you can afford it.
> Athlon64/Opteron for bargain solutions.
> Dual core even if you don't need them."
>
> I provided no link to any (soon to be released) quad
> cores, because that is really a waste for the average
> desktop application. There are enthusiasts salivating
> over the possibility, but I think a dual core is the
> sweet spot for the next couple years at least.
>
> (OK. Just one link :-) )
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/...n_the_rampage/
>

Thanks, Paul. That's the kind of response I hoped for. It's
given me some good starting points. I'll check those links.