Differences between AMD and Intel's CPUs - Assignment Example

Introduction: AMD vs Intel Processors CPU's or Processors forms the brain of the PC. The technology behind this magnificent entity has always been among the all evolving and developing one that provides more CPUs that are faster, smarter and more efficient than the one developed just a generation before. This document revolves around the idea of comparing as well analyzing the technology behind the progression of CPU's and the way they are augmenting. The two major manufacturers of CPUs are the Intel and AMD. Their CPUs work in different way either and are not interchangeable which clearly demarcates the extremity and hence the way they work. As, the evolution in the field of microprocessor in the last decade of 20th century has ever increasing change, the evolutionary phase gained pace right from mid 90 with the introduction of sixth generation CPUs from both AMD and Intel. AMD introduced AMD K6 and Intel brought Pentium II to the market (Ignacio, 2004). Clock frequency of both the processors was over 500 MHz and led to a common understanding among common people that the general performance of the CPU is a factor of clock frequency. At a later stage various other factors have also become equally instrumental in performance evaluation of the processor. Some of the other important aspects can be the architecture of the processor on hardware side and software optimization on other side (McLaughlin, 2002). Basing the main concentration on architecture and hardware aspect of the processor usage, the other important parameters have been the size of the cache memory. Cache memory and its size is quite influential in speeding the data transfer rate from the processor to the system main memory and hence affects the overall performance of the processor. The second architecture based parameter for consideration is the internal architecture of the CPU Core and how they carry out the two general types of instructions topologies. Those two instructions topologies are: Integer calculations and Floating point calculations. Integer calculations have frequent usage in Business applications like word processing and spreadsheet etc. while floating point calculations are used with High-End applications. When it comes to desktop processors, there have been continuous arguments that which of the two major processor manufacturing company namely Intel and AMD provides better processors. Answer for the above mentioned question has changed over the years and depends very much on user’s know-how as well as its expectations from its computer. The final question may scale down to just one question which is nothing but “which CPU offers the best performance for the kind of work one has to do?”. Hence in order provide an answer to the above mentioned question, this document has been developed with sole purpose being to let a normal user know about various technical aspects of a processor and how one processor is better than other over a particular aspect (Apong, 2008). Through this document, it has been tried to figure out which of the two processor manufacturing companies is better. The analysis has been based on three parameters with first one being the value for money at sub-$500 PCs; second one being the Processors for Gaming purpose and finally the third one being the processors for high-end zone. AMD Athlon64 X2 4859e and Pentium Dual Core E2200 are two processors being compared for first parameter as under this category, our two other choices namely Core 2 Extreme QX9770 or AMD’s Phenom X4 9950 couldn’t feature but at the same time in next two categories only Core 2 Extreme QX9770 or AMD’s Phenom X4 9950 could be considered as they are the powerhouse of processing capacity. The first parameter for answering the AMD vs. Intel question is based on a simple query that is the least expensive CPU with the most value. The answer would be none other than AMD. The AMD Athlon64 X2 4859e paired with AMD 780G based motherboard could be the choice right now. Though for a user with the budget in the sub-$500 category, both Intel and AMD processors but the fact is that Intel doesn’t provide a whole lot for a motherboard under $100. Boards based on Intel G45 Express chipset with features similar to AMD 780G like the Asus P5Q-EM are available for approximately $140 but still lack comparable integrated graphics. Even with Intel’s Integrated GMA X4500 HD graphics processor, the overall gaming experience has been quite frustrating. Another option could be the new integrated nvidia GeForce 9300 chipset. The GeForce 9300 would be better in performance than Intel’s GMA X4500 HD. Now moving on to similar products of AMD like AMD 790GX which possesses faster graphics processor is better equipped in handling gaming. Hence the final winner over the first parameter is none other than an AMD CPU and AMD 780G based motherboard (Apong, 2008). The second parameter is based on user’s need for a gaming PC. The processors are here characterized by the kind of visual and FPS performance they provide. Here the performance of both CPU and video card need to be sync with each other. Quad core processors by both AMD and Intel namely Core 2 Extreme QX9770 or AMD’s Phenom X4 9950, have been considered as an extraordinary step and has shifted the actual focus from Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 or AMD Phenom X4 9950. As the PC in this case is meant for serious gamers, hence systems with integrated graphics is to be avoided and hence a board with dual PCI Express x16 slots with a full 16 PCI express lanes each. The best of the two in this case is the Core 2 Extreme QX9770. This assessment is in sharp contrast to what has been understood till now. Right from the beginning, it used to be AMD CPUs considered as the processors for serious gamer. But due to lower clock speed per core, AMD processors have faded into oblivion. The Phenom X4 9950 has been a no-match to Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 in dual-core compatible games. The difference in the performance expands further when AMD’s Phenoms are compared with Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (Apong, 2008). The third parameter is based on high end zone where PC are no less than ultimate high end systems. Here the actual user belongs to the power user crowd. The PCs are now professional machines used as tools for 3D-rendering, video processing, heavy duty graphical designing etc. Apart from these they have to handle other processing power hungry applications like MS Office, web browsers etc. The options provided by both AMD and Intel in this category are Dual- core as well as Quad-core processors but if models are being talked about then the choice for discussion zeroes down to Intel’s Core 2 Extreme QX9770 or AMD’s Phenom X4 9950 processor (Tom’s Hardware DE, 2008). Now, under above mentioned architecture, the fastest processor from Intel platform is the Core 2 Extreme QX9770 manufactured on a 45 nm process consisting of two dual-core processors with frequency of each of them being 3.2 GHz The two CPUs have access to 6 MB shared L2 cache. Hence with four computing cores and 12 MB of L2 cache, the processor boasts of the cumulative (FSB) front side bus 1600 MHz effective with each of the processor capable of 400 MHz frequency. But despite being developed on 45nm manufacturing process, Intel’s processors have been extremely power hungry with QX9970 model having 136 watt TDP. Other faster models like QX9775 need as much as 150 watts. From AMD desk, its always been a catching game. Their processor architecture have been in a continuous updating mode so as to achieve higher clock speed so that it could keep itself competitive in PC processor market dominated mainly by Intel. As their fastest processor being the Phenom X4 9950 clocks at 2.60 GHz, but its been the slashed prices that have made AMD CPUs inexpensive enough to compete its top end product with Intel’s mid-class products. As, AMD manufacturing process is still at 65 nanometers, the power consumption by the processor gets an extreme hike when clock speed of the processor is ramped up. The operating power requirement of a 2.50 GHz clocked quad-core Phenom X4 9850 is 125 watts. But still its been the energy efficiency, its AMD which boasts the most energy-efficient quad-core processor i.e., the Phenom X4 9350e requiring just 65 watts while clocking above 2.00 GHz. But when focusing in professional PCs zone and switching to 65 nm models, Core 2 Duo E6600 is perhaps the most desirable product from Intel platform. The processor has 4 MB L2 cache and frequency clocked at 2.40 GHz (Tom’s Hardware DE, 2008). Hence, depending on the form of usage and the budget of the possible buyer, the answer for the question Intel vs. AMD changes. In case of budget –level PCs, AMD’s CPU wins hand down as it has made its product available at sub-$100 range an in this category, Intel has no product. Its nearest product have miserably failed in competing with AMD’s processors. But once the parameter moves on other categories like Gamers’ choice and high-end professional users, its been the Intel processors which have brought misery to processor from AMD’s stable. Intel is a definite winner and the most favorite CPU when system prices increase without any boundary. In the gaming segment, Intel’s E8000-series Core 2 Duo processors has been best among all offerings while in case of professional PCs where power hungry CPUs hold their ranks. Its been the Intel’s  Core 2 Extreme QX9770 that rules the roost. The raw power of this CPU takes Intel much ahead of AMD which competes through its Phenom Series. As further development in recent days is supposed to bring more muscle to the CPUs, the Intel may rule the ramp with its Core i7 series but still AMD with AM3 architecture could spring some surprises in various other categories. References: Apong, J. (2008) AMD vs. Intel - Which is the Better Processor Now? Brown, R. (2005) Dual Core Desktop CPU bout: AMD vs Intel Tom’s Hardware DE (2008) Updated CPU Charts: AMD vs. Intel: Introduction Ignacio, J (2004) AMD KIII and Intel PIII. McLaughlin, T. (2002) AMD vs. Intel Comparison Task 2 2.1 Using the details contained in the Instruction Cycle lecture notes:- Encode the following table of Theoretical Assembler statements into its associated numerical machine code representation. ALL values are in decimal unless followed by an H e.g. 112 denotes a decimal value whilst 1A34H denotes a hex. Value; Deduce both the number of Read Cycles and Write Cycles necessary to complete the execution of each statement. Control Word (Binary) Control Word (Hex.) 2nd. Byte ( if req. ) (Hex.) 3rd. Byte ( if req. ) (Hex.) No. of Read Cycles No. of Write Cycles ADD D, C 00 010 011 13 1 0 ADD A, A 00 010 011 13 1 0 ADD C, 120 00 000 101 05 0000 0001 0010 0000 2 0 ADD B, 49H 00 000 101 05 0100 1001 2 0 ADD E, -11 00 000 101 05 1000 0000 0000 1011 2 0 ADD A, -23H 00 000 101 05 1000 0000 0010 0101 2 0 MOVE D, 100 01 011 101 5D 0000 0001 0000 0000 2 0 MOVE D, -100 01 011 101 5D 1000 0001 0000 0000 2 0 MOVE B, 47H 01 011 101 5D 0100 0111 2 0 MOVE C, -20H 01 011 101 5D 1000 0000 0010 0000 2 0 MOVE A, A 01 011 101 5D 2 0 MOVE C, E 01 011 101 5D 2 0 STORE 1234H, E 01 110 001 71 1100 0101 1100 0101 3 1 STORE 1000, B 01 110 001 71 1010 0000 0000 3 1 LOAD C, 7081H 01 110 010 72 0111 0000 1000 0001 3 1 LOAD E, 2000 01 110 010 72 0100 0000 0000 0000 3 1 JMP 1234H 10000000 80 1100 0101 1100 0101 3 0 JMP 1234 10000000 80 1100 0101 1100 0101 3 0 JPZ 7000 10000001 81 00110100 00010010 3 0 JPP 300H 10000010 82 0000 0101 0000 0000 3 0 JPN ABCDH 10000011 83 3 0 JPN 4000 10000011 83 0100 0000 0000 0000 3 0 Read More