Features

It's no secret that for the whole of 2007, Intel - in particular, its desktop and mobile Core 2 processors - has dominated the CPU scene. But now, the first of AMD's quad-core processors have arrived, as have Intel's next-generation parts.

The goalposts have shifted, too: where once the only thing anybody cared about was the outright speed of a processor, the past 12 months have seen a massive shift towards the green credentials of a CPU. Power consumption and performance per watt - the actual amount of work a processor can get done with a given amount of power - are now considered as important as performance.

Both companies are trying

ADVERTISEMENT

to convince anyone who'll listen that their parts are king of the energy-saving hill, particularly when it comes to total-platform power consumption: the overall power drawn from the mains by a system based on the processor, chipset and supporting components of either company.

This month, we've cut through the hype and actually tested Intel and AMD's newest parts for outright performance, plus performance per watt and overall value. We've moved heaven and earth to get cutting-edge parts to test from both companies, but as you'll see, one of the two is in serious trouble when it comes to delivering on its promised new products.

This will hopefully change in the coming months, but for now there's one clear winner and one that simply can't cut the mustard.

Phenom
Core 2
Opteron
Xeon
Alternatives