Thoughts
Let's face facts. Intel has known for some time that AMD's new CPUs were immensely fast in processing 32-bit applications. The Opteron CPU, from which both the FX-51 and the lesser 3200+ Clawhammer were born, has been paraded around review sites for months now. Almost every reviewer has remarked on just what an incredible work-per-clock-cycle ratio it enjoys. We've seen 1.6GHz and 1.8GHz Opteron-based CPUs give Intel's heavyweight Hyper-Threading processors are run for their money, especially in gaming-related tests. So the announcement of a re-badged Opteron, running at 2.2GHz and supporting dual-channel DDR400, was not altogether unexpected.
Taken over the broad spectrum, the incumbent 3.2GHz Northwood 800MHz FSB CPU put up a reasonable fight against AMD's finest, but the fact remained that most observers gave the performance nod to the FX-51, ourselves included. Intel is still busy readying the Northwood's replacement. The Prescott promises to be a finely-honed CPU with improved Hyper-Threading, more cache, and a gaggle of other behind-the-scenes improvements. Paper talk is meaningless, as Intel only too well knows. So some clever spark decided to beat the Xeon architecture up enough into accepting a Northwood form; the 3.2GHz Extreme Edition was born. Improvements are few and far between, but what there is, is formidable. The Extreme Edition, a name that'll either inspire or derange you, carries a die-busting 167 million or so transistors, the bulk are which are reserved for 2MB of Level 3 cache, which helps keep the execution units ticking along ever so nicely. The advantages are simple. Keep the CPU waiting less time for data and watch its IPC rise with respect to memory-related tasks.
Our benchmarks have shown that the Extreme Edition's talents best present themselves in gaming, where code with large data sets is most often used. That's exactly what the 2MB of L3 cache adores. Compared to the regular 3.2GHz Northwood, the Extreme Edition returned benchmarks that were up to 20% higher, although 10% would be a more realistic evaluation. Importantly for Intel's consumer-level prestige, it allowed the E.E to swap benchmark blows with the AMD Athlon FX-51. That's not all it will be swapping, either. Price tags appear to be startlingly similar. We could write volumes on just how fast it could be, or something along the lines of 'the fastest we've seen'. The bottom line is a simple one. It's expensive (£600 - £700), it's in limited supply, it's hugely fast and it's probably matches the competition's finest. We could be talking about either the FX-51 or the Extreme Edition; that's how similar they are.
The enthusiast with ultra-deep pockets will have a choice between two monster CPUs that go about their respective work in differing ways but tend to achieve similar results. The 3.2GHz Extreme Edition puts Intel back in the very high-end performance game. For that alone, it's a decent CPU. A niche product for a niche market, and it's sure to tempt all those who had their minds fixated on the Athlon FX-51. Competition is always a good thing for the consumer. It's positively rife here. We just hope that Intel decide to leave the Extreme Edition CPUs multiplier unlocked. £650+ of your money deserves that treat.
