<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Mathieu Gagné <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mgagne@iweb.com">mgagne@iweb.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
According to <a href="http://cpubenchmark.net" target="_blank">cpubenchmark.net</a>, my el cheapo CPU is better than yours:<br>
<br>
Intel Xeon 2.80GHz<br>
Score: 495<br>
Rank: 281<br>
Link: <a href="http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+2.80GHz" target="_blank">http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+2.80GHz</a><br>
<br>
Intel Core2 4300 @ 1.80GHz<br>
Score: 983<br>
Rank: 170<br>
Link: <a href="http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+4300+%40+1.80GHz" target="_blank">http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+4300+%40+1.80GHz</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Xeon isn't always better. Sorry. :-(<br>
</blockquote></div><br>Haha! I guess I have to live with that for now! Too bad!<br><br>-- <br>Rahul<br>