Now that we know the iPhone 3G S and the Palm Pre share extremely similar 65nm ARM Cortex A8-based internals, it's time to break out the stopwatches and see how these blood brothers stack up. Anandtech has the first head-to-head tests we've seen, and it seems like the 3G S has the slight edge, loading a series of web pages 11 percent faster and a whopping 54 percent faster than the iPhone 3G. Not too shabby, but not exactly a thorough drubbing either -- especially when you consider webOS is still 1.0 and there's likely some optimizations to come. Full results at the read link.

Update: Anandtech had some uncharacteristically bad math going on -- the 3G S is actually 21 percent faster than the Pre, which is quite notable considering the similar hardware and WebKit-based browsers.

Just when you though you'd had your fill of insanely detailed benchmarks of processors you may or may not have ever heard of, AMD's new Phenom II X4 955 and 945 hit the scene to get those overclockers all in a tizzy. The top of the line is the 955 "Black Edition" at 3.2GHz, while the 945 plays with a petty 3GHz. And the verdict? They're clearly AMD's fastest so far, but that might not be fast enough. AMD offers great value, but only really matches Intel's Core 2 offerings on performance -- Core i7 is still out in front. There is the fact that Phenom II offers a nice upgrade path for certain people who already do the AMD thing and are looking to upgrade, along with "enthusiasts" who are "enthused" by easy-access overclocking, but overall it looks like AMD is still playing catch-up with Intel.

Read - HotHardware
Read - Neoseeker
Read - PC Perspective
Read - Tech Report
Read - TechSpot
Read - EXTREME Overclocking

When Apple's ever-so-slightly refreshed Nehalem-based Mac Pro showed up on our doorstep, we were understandably taken aback by the enclosure. Sure, it looks exactly like the previous Mac Pro externally, and only slightly more beautiful internally, but it's hard to deny the gorgeousness of this metallic wonder. That said, the so-called cheese grater design is one that's mighty familiar to Mac fans by now, so we'll spare you the details there. What you're probably wondering is whether or not this rig is really worth the steep asking price. At $2,499 for a single quad-core 2.66GHz rig and $3,299 for a twin quad-core 2.26GHz machine (which is our test system, by the way), neither option is particularly "affordable." And outside of the refreshed Intel Xeon processor, there aren't too many new hardware components to really convince you that an upgrade is a dire necessity. Follow us past the break to get a real-world perspective on the value proposition, and moreover, to get a better understanding of who exactly benefits most from a workstation of this magnitude.

Yeah, we already heard that Dell's Phenom II-equipped XPS 625 was a solid value, but what does that really mean? The testing fiends over at HotHardware sought to find out, and after putting this gaming beast through more tests than it ever wanted to endure, they mirrored most of the earlier (positive) sentiments. In fact, it was found to boast one of the best price-to-performance ratios out there, and the "minimalist" software installation definitely earned brownie points in our book. One thing that bothered critics, however, was the excessive amount of noise. We too have noticed that Dell's ginormous XPS towers -- which, by the way, reviewers also found to be unnecessarily heavy and unwieldy -- can emit some serious decibels under heavy loads, but you'd think the engineers in Round Rock would've figured out a solution by now. Still, those quirks are probably small hassles to deal with given the savings compared to similar rigs, but we'd highly recommend digging into the read link just to be sure.

Apple's been pretty resistant to putting out an OS X netbook, and we might have an inkling why -- according to benchmarks run on a hackintosh'd MSI Wind variant, Apple's OS runs just about as well on your average 1.6GHz Atom / 1GB RAM machine as it does on a four-year-old iBook G4. Sure, the Atom boots a bit faster and outperforms the G4 on simple tasks, but it slows way down when the going gets tough. Of course, the iBook was a much larger machine than most netbooks out there, but with numbers like this we'd say those of you searching for an OS X netbook can skip the EULA violations and just hunt down an old 12-inch PowerBook G4. Check out all the stats at the read link.

[Thanks, Penny]

Now that the Windows 7 beta is out, the benchmarks are coming fast and furious, and while 7's been previously found to best XP and Vista during "real-world" tasks, it looks like XP is still the outright speed champ on current hardware. That's at least the word according to InfoWorld, which pitted all three systems against each other in a suite of tests designed to suss out how each performed on modern multicore systems, and while we won't pretend to grok all the data, there's nothing complicated about the final results, which showed that "any illusions about Windows 7 somehow being leaner or more efficient than Vista can now be thrown out the window." Sure, there was some speedup -- 7 was 60 percent faster than Vista during the dual-core workflow tests -- but overall, 7's just slower on dual- and quad-core hardware than XP. However, there's a silver lining here: InfoWorld says the slowdown is in large part due to the extra code Vista and 7 use to manage multicore processors, and as the number of cores increase, the corresponding performance gains are much bigger than with XP since they can be used more efficiently. Of course, by the time we're all sitting pretty with 48-core Larrabee machines this all might be just a distant memory, so for right now we're just going to get back to installing the Windows 7 beta on anything we can find and reveling in the glory of perceived speedups.

Read - Analysis I (against Vista alone)
Read - Analysis II (against Vista and XP)

We were pretty stoked about the OQO model 2+ when we got to spend a few quality minutes with it at CES this year, and apparently actually getting one delivered to your house is even more spectacular. The cool cats over at MID Moves were able to score one of the Gobi / OLED-equipped handhelds for review, and rather than making us wait until all opinions were formed, they've hosted up a nice preview video along with a few high quality unboxing shots. Initial impressions seem pretty positive, with the SSD helping things along quite significantly. Granted, we would've preferred a WiFi-on battery life of more than two hours, but what fun would it be to not have a single gripe to harp on? More pictorial delight is in the read link, and the vid's just past the break.

[Via Slashgear, thanks Kris120890]

If you thought the original XPS 730 H2C was boss, get a load of this. The incredibly diligent benchmarkers over at HotHardware have taken the Core i7-powered XPS 730x H2C under their wings for a fortnight of testing, and they've got a baker's dozen worth of review pages to display their findings. We can't even begin to cover the array of graphs, bar charts and triple-digit FPS numbers here, but we can tell you that critics were duly impressed with how well the Core i7 performance compared to older Core 2-based offerings. Gaming performance was predictably "fantastic," and even the single GeForce GTX 280 that it was packin' held its own under pressure. All in all, this fanciful machine was deemed "a worthy update to what [reviewers] thought was the best XPS 700 series system to date," and if you've got the coin, you'll probably be incredibly pleased with what it delivers. Dive deep (and we mean deep) in the read link below.

AMD, a company not exactly known for meeting its own deadlines, seemed to be trying to avoid news of painful delays for the Phenom II by simply not letting anyone say when the thing would be available. Now the chip is apparently in the hands of one lucky gamer at the HardOCP forums, Table21, who was kind enough to run it through its paces. The Phenom II 940 running at 3GHz scored a 4,091 on 3DMark06 and, once OC'd up to 3.85GHz, delivered a score of 5,086. It's rather too early to draw any conclusions from these numbers, and we don't know what he paid for the thing, but that performance does fall well behind Intel's Core i7 Extreme that was similarly benchmarked last month, scoring 6,608 at the same clock speed. That's quite a gap -- but nothing a little liquid nitrogen won't fix.

[Via PC Perspective]

NVIDIA still hasn't gotten official with the less-than-secret card, but it looks like China's IT168 website has already gotten its hands on an actual GTX 295 and gone ahead and published some early benchmarks, which now seem to have not so mysteriously disappeared. This being the internet, however, there's already been screenshots taken, and while the benchmarks certainly impress, they're also rightfully leading folks to wait for some slightly more official numbers. If they are accurate, however, it looks like the GTX 295 will trounce ATI's top-end HD 4870 X2 in a number of tests, including a stunning 100% boost in performance in Dead Space, all while boasting a considerably lower power consumption too boot (hence the suspicion). We won't have to wait too much longer to put things to rest, however, as the card is expected to be officially unveiled at CES, with a whole slew of benchmarks inevitably set to follow shortly thereafter.

[Via The Inquirer]

Intel's new Core i7 chip has been showing up in tons of silly-spec'd high-end gaming rigs for about three days now, so it's obviously time to get bored and move on -- and right on cue, TechRadar's got the first benchmarks we've seen of the upcoming dual-processor Nehalem EP platform. The secret test machine featured two 2.8GHz Nehalem EP chips (likely to hit retail in 2009 as the Xeon X5560) and 24GB of 1,066MHz DDR3 RAM controlled by the new Quick Path Interconnect and on-die memory controllers, which together cranked out a SPECfp base rate of 160 -- way above the 90 posted by current 3.4GHz Xeon setups, and higher than the 105 scored by a 2.7GHz dual-processor rig with AMD's new Shanghai chips. Yeah, that's silly fast, and it's bound to get even faster when these bad boys launch with a 3.2GHz part along for the ride. Now if Intel could just siphon some of that speed into these pokey Atoms we can actually afford, we'd be grins-a-plenty.

Looking for the latest in CPU spice to keep your gaming rig flowing? You'd better go find your wallet/purse and head to your local computer shop for a fresh Core i7 (née Nehalem), because they are apparently available for sale right now -- before most of the major sites have even received theirs. User gooddog over at the Overclock.net forums has flaunted posted this picture of his recently purchased 3.2GHz Core i7 Extreme 965 CPU. Paired with an Asus P6T motherboard and running at the stock clock rate it scored a 5,606 in 3DMark06, in-line with what earlier testers found. O/C'ed up to 3.8GHz it delivered a tidy 6,608, a mark that surely gives it control of all benchmarks and, thus, the PC universe.

[Thanks, Adam]

Presumably in an (utterly futile) attempt to bring down the power grid all around the Mediterranean, print magazine PC World Greece benchmarked three powerful Nehalem desktop processors -- the Core i7 Extreme Edition 965, and the apparently non-extreme Core i7 920 and 940. Names aside, performance from all three was extreme compared to most stuff currently on the market. The data for number nerds: in 3DMark06 the 920 finished ever-so-slightly behind the Core 2 Extreme QX9770's 4,922 marks with 4,818 while the 940 and the 965 both opened a can of you-know-what at 5,282 and 5,716 respectively. More titillating figures await enthusiasts through the read link, but for you normal folk only concerned that Nehalem wouldn't be fast enough to justify an upgrade (and you weren't), rest assured that it triumphed in this no-holds-barred CPU cage match.

[Via techPowerUp! Forums, thanks sk]