Core2Duo Part 2

We temporarily assembled a Core2Duo machine and benchmarked the HALCON environment.
The benchmark program was prepared by disabling all "wait_seconds" in the HALCON sample program, explore_halcon.dev.
* Core2Duo E6600 / Normal / 60.5s
* Core2Duo E6600 / Parallel / 65.7s
* HT-Pen4 3.4GHz / Normal / 114.3s
* HT-Pen4 3.4GHz / Parallel / No completion
* Pen4 3.4GHz / Normal / 101.6s
* Pen4 3.4GHz / Parallel / 164.4s
* Athlon64 3200+ / Normal / 72.4ms
* Athlon64 3200+ / Parallel / 75.1ms
Normal: Runs with standard Hdevelop
Parallel: Executed with Parallel Hdevelop
Normal is efficiency-oriented and cannot run in multi-threaded mode, so it is only a reference value.
It is true that Core2Duo was faster, but Athlon64 also did well.
On the other hand, Pen4 and HT-Pen4 are miserable. I have to check it out, but it was as if it was running with the brakes on, even with thermal protection working. Even if it was thermal protection, it is still unstable.
I'll look into this a little more.
As for the Athlon series, "Athlon64X2 4800+" is currently available, and as a conclusion,
Core2Duo and Athlon64X2 are almost equal when used under HALCON environment.
The faster clock speed is not necessarily better for image processing by HALCON. It seems that the speed of floating point calculation is effective.
There is no reason to choose Pen4.
I think that is the reason why I choose Pen4.
Now I will try benchmarking under FI environment.