Intel WILL win the next round.

[Jamie1984]

True.

In the end for me it will come down to performance for price (bang per buck).

For arguments sake lets say, the Intel Conroe is 20% faster than X AMD chip but cost 45% more, will i buy Intel or AMD. More than likely AMD will again get my money. Intel have had good chips in the past too, but they have allways been more expensive (even when their chips were worse).

exactly, id rather give less money to the underdog for near the same performance. thats just me

 

[Jokester]

True.

In the end for me it will come down to performance for price (bang per buck).

For arguments sake lets say, the Intel Conroe is 20% faster than X AMD chip but cost 45% more, will i buy Intel or AMD. More than likely AMD will again get my money. Intel have had good chips in the past too, but they have allways been more expensive (even when their chips were worse).

Yeah, but this is apparently the Intel chip that's about half the price of an FX and it's still 20% faster.

Jokester

 

[Jamie1984]

be nice to see cpu prices drop once conroe hits and amd loses sales then hehe

 

[ted34]

It's a next gen CPU and I'm not surprised it's faster than the FX60. If it wasn't it'd be an embarrasment for Intel to say the least - they've been trailing behind for a long time. Presler became more competitive and now they've got a new trick up their sleave. We'll have to wait to see how AMD responds

Completely true. At the moment it looks like conroe is the best out there but we havent seen any benchies from amd with m2 socket which i reckon will be a massive improvement with the move to ddr2. Amd will live on

 

[benjo plz.]

and amd loses sales then hehe

 

[james32]

Amd need to drop prices on those X2 dual cores if they are smart
because the now there not worth money knowing something in 3 months going to be a lot faster, even yonah is going to match amd any model, never mind conroe

i was going to buy an amd 4400 89 watt version but no way are they worth
£344 i can wait to june to get a better performace chip for problay same price or cheaper.

X2 should be dropped to £200 apart from the top 1, better to sell cheaper or theres going to be a lot of chips unwanted once conroe comes out.

 

[Pulseammo]

So are the only boards that will run conroes that are available right now the £140 and upwards 975x boards or is there something cheaper?

I mean, I usually pay about £90 for my AMD boards because I've never really gotten into overclocking. If im having to shell out an extra £50 -> £85 on just a board for a 20% gain I can't see me buying a conroe tbh.

 

[Sanzy]

Amd need to drop prices on those X2 dual cores if they are smart
because the now there not worth money knowing something in 3 months going to be a lot faster, even yonah is going to match amd any model, never mind conroe

i was going to buy an amd 4400 89 watt version but no way are they worth
£344 i can wait to june to get a better performace chip for problay same price or cheaper.

X2 should be dropped to £200 apart from the top 1, better to sell cheaper or theres going to be a lot of chips unwanted once conroe comes out.

well not really as the dual cores are around £300 for arguements sake i think paying the £100 would be a better option the paying

say Conroe = £300 , mobo = £150 , ram = £150

 

[Otacon]

It's not an open and shut thing that Intel will simply wipe AMD from the market now. For one, that will take time, and two, AMD have a strong enough user base (in both desktop and server markets) to be given a couple of opportunities to turn it around. AMD has always thrived on being the best bang for buck option - and early indications are they will continue to be so (unless AM2 significantly under performs).

Also remember that being 'top dog' has meant that AMD have had no need to totally reveal their hand. If they're smart (and it's a big if), they will have a strategy and a technology waiting in the wings to bring some competition to Intel’s new architecture. News like this could also add extra feathers to AMD's cap.

As I've said before, the only 'conclusion' I'm taking from all these reports and articles is that it's going to be an interesting year in the CPU market. The most interesting we've had for a while.

 

[AWPC]

So are the only boards that will run conroes that are available right now the £140 and upwards 975x boards or is there something cheaper?

I mean, I usually pay about £90 for my AMD boards because I've never really gotten into overclocking. If im having to shell out an extra £50 -> £85 on just a board for a 20% gain I can't see me buying a conroe tbh.

No boards currently available are fully Conroe compliant. Intel say Conroe may run in current 975X boards without all its features but it all depends on how the circuitry is laid out apparently as all current 975Xs lack 3 transistors + 1 other IC required for full Conroe support.

Hold off until they release the Conroe spec 975X in the next 3 weeks or so.

 

[AWPC]

Thats not a good thing, means you will need one of the £160 motherboards and overclocking 1:1 will be much more dificult. Not to mention memory costing more

High end mobos are always expensive as they throw lots of extra SATA & USB Ports in as well as Dual Gigabit LAN and many other costly features as the makers figure a high end enthusiast is only gonna want all the latest greatest hardware so must also need lots of connectors to plug their kit into.

Bit of a con if you ask me but its been that way for years now as the chipset makers force the mobo makers to only include the high end chipsets like 955X & 975X with all the other ports etc etc.

High end is never ever cheap @ least DDR2-800 is future proofed for @ least a few years + not really cost that much more (currently £30ish) than DDR2-667 anyway so why bother getting the lesser speed to save £30. Bit pointless if you ask me.

Overclocking 1:1 is very easy on Intel mobos.

 

[Raikiri]

Not if the FSB is 1600mhz on the conroe chips (1:1 with DDR2-800), you would need to get DDR2-1000 which is very expensive, also I have a fairly high end AMD motherboard that cost £80 with all the connectors I need... they dont have to cost a fortune.

Plus the conroe is supposed to be half the price of the FX60, so it isnt high end kit really.

 

[AWPC]

Not if the FSB is 1600mhz on the conroe chips (1:1 with DDR2-800), you would need to get DDR2-1000 which is very expensive, also I have a fairly high end AMD motherboard that cost £80 with all the connectors I need... they dont have to cost a fortune.

Plus the conroe is supposed to be half the price of the FX60, so it isnt high end kit really.

I agree most Intel mobos are well overpriced even if they do now include native Xfire support + unnoficial leaked SLI support is coming very shortly as well for the 975X chipset.

The bottom of the range Conroe CPU which beats the FX60 oced to FX62 is only running @ DDR2-667 in the test. It is also the cheapest one and will only cost approx £300-350. Intel are currently saying that they intend to up it to a native FSB of DDR2-800. The first Conroe CPU to be released is gonna be the Extreme Edition model @ 3.33Ghz which will cost the usual $999 or £750ish.

 

[Corasik]

Dont forget Intel are slashing the price of P4-D's in april, up to 50% saving on certain processors. Intel are starting to learn that value for money is important.

And as has already been mentioned the conroe they have been demonstrating is the mainstream processor, not the extreme edition.

 

[kumar101]

ASUS have a Press release on their new Broadwater chipset based Motherboard. Noticed one of the PC-E slots is 4 x wont be using SLI so doesnt bother me.

P5B Deluxe - http://www.asus.com/news_show.aspx?id=2474

I was holding off for AM2(BTW above link also has spec on ASUS AM2 new nForce chipset)

Will wait a bit longer for Conroe before deciding.

 

[Mattus]

The bottom of the range Conroe CPU which beats the FX60 oced to FX62 is only running @ DDR2-667 in the test.

That's not quite true. The Conroe in the test was running at 2.66Ghz. Conroes will range from 1.8Ghz to 3.0Ghz with the Extreme Edition at 3.33Ghz, so the chip in the test was actually a mid-range part.