Soldato
NetBurst messed up, not Intel's FABs. Just look at Dothan, that was 90nm and was a great chip...sr4470 said:
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Intel's Conroe 2.66GHz beats an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz!
- Thread starter crazyswede
- Start date
Yes strange that isnt it how all of a sudden when Intel may actually finally once again have a performance leading CPU for both desktop + server + mobile all of a sudden its no longer becomes an issue how much faster/better it is on all countslowrider007 said:funny that, us intel users have been saying the same for years, now the the shoes on the other foot..............., sorry i'm just feeling a little smug with the results, surely i'm aloud.
Which for the record @ the early stage appears to be 40% average performance gain with the entry level Conroe and 40% lower TDP. On the server side with Woodcrest its 80% performance & 35% lower TDP
Hmm wonder how long (if ever) it will take AMD to recoup these performance losses as Intel will no doubt price aggressively to regain market share & crush AMD then bring out the Dual Conroe CPU
)AWPC said:Yes strange that isnt it how all of a sudden when Intel may actually finally once again have a performance leading CPU for both desktop + server + mobile all of a sudden its no longer becomes an issue how much faster/better it is on all counts
Intel doesnt have a good track record with benchmarks though
Perhaps but a 60% increase in the std FEAR benchmark for max details is impressive considering what a hardware hog it is.sr4470 said:Intel doesnt have a good track record with benchmarks though
Clearly the Conroe can keep up with the Xfire setup as its a next-gen CPU.
AMD need to respond quickly if they can & I doubt this as they have been pushing the envelope to get the advantage they already have. To retool and ditch existing product lines now is a huge 7 figure investment risk. I'm no expert but doubt very much its simply a case of raising clock speeds to regain the high ground. Intel clearly have a much better thermal technology which will be hard to beat unless AMD can defy the known laws of physics.
AMD are most probably gonna lose some of their hard fought gains of the past few years. Who in their right mind would buy any high end AMD or Intel CPU now when in a few months time you can have a much faster/newer technology for the same price.
No wonder Dell decided to give AMD a miss when Intel told them what they had up their sleeves.
Soldato
Im changing nothing untill the dust settles on this. Its looking very good for Intel at the moment. I personally dont give a poopoo about AMD/Intel or Nvidia/ATI. I'll buy the best one when the time comes. (and watch it stay cutting edge for 1 month or less)
Soldato
Its great to see the giants battle it out, as where would we be without competition ?.
I will go for whatever is fastest, when I can afford
How about 9x 1Ghz processors on one chip ?, is that called a Cell ?.
I will go for whatever is fastest, when I can afford
How about 9x 1Ghz processors on one chip ?, is that called a Cell ?.
Soldato
Anyone forgot about Yonah cpu's Yonah's might just take on FX60's right now, never mind the next gen of Intel cpu's. I can see this being a hit in 3D Mark. 4000MHz Yonah and FX's aint got a chance...
Yonah's might just take on FX60's right now, never mind the next gen of Intel cpu's. I can see this being a hit in 3D Mark. 4000MHz Yonah and FX's aint got a chance...juno_first said:I will go for whatever is fastest, when I can afford
I'll be going for whichever gives me the best value for money (obviously taking overclocking into account, we need someone to get there hands on some ES versions and clock'em
Soldato
Is there an article explaining why the Conroe is soo much faster?
Dutch Guy said:
Anand had an article on the keynote speech which had some clues in it. I'm no techie though.
I'm seeing a potential drop in AMD prices all of a sudden here. Especially if all they have with AM2 is a Venice Dual-Core pushed to breaking point in the 'new stuff' list.
It's certainly going to take something impressive to pinch the power table back.
Soldato
AMD is still using 90nm while Intel is using 65nmThing said:
If AMD can go 65nm and as a result can run the CPU's at 3.5Ghz+ it will be interesting which one would be faster.
at 65nm, they could have more cache too couldnt they?
personally, while i do want AMD to be in the lead for a few more years, it's not due to being an AMD fanboy - it's more that the longer AMD are in the lead the more market share they have and the more resources they have to compete properly with Intel (who, lets be honest, are 10 times bigger at least).
If that happens, then we could end up with an ATi/Nvidia situation where one tops the other back and forth. hopefully bringing lower prices and better speeds.
personally, while i do want AMD to be in the lead for a few more years, it's not due to being an AMD fanboy - it's more that the longer AMD are in the lead the more market share they have and the more resources they have to compete properly with Intel (who, lets be honest, are 10 times bigger at least).
If that happens, then we could end up with an ATi/Nvidia situation where one tops the other back and forth. hopefully bringing lower prices and better speeds.
Last edited:
Soldato
Do you mean ATi ?