NGMA (Conroe) architecture expected to be 20% faster clock-for-clock than AM2 chips

easyrider · 22 Feb 2006 at 21:21

Emlyn_Dewar said:
I covered my ass with my (going by ocuk price only)
I'd also say the Presler is the incorrect choice, but I also don't see it as a poor CPU choice. I don't even know why I want to defend the Presler, I'm just not in the usual pro AMD mood tonight...

gary996 · 23 Feb 2006 at 03:13

Been Amd for a fair time now prior to that Intel and prior to that Amd. If Intels next chip (conroe) performs way better than Amd then Intel here i come as simple as that (of course as long as it doesnt cost an arm and a leg)

maddness · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:12

easyrider said:
evidence please ?

Blah de blah de blah.....

Can uou get a 700 mhz overclock on a presler without a bump in voltage?

.....blah de blah de blah
even the extra 2 mb cache the presler has is not enough to make it a AMD dual core contender.

yes i can do better, 1.2Ghz overclock with 0.025v (1.325) bump in voltage
from a 920.

and considering how much the asus droops, im not surprised if i can do 4Ghz on defaults.

iamgud · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:12

I will just buy whatever is the best for a sensible price at the time,I have a feeling it will be AMD again but we will see.

easyrider · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:19

<maddness> said:
yes i can do better, 1.2Ghz overclock with 0.025v (1.325) bump in voltage
from a 920.

blah de blah de blah im not surprised if i can do 4Ghz on defaults.

what cooling?

oh and btw a 700 mhz oc on a opty is worth more than 1.2ghz on a presler

Relatively speaking

So you need higher clock speeds for matching performance but I guess you already know that

maddness · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:31

on air, im using a reserator now though, have been upto 4.6Ghz on the reserator but thats for another thread, not here

this Presler is even more bang for buck than the 3Ghz opteron i 'upgraded' from

edit: with the 4ghz and 1800xt i could break 20k 03 marks, not even the opty combo could do that

, mind you it wasnt far behind.

Mr Paul · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:54

YAWN,

Here's an idea, why don't you all wait for all the chips and chipsets to comeout, mature and then buy whichever is the fastest......

easyrider · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:56

Mr Paul said:
YAWN,

Here's an idea, why don't you all wait for all the chips and chipsets to comeout, mature and then buy whichever is the fastest......

kill joy

easyrider · 23 Feb 2006 at 10:56

<maddness> said:
on air, im using a reserator now though, have been upto 4.6Ghz on the reserator but thats for another thread, not here

this Presler is even more bang for buck than the 3Ghz opteron i 'upgraded' from

edit: with the 4ghz and 1800xt i could break 20k 03 marks, not even the opty combo could do that , mind you it wasnt far behind.

hey! Arn't you comparing a single core to a dual core cpu?

Sumanji · 23 Feb 2006 at 11:01

Wow after 3 years of eating dirt, maybe Intel finally pulled their thumbs out of their bumholes and made something half decent

the.m · 23 Feb 2006 at 11:06

Nice to see intel fighting back. If its faster it will end up more expensive, thats always been the way. I used to run intel all the time untill Athlon64 and would be happy to go back as would many others I believe. We all want better perfomance and competition, its short sighted to stay in one camp all the time.

Corasik · 23 Feb 2006 at 11:11

Intel have been slashing the prices lately, with the next round of price cuts coming in April with up to 50% reductions on the dual core chips.

Pound for pound, in a stock speed system, Intels are doing pretty well for price/performance now. And intel have often been very good clockers. The 900 series is clocking extremely well on air.

Im sure a Conroe XE will be an extremely costly chip, but so are the top end AMD FX series chips, and for clockers, you'll probably get a long way on the lower end Conroes.

Its certainly not fair to say Intel are 'learning from AMD' in regards to short pipelines. Its speculated that much of the design of Conroe came from Pentium 3, which was a great processor. Clock for clock P3's destroyed P4's but at the time the process technology didnt exist to make faster P3's.

P4 allowed Intel to ramp up clock speeds, and get overtake the performance of the Athlon XP. Now with 65nm process Intel can make a redesigned P3 type processor with 64bit, dual core and extreme performance, and get clock speeds from 1.8Ghz to 3.3Ghz if the rumours are correct.

And if they can get 20% more speed clock for clock than AMD while still using a legacy FSB, they will still have the option to make future generations with integrated memory controllers to increase speed even further.

Anyway, as long as Intel and AMD continue to leapfrog each other in performance, each company will have motivation to stive to make better and faster processors.

Long live AMD... Long live Intel!

maddness · 23 Feb 2006 at 13:01

easyrider said:
hey! Arn't you comparing a single core to a dual core cpu?

thats right, im giving the opty a fighting chance, lol

ive yet to see a dual opty reaching 2.8Ghz, i figured the 200mhz-300mhz bump in speed would help, infact anyone out there can give a dual opty @ 2.8Ghzz with an x1800xt give a quick whirl with 03?

anyhow the Conroe is deffinatly the next upgrade for me

easyrider · 23 Feb 2006 at 13:59

<maddness> said:
thats right, im giving the opty a fighting chance, lol

ive yet to see a dual opty reaching 2.8Ghz, i figured the 200mhz-300mhz bump in speed would help, infact anyone out there can give a dual opty @ 2.8Ghzz with an x1800xt give a quick whirl with 03?

anyhow the Conroe is deffinatly the next upgrade for me

well my dual core 170 is currently 2.7 ghz stock vcore (1.3v) 12 hrs prime stable.

I booted into windows at 2.8ghz stock vcore but it failed prime after 5 mins on 1 core.

so with a little boost in vcore I will definitely see 2.8ghz maybe 2.9ghz!

I will try tonight for 2.8ghz and it shouldn't be a problem

Unfortuantly I have a 7800 GT so If i bench at 2.8ghz it won't be the same.
As I do not have a x1800xt.

Check out the dual opty thread people in there are getting 2.8ghz (I will be soon)

maddness · 23 Feb 2006 at 15:00

nice, i'll watch this space, btw how much was your 170

?

my 920 was £172, well £344 for both of them (i liked it soo much i got a second for another rig

)

easyrider · 23 Feb 2006 at 15:17

<maddness> said:
nice, i'll watch this space, btw how much was your 170 ?

my 920 was £172, well £344 for both of them (i liked it soo much i got a second for another rig )

£297

great value for money

maddness · 24 Feb 2006 at 20:15

easyrider said:
£297 great value for money

any luck with you 2.8Ghz landmark,

i did an all blown 4.5Ghz, needs a bit of volts, 1.6v (as it droops to 1.43) but is 100% stable with the reserator

, will be doing the droop mod next week and hopefully aim for 4.6-4.8

easyrider · 24 Feb 2006 at 20:19

<maddness> said:
any luck with you 2.8Ghz landmark,

i did an all blown 4.5Ghz, needs a bit of volts, 1.6v (as it droops to 1.43) but is 100% stable with the reserator , will be doing the droop mod next week and hopefully aim for 4.6-4.8

yeah i got 2.8 on 1.375 vcore

but I haven't had time to prime it properly yet.

but initial super pi runs are fine.I may get the vcore lower but not had enough time to fiddle yet.

gonna get rock stable over the weekend

Only thing is my G skill HZ ram they are topping at 270 mhz so I guess a divider is needed.

Competitor rules

NGMA (Conroe) architecture expected to be 20% faster clock-for-clock than AM2 chips

More options

easyrider

easyrider

gary996

gary996

maddness

maddness

iamgud

iamgud

easyrider

easyrider

maddness

maddness

Mr Paul

Mr Paul

easyrider

easyrider

easyrider

easyrider

Sumanji

Sumanji

the.m

the.m

Corasik

Corasik

maddness

maddness

easyrider

easyrider

maddness

maddness

easyrider

easyrider

maddness

maddness

easyrider

easyrider