pcper reviews Conroe with nForce 590 SLI

pastymuncher · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:19

Here's what i believe is one of the first independent reviews of Conroe. No Intel persons involved. See it here.

Pretty damn impressive too.

killer_uk · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:23

Thanks for the link!

weescott · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:24

I just read that. Not as big a performance leap as I thought.

I'll wait for the AMD quad core that allegedly will be better than the Intel offering.

As always. Too soon to tell.

killer_uk · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:24

weescott said:
I just read that. Not as big a performance leap as I thought.

I'll wait for the AMD quad core that allegedly will be better than the Intel offering.

As always. Too soon to tell.

I suppose it all depends on what you're upgrading from as to whether its worth it or not.

weescott · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:27

killer_uk said:
I suppose it all depends on what you're upgrading from as to whether its worth it or not.

Indeed. And wether or not you will be clocking it and what your budget is.

One thing is for sure. It will be the best thing for another 6 months :rolleyes:

.

killer_uk · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:29

Yeah, I originally had a Athlon64 3000 till I sold it a few weeks back. Currently running on my backup system - a Sempron 2400 - so it will seem 1000x faster than this heap of junk!

Slinwagh · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:36

weescott said:
I just read that. Not as big a performance leap as I thought.

I'll wait for the AMD quad core that allegedly will be better than the Intel offering.

As always. Too soon to tell.

And what is the quad core going to do for you. There are very few applications out that are multithreaded and make uses of two cores let alone apps specifically created for quad cores.

Tooks · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:43

I looked through all those benchmarks too, and thought there wasn't a massive difference, depending on what you use your PC for of course.

But, then I looked at the price of an X2 4800 and an FX62 in comparison to the E6700 Conroe and it's like WOW!

For the price, nothing can really touch Conroe can it?

I'm still waiting until all the early adopters have reported back though...

Trailing edge, not cutting edge, is my upgrade mantra!!

Scoobie Dave · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:50

Interesting link, cheers!

Dont think im gonna upgrade just yet though, im still happy with my Opty.

clv101 · 22 Jun 2006 at 20:53

Looking good - nice to see the load power consumption down, but more important is the idle more consumption. Maybe time to replace my 2.8C P4?

Kamakazie! · 22 Jun 2006 at 22:17

Slinwagh said:
And what is the quad core going to do for you. There are very few applications out that are multithreaded and make uses of two cores let alone apps specifically created for quad cores.

a quad core is just as useful as a dual core.
you dont have "dual-threaded" apps. You only have single threaded or multi-threaded.

TVR_Fan · 22 Jun 2006 at 22:21

weescott said:
I just read that. Not as big a performance leap as I thought.

I'll wait for the AMD quad core that allegedly will be better than the Intel offering.

As always. Too soon to tell.

I,m waiting to hear, at the moment Intel may of got me back on there Intel ship. But if AMD can bring a better CPU out in non Quad Father, then I am most likely going to go back to Intel.

Unless I pay for the quad father, but give it time and Intel will bring a motherboard out for the home user which uses 2 of these conroe CPU's.

Scoobie Dave · 22 Jun 2006 at 23:44

Kamakazie! said:
a quad core is just as useful as a dual core.
you dont have "dual-threaded" apps. You only have single threaded or multi-threaded.

I think you will find dual core cpu's take full advantage of muti-threaded apps.

easyrider · 22 Jun 2006 at 23:46

Kamakazie! said:
a quad core is just as useful as a dual core.
you dont have "dual-threaded" apps. You only have single threaded or multi-threaded.

lol

Thats the whole point

Scoobie Dave · 23 Jun 2006 at 00:06

easyrider said:
lol

Thats the whole point

That's what I thought.

NathanE · 23 Jun 2006 at 09:12

Slinwagh said:
And what is the quad core going to do for you. There are very few applications out that are multithreaded and make uses of two cores let alone apps specifically created for quad cores.

The more cores, the better the multi-tasking - regardless of how "threaded" your running software is.

Still, more and more software is becoming highly multi threaded. Windows Vista's Explorer shell and background search indexer are highly threaded.

And then, not everybody is waiting for games to become multi-threaded. Some of us actually use our PC's for doing "work". The types of software we use (say, Visual Studio, Eclipse, SQL Server... or maybe Studio Max, Maya, etc) are already highly threaded and have been for donkeys years.

a quad core is just as useful as a dual core.
you dont have "dual-threaded" apps. You only have single threaded or multi-threaded.

I've wrote software with dual (2) threads before. How do you explain that one, sports fan?

Jay_t · 23 Jun 2006 at 09:20

killer_uk said:
Yeah, I originally had a Athlon64 3000 till I sold it a few weeks back. Currently running on my backup system - a Sempron 2400 - so it will seem 1000x faster than this heap of junk!

Hah, beat you, I'm running on a sempron 2800 for now, gotta dig those sis mirage onboard graphics.

Black Dog · 23 Jun 2006 at 11:39

I'm just interested in gaming and so far the Conroe looks impressive, it's beginning to temp me

Scoobie Dave · 23 Jun 2006 at 15:46

Black Dog said:
I'm just interested in gaming and so far the Conroe looks impressive, it's beginning to temp me

Have to admit the more I keep reading the better it sounds. I definately would not get anything til the DFI NForce5 590 x16 SLI motherboard is released though.

TVR_Fan · 24 Jun 2006 at 11:29

Anyone else tempted to get the 2.93GHZ version, but I be waiting till next year to get this CPU.