Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel regains crown

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 7, 2006 7:23:02 PM

Check out these benchies ..

I don't usually believe in benchmarks so this is for everyone else's enjoyment. I usually take these for what their worth.


http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713...

More about : intel regains crown

March 7, 2006 7:39:46 PM

As i predicted. Intel Conroe beats AMD.
Congratulations Intel and keep improving that chip. It beats AMD at its own thing. I now know that it is worth waiting. For now it has surpassed my most optimistic estimation. I am more than impressed. Real tests shall be the definitive factor but this is a awesome start.
March 7, 2006 7:42:47 PM

If the test was stupid AT wouldn't have posted it. They have mentioned that AM2 will probably improve over 939 but not by that much. And AT is a very credible certainly non Intel biased site.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
March 7, 2006 7:48:30 PM

That's right, so what else are they supposed to test it against?

Let us not forget, let's take a look at all of these forums and how everybody bashed even the conroe chips.

Its not a fact of whether or not Intel is using their chips against AMDs current lineup, its about showing us how they stack up and the performance gains they've been able to get out of their lower powered chips.

I'm not against AMD by any means and don't take this the wrong way man because its only my opinion. But, I do like seeing what strides Intel is making with their new lineup.
March 7, 2006 7:48:57 PM

Hey he's right; there's also nothing wrong with comparing a X800 XT to a 7800GTX.
March 7, 2006 7:52:40 PM

Quote:
If the test was stupid AT wouldn't have posted it. They have mentioned that AM2 will probably improve over 939 but not by that much. And AT is a very credible certainly non Intel biased site.


Well, The test was somewhat stupid, It does compare next gen to this gen. And Intel setup up the benchmarks and the systems.

However, the performance gains are very impressive. Intel looks like they finally realized where to put their research and got things straightened out.

Let me ask you this. We have all seen that you are very pre-disposed to liking Intel. If AnandTech went to the AMD booth, and showed benchmarks that AMD set up which had Socket AM2 beating a Pentium D or Conroe by 20%, would you believe it, or would you wait for the independent benchmarks.

I'd like to actually see an answer, since I know that most biased people tend to ignore questions like that.
March 7, 2006 7:59:12 PM

I'd not believe them cause AMD can't put their hands on Conroe. If it's only compared to Pentium D yes i'd believe it since Pentium D is currently beaten by 939 so AM2 would just beat it more.
March 7, 2006 7:59:59 PM

From tom's hardware's benchmark on Pentium M I expected that Intel's next generation CPU can out perform AMD's current offering. I hope AMD will have their next generation CPU out soon. Competition is always good for the cunsumers.
March 7, 2006 8:04:48 PM

I wonder how many finger prints are on that crown..

:oops: 
March 7, 2006 8:06:30 PM

Quote:
I'd not believe them cause AMD can't put their hands on Conroe. If it's only compared to Pentium D yes i'd believe it since Pentium D is currently beaten by 939 so AM2 would just beat it more.


Well, its good to see you be open minded about something.

BTW, Where's Fugger in all this? I Expected he'd be jumping all over this.

Personally, I will probably buy a Dual Core Opteron next, since it won't require any platform/memory changes from what I have now.
March 7, 2006 8:12:19 PM

yeah, that's a good call man. I bought my opty because I already had the board and memory for it. I just didn't feel like waiting for the next gens to come out.
March 7, 2006 8:31:28 PM

Intel finally stopped being a moronic brand and dropped netburst. period.

Altho i didn't like waiting 6 months for a new rig, so i bought an Opty 170 + Asus A8R32-MVP instead.. Who knos.. maybe Conroe will replace it.. since the performance preview is way better than the preview i seen of AM2 >.<
March 7, 2006 8:35:28 PM

Quote:
The test was stupid. They tested current gen AMD to a next gen Intel. Where's the comparison? It's unfair. But Intel is making huge improvements, which is good.


Concur - We all need to wait for AMDs next release. Until then everything is still the way it is. But a small thing stuck in my brain a picture showing the AMD Processor as unknown? I'm not accusing anybody of anything but why show that picture? I know it's a BIOS flash issue but you still have to wonder and ponder? :roll:

Now before all the Intel Fans jump on me - I like AMD and Intel. Intel still makes good CPUs. Each company has their bennifits and drawbacks. Lets just compare apples to apples (or oranges to oranges).

Today Intel can enjoy the Day :wink:
March 7, 2006 8:35:39 PM

All you can get from this article is that Intel has done their homework and has made significant gains and has a very hot processor on their hands.

Saying one processor that's not available yet, beats another processor that's not available yet is a little pointless. It sounds more like media buzz to get us geeks drooling like rabid dogs eyeing that maimed squirrel on the road.

This is just hype until some solid testing can be done with both new processors head-to-head.
March 7, 2006 8:37:02 PM

heh, yeah, I enjoyed reading the reviews and hopefully, Conroe will make a mark.

I love my opty though and probably won't get rid of it for a long time. I will replace my 630 Prescott machine with a new Intel though. The thing is, those benchmarks were performed with a 2.66Ghz Conroe. Can't wait to see how the 3.0Ghz Conroe EE performs. Should be very interesting.
March 7, 2006 8:40:00 PM

well i mentioned this 2 months ago, that Conroe will be a winner.
Think about it am2 will have ddr2 upgrade and conroe on the other hand is a totally diff chip

But intel has the crown for few months. Because if they do beat am2, amd will come up with a totally diff chip maybe by the end of this year, and take the crown back.

peace
March 7, 2006 8:44:51 PM

That is very true man. Intel can only compare to what's available today and until both AM2 and Conroe come out, we just won't know how they will compete.

I'm just happy that Intel has finally made some good things come to life and seems to be headed in the right direction.
March 7, 2006 8:53:06 PM

i love this year... after 6 years the battle started all over again.

reminds of the 1GHZ war back in 2000-2001.... you guys remember???
March 7, 2006 9:10:52 PM

Quote:
i love this year... after 6 years the battle started all over again.

reminds of the 1GHZ war back in 2000-2001.... you guys remember???


Yep - AMD won that battle...... :wink:
March 7, 2006 9:20:14 PM

I would say parts of the PIII era.
March 7, 2006 9:25:34 PM

Yeah I was gonna say that or the Northwood era. Probably the P3 era though.
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 9:25:53 PM

Quote:
intel will regain the crown.. hmmn can anyone tell me the last time they had it.


Pentium4C owned AMD, the 2400 was quicker then AMD's 3200+ in some benchmarks and thats when i bought my Intel system :cry: 

P3's were faster 1/2 the time (both with 10% of each other), the AMDs were hotter and cheaper.

Pentium 2 owned the K6/2/3 series

P6/Pentium Pro owned the original K6 series at the same speeds.
March 7, 2006 9:28:04 PM

Quote:
That is very true man. Intel can only compare to what's available today and until both AM2 and Conroe come out, we just won't know how they will compete.

I'm just happy that Intel has finally made some good things come to life and seems to be headed in the right direction.

Oh my f*cking god, I love you. I can shut dvdpiddy and madmodmike the hell up now!
March 7, 2006 9:30:04 PM

Quote:
intel will regain the crown.. hmmn can anyone tell me the last time they had it.


Pentium4C owned AMD, the 2400 was quicker then AMD's 3200+ in some benchmarks and thats when i bought my Intel system :cry: 

OH NO! You just opened Pandora's Box with that statement...dvdpiddy will post 30 comments in no time :) 

No comments regarding THWG claiming the Woodcrest will destroy current Opteron Servers?
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 9:31:20 PM

Quote:
That is very true man. Intel can only compare to what's available today and until both AM2 and Conroe come out, we just won't know how they will compete.

I'm just happy that Intel has finally made some good things come to life and seems to be headed in the right direction.

Oh my f*cking god, I love you. I can shut dvdpiddy and madmodmike the hell up now!

Yup - let me state the facts.

Intel = Faster

Any questions?

Hurrrraaayyyy

Oh MadModMike? Care to show your shame filled face? And Please - dont post the "those benchmarks are fake" and "its not comparing AM2" cause thats BS - AM2 is just a colder S939 - suck crap, and whats this ICM there refering to with woodcrest? HEH
March 7, 2006 9:31:57 PM

What I want to know is the specifics of the chip/chipset. I also think if AMD will stick in support for DDR2 running at 1 GHz effective they'll see a better performance gain than some crappy 667. I had heard that DDR2 800 would be supported, but can't confirm it. I mean, if you're going to give up low latencies, you may as well get awsome bandwidth.

I don't think its an unfair comparison though, its not any less fair than comparing the x1900xt to the 7800 or the 7900.
March 7, 2006 9:36:00 PM

Quote:
What I want to know is the specifics of the chip/chipset. I also think if AMD will stick in support for DDR2 running at 1 GHz effective they'll see a better performance gain than some crappy 667. I had heard that DDR2 800 would be supported, but can't confirm it. I mean, if you're going to give up low latencies, you may as well get awsome bandwidth.

I don't think its an unfair comparison though, its not any less fair than comparing the x1900xt to the 7800 or the 7900.

The chipset on the Intel was 975X. AMD's chipset was the ATi 480, as Crossfire was needed.
More than fair battle. That was a heavily OC'ed X2 too. Also, DDR2-800 will certainly be supported by AMD and Intel soon to come.
I can't WAIT to overclock a single core Conroe...
March 7, 2006 9:42:05 PM

The AM2 will support DDR2-800 as well. I'm not sure about the higher ones.

I'm sure someone else can answer that one.
March 7, 2006 9:43:41 PM

Quote:
No comments regarding THWG claiming the Woodcrest will destroy current Opteron Servers?


I would expect woodcrest to beat current Opteron servers, which are approaching EOL anyway. However, I am anxious to see how is stacks up agains the 1207 pin Socket F Opterons, which is where the battel will really be fought.
March 7, 2006 9:47:26 PM

Quote:
The AM2 will support DDR2-800 as well. I'm not sure about the higher ones.

I'm sure someone else can answer that one.

You can always just overclock anyway.
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 9:47:33 PM

Quote:
What I want to know is the specifics of the chip/chipset. I also think if AMD will stick in support for DDR2 running at 1 GHz effective they'll see a better performance gain than some crappy 667. I had heard that DDR2 800 would be supported, but can't confirm it. I mean, if you're going to give up low latencies, you may as well get awsome bandwidth.

I don't think its an unfair comparison though, its not any less fair than comparing the x1900xt to the 7800 or the 7900.

The chipset on the Intel was 975X. AMD's chipset was the ATi 480, as Crossfire was needed.
More than fair battle. That was a heavily OC'ed X2 too. Also, DDR2-800 will certainly be supported by AMD and Intel soon to come.
I can't WAIT to overclock a single core Conroe...

i thought i read somewhere an interview with some intel guy and he was hinting overclocking to over 4ghz was posible!?!?

Yeah AM2's first cpu is the X2@2.8ghz and DDR2-800? THG already did DDR1-600 with an AMD and it did crap all, whats a bit more bandwidth going to do?

Conroe specs are prolly:
Intel Conroe @ 2.66ghz
FSB 1333
4mb Shared L2
SSE4

By the end of the year 3ghz is expected

These chips are colder then AMD's - either they gotta overclock and get the heat or underclock and loose more performance!!!

The Woodcrest - Whats this ICM? as Integrated Controller Memory?
March 7, 2006 9:48:54 PM

Quote:

The chipset on the Intel was 975X. AMD's chipset was the ATi 480, as Crossfire was needed.
More than fair battle. That was a heavily OC'ed X2 too. Also, DDR2-800 will certainly be supported by AMD and Intel soon to come.
I can't WAIT to overclock a single core Conroe...


I would like to know why the BIOS shows the AMD chip as unknown, and in the article They first say the chip is an OCed FX-60, then that its an OCed X2. I know there isn't much difference, but I would not expect those kinds of whole from a site like AnandTech.
March 7, 2006 9:50:36 PM

finaly some nice benchmarks, and from reading and hearing about AM2, it wont be nothing more thne DDR2 mem upgrade that runs a bit cooler, but still, either or, this is great, nice in my opinion.
March 7, 2006 9:51:06 PM

Well, an FX60 is just an X2 core with a nicer memory controller on better solicon. That could be fishy though, I see what you're saying.
March 7, 2006 9:52:15 PM

Quote:

Yeah AM2's first cpu is the X2@2.8ghz and DDR2-800? THG already did DDR1-600 with an AMD and it did crap all, whats a bit more bandwidth going to do?


Not saying its going to be any good or not, but why do so many people keep citing benchmarks of AM2 that clearly state there is a memory controller bug, and expect that to be an accurate portrayal of what things will be like at launch?
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 9:52:55 PM

Quote:
The AM2 will support DDR2-800 as well. I'm not sure about the higher ones.

I'm sure someone else can answer that one.


HANG ON A SEC - ANANDTECH LISTS INTEL SYSTEM SPECS "The AMD system used 1GB of DDR400 running at 2-2-2/1T timings, while the Intel system used 1GB of DDR2-667 running at 4-4-4" - CONROE IS GETTING AWAY WITH DDR667 - ITS NOT EVEN AT FULL CAPACITY! EVEN MORE OF A KICK IN THE ASS TO AMD
March 7, 2006 10:02:52 PM

That's very true... the true potential will come out when the 3.0Ghz EE comes out too. That should really make things very interesting.
March 7, 2006 10:05:49 PM

uhhh i dont get it, whats wrong with conroe using DDR2 667 memory?
March 7, 2006 10:07:30 PM

Quote:
uhhh i dont get it, whats wrong with conroe using DDR2 667 memory?


Its not what's wrong, it actually more whats right. DDR2 667 is not the best that Conroe can do, so there is even more potential for Conroe to shine using DDR2-800. Unless some weird bug a la AM2 pops up.
March 7, 2006 10:09:00 PM

but isnt DDR2 800memory expensive in canada? And i mean really expensive?
March 7, 2006 10:10:46 PM

Quote:
but isnt DDR2 800memory expensive in canada? And i mean really expensive?


Its expensive anywhere, not just Canada. Do you think a high end Conroe will be cheap? The best is always really expensive.
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 10:13:07 PM

yeah its not the standard yet so its expensive (hence the wait for intel and amd to use it "oficially")
March 7, 2006 10:13:41 PM

that conroe that was tested is supposed to be around 500 bucks american, and if it outperformed a processor that is 1000 dollors and more and pluse it overclocked, i think the price is more then good. But i bet the EE will be priced high.
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 10:20:07 PM

"The test was stupid. They tested current gen AMD to a next gen Intel. "

I rather doubt that the jump to AM2/DDR2 will help *that* much...
March 7, 2006 10:22:13 PM

To me if you cant buy it now, Then its all talk.
a b à CPUs
March 7, 2006 10:30:39 PM

more like "amd has 4 months to come up with a solution"

AMD now cant outrun intel - there quicker clock for clock and 65nm aswell as when amd jumps intel will already be at 45nm - could it be intels planed it perfectly for once!!?!?!?

ICM - IS THAT INTEGRATED CONTROLLER MEMORY???? (FOR WOODCREST)

Sorry for my excitement, just been shitted with AMD fanboys for so long - they will have something faster then intel some time in the future and its good for us consumers.
March 7, 2006 10:31:27 PM

With Conroe, Intel is introducing a whole new CPU design for desktop.

With AM2, it looks like AMD is only changing the platform and moving to DDR2; and probably adding more cache to the CPU.

From past experiences, we all know who will have a clear advantage in the next 6 months or so.

I hope AMD can come up with something better to stay in the game with Intel and keep CPUs price low like it is now. As of now, it is a thin hope.
March 7, 2006 10:36:13 PM

This is my first time posting at this site. So that being said you don't really have to listen to anything I have to say.

Congrats to Intel.. They have had a dryspell for sometime now and its nice to see them making a very well made CPU.

There is one thing I didn't see on the benchmarks, which I was sad not to see. The Conroe Chip is coming out as a Duel core AND a Quad Core. So, Which one did they use to compare to the AMD X-2 Chip. If they used a Quad Core then they really didn't make to much of an improvement seeing as the AM2 is coming out as a Duel and a Quad as well. Anyways, I looked all over that benchmark looking for the word Duel or Quad and couldn't find it.

Again you can ignore this statement. First time posting here
March 7, 2006 10:39:38 PM

Intel does not release Quad-cores until 2007 and the release of 45nm. The 2.66 Conroe tested was a dual-core.
    • 1 / 10
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!