AT conroe review updated

[CompGeek]

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716&p=1
Still,it doesn't change much. Conroe is way ahead.

 

[MadModMike]

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716&p=1
Still,it doesn't change much. Conroe is way ahead.

Because of DDR2. If you look at straight CPU tests (Encoding) Conroe is barely ahead, which shows that Conroe is barely faster given it's new Architecture, that is a fact, not a fanboy comment. I still want to know what this "Modified ATI Driver" did and if it could have affected the AMD System, which it could have very easily.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[qurious69ss]

So DDR2 will give amd a 20% performance increase? Wow imagine what DDR3 will do....

 

[MadModMike]

So DDR2 will give amd a 20% performance increase? Wow imagine what DDR3 will do....

Conroe does not have a 20% increase in CPU power, those Gaming Benchmarks are RAM related, so yes, DDR2 will give the performance crown in Gaming to a Par or to either Conroe or AM2 by <5%. But those encoding Benchmarks prove the CPU power in Conroe is not >20%.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[CompGeek]

DDR2 can't be the ONLY cause now can it?
Anyway,looking forward to see how DDR2 affects AMD's performance then we'll have a clear picture.

 

[MadModMike]

DDR2 can't be the ONLY cause now can it?
Anyway,looking forward to see how DDR2 affects AMD's performance then we'll have a clear picture.

Read my previous post, DDR2 will bring only gains in Gaming, where RAM Bandwidth is very important.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[RichPLS]

After AnandTech reviewed their tests:

The performance picture with regards to Conroe hasn’t really changed all that much - on average we’re still seeing a bit over a 20% increase in performance over an overclocked Athlon 64 FX-60.

 

[MadModMike]

After AnandTech reviewed their tests:

The performance picture with regards to Conroe hasn’t really changed all that much - on average we’re still seeing a bit over a 20% increase in performance over an overclocked Athlon 64 FX-60.

That's because all they looked at were Gaming Benchmarks where the DDR2 gave Conroe the advantage, look at the Encoding, they are 10%/12%/30% gain over FX-60. DiVx can use a tremendous amount of Memory which can quickly give the 30% gain attribution to the DDR2 vs. DDR1, BTW, in no way do I believe it was OC'd to 2.8 correctly, wouldn't doubt if the FSB is set to 100MHz.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[qurious69ss]

The thing that get me is that this chip is 6 months away from being released. Why? If it's this good, why wait. Are they still tweaking it? My guess is that they are filling up the pipeline. Oh yeah and by the way, has anyone heard of anymore dell going to amd? I guess sooodoo or whatever his name was way off.

 

[sviola]

That's because all they looked at were Gaming Benchmarks where the DDR2 gave Conroe the advantage, look at the Encoding, they are 10%/12%/30% gain over FX-60. DiVx can use a tremendous amount of Memory which can quickly give the 30% gain attribution to the DDR2 vs. DDR1, BTW, in no way do I believe it was OC'd to 2.8 correctly, wouldn't doubt if the FSB is set to 100MHz.

But isn´t gaming performance what really made it for Athlon 64?
One more thing, AT states that they´ve checked out all BIOS settings (they actually instaled the last BIOS version), drivers and stuff to see if anything might be wrong. Even thought they might have not done their first reiew correctly, they have gone back and checked it all. And at the end they got results very similar to the ones before, and some even better for Conroe.
Anyway, we should wait for the release, so we can truly see what´s coming from Intel (seems there´s a 3 GHz Conroe) and AMD AM2 plataform, which the latest news I´ve seen around have shown worse performance than the 939 (AMD is having some hard time with the DDR2 HT stuff).


PS - Don´t think I´m Intel Fanboy, cause I haven´t had an Intel processor since Pentium 3 (and that´s over 7 years ago).

Edit: typo on the text

 

[MadModMike]

That's because all they looked at were Gaming Benchmarks where the DDR2 gave Conroe the advantage, look at the Encoding, they are 10%/12%/30% gain over FX-60. DiVx can use a tremendous amount of Memory which can quickly give the 30% gain attribution to the DDR2 vs. DDR1, BTW, in no way do I believe it was OC'd to 2.8 correctly, wouldn't doubt if the FSB is set to 100MHz.

But isn´t gaming performance what really made it for Athlon 64?
One more thing, AT states that they´ve checked out all BIOS settings (they actually instaled the last BIOS version), drivers and stuff to see if anything might be wrong. Even thought they might have not done their first reiew correctly, they have gone back and checked it all. And at the end they got results very similar to the ones before, and some even better for Conroe.
Anyway, we should wait for the release, so we can truly see what´s coming from Intel (seems there´s a 3 GHz Conroe) and AMD AM2 plataform, which the latest news I´ve seen around have shown worse performance than the 939 (AMD is having some hard time with the DDR2 HT stuff).


PS - on´t think I´m Intel Fanboy, cause I haven´t had an Intel processor since Pentium 3 (and that´s over 7 years ago).

Conroe now has an architecture more similar to the A64 and now DDR2 is being able to take effect (800MHz FSB can't even handle fast DDR2) and you're seeing the gain DDR2 gets in gaming, look at the Encoding, where its CPU vs. CPU, barely a gain given by Conroe over K8.

BTW: I think you just made up something else, there is no problem w/ DDR2+HyperTransport.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[apache_lives]

That's because all they looked at were Gaming Benchmarks where the DDR2 gave Conroe the advantage, look at the Encoding, they are 10%/12%/30% gain over FX-60. DiVx can use a tremendous amount of Memory which can quickly give the 30% gain attribution to the DDR2 vs. DDR1, BTW, in no way do I believe it was OC'd to 2.8 correctly, wouldn't doubt if the FSB is set to 100MHz.

But isn´t gaming performance what really made it for Athlon 64?
One more thing, AT states that they´ve checked out all BIOS settings (they actually instaled the last BIOS version), drivers and stuff to see if anything might be wrong. Even thought they might have not done their first reiew correctly, they have gone back and checked it all. And at the end they got results very similar to the ones before, and some even better for Conroe.
Anyway, we should wait for the release, so we can truly see what´s coming from Intel (seems there´s a 3 GHz Conroe) and AMD AM2 plataform, which the latest news I´ve seen around have shown worse performance than the 939 (AMD is having some hard time with the DDR2 HT stuff).


PS - on´t think I´m Intel Fanboy, cause I haven´t had an Intel processor since Pentium 3 (and that´s over 7 years ago).

Conroe now has an architecture more similar to the A64 and now DDR2 is being able to take effect (800MHz FSB can't even handle fast DDR2) and you're seeing the gain DDR2 gets in gaming, look at the Encoding, where its CPU vs. CPU, barely a gain given by Conroe over K8.

BTW: I think you just made up something else, there is no problem w/ DDR2+HyperTransport.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

P4's were using DDR2 and they wernt fast, and AM2 with the same speed ddr2 (667) didnt boost any (5% around, better and worse at the benchies)

Conroes architecture similar to A64? thats total BS - its based on good old P6 which was designed in 95, and AMD copied the concepts used to make the K6 (notice the 6?) which advanced to the K7 and K8 today - Conroe has nothing to do with the A64.

 

[Atolsammeek]

Where did k6 have onboard memory controler? Where did k6 have hypertransport. Hum I dont see any.

The only chip that I see that uses p3 tech. Is Laptops. Intel P M chips.

 

[sviola]

Well, I´ve read in a few places about the bandwith problem AM2 was getting...

Check out this link (it´s from this week):

http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/default.aspx

But I do expect AMD to change this. They still have 3 months or so before launch. Althought I might not be making any major upgrade for a long time (maybe I´ll put some more RAM or go dual core on the 939, but not anything as drastic as changing to Conroe or AM2).

 

[apache_lives]

Where did k6 have onboard memory controler? Where did k6 have hypertransport. Hum I dont see any.

The only chip that I see that uses p3 tech. Is Laptops. Intel P M chips.

Huh? what do you mean?

Amd for years has improved there design, intel also should have but then we got P4, and now were back to the P6 design (from pentium m which is based on P6).

P6 tech evolved to the P2, P3, then Pentium M and now to conroe.

The original pentium pro (P6) shared the same chipset as the P2, and a P2 could fit the P3 chipsets etc - they were the same design with a few updates, Pentium M changed the FSB so it was incompatible but otherwise it was a tualatin with a P4 fsb and twice the cache.

 

[RichPLS]

Shhhush! We do not want to hear the truth if it means AMD's AM2 using DDR2 is actually slower than with current 939 chips!
That is just speculation, and AMD will refine it by the time it is ready for mainstream to be 50% faster than any other chip, clock for clock!
Nor do we want to hear that Intel's Conroe preview actually performs better than todays faster current 939 chip even if they released a faster FX chip than currently available, for by actual release day they will have slowed down the chip significantly to nestle in right under the performance levels of AMD soon to be released chips....
All is well in the world now...

 

[rippleyaliens]

what is crazy is that they are going against a overclocked FX-60. and still the preformance....

Now i konw that wastnt the extreme edition of the Conroe...

So AMD has to release something.. Something tight.
I cant wait for the top vs top test to hit...

 

[FITCamaro]

Where did k6 have onboard memory controler? Where did k6 have hypertransport. Hum I dont see any.

The only chip that I see that uses p3 tech. Is Laptops. Intel P M chips.

You do realize that all of Intels new processors are based on the Pentium M right? And the Pentium M is based on the Pentium III.

I see the arguement mike is trying to make. But sorry Mike, I don't see DDR2 giving AMD the huge boost in performance you do. THG did tests with an early AM2 chip. Granted it was with DDR2 667 instead of DDR2 800 but I don't see there being that huge of a difference between the two of them.

Once again though the best idea is for all of us to just shut up and wait.

 

[dvdpiddy]

ok guys im back so whats going on today *looking at replies* oh no not this crap agian huh :roll:

 

[9-inch]

I see the arguement mike is trying to make. But sorry Mike, I don't see DDR2 giving AMD the huge boost in performance you do. THG did tests with an early AM2 chip. Granted it was with DDR2 667 instead of DDR2 800 but I don't see there being that huge of a difference between the two of them.

That was becasue that chip had the DDR2 bug. That's the reason AMD didn't want anyone to preview the chip, since it will give a false impression of the chip's performance.

Conroe is going to be the best cpu that intel has ever come out with, but amd will be right there with it.

intel bringing the conroe out now was to knock the wind out of amd's sales , but what intel forgot was that thier sword is a double edge sword, and the blade fell back and has killed off intel sales

yes the 2.6 conroe looks good , but this is the best conroe that intel was able to bring to the show

there is a difference between a hand picked cpu , and putting out millions of them

i hope intel can do it , the competition is good for all of us.

Let's not forget what the FX-62 will look like on the AM2 platform. I'm sure AMD knew that all of this was going to happen (in some kind of way). This will give them enough time to tweak the FX-62 for it to battle against Intel's conroe EE version.

 

[Ycon]

those Gaming Benchmarks are RAM related

That would put the FX way ahead :roll:

 

[Viperabyss]

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716&p=1
Still,it doesn't change much. Conroe is way ahead.

but F.E.A.R's benchmark actually decreased from 36% advantage to 19% advantage, and you're telling me it doesn't change much?
ok.. maybe the bios problem we caught this time only reduces their nearly 40 % increase to 20% increase in performance.

however, intel is known to do anything, and i mean ANYTHING to destroy the credibility of the benchmark.
history:
intel is known to have used CPUID to reduce performance in other machines in benchmarks and programs, such as BAPco, Skype, and a linux compiler.
http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.html
what does this tell us? intel does not have the credibility to be trusted with building their and rival's machine on their own. AT only said they found no problem with hardware configuration, but never mentioned the software benchmarks they were using. would anybody know if there are CPUID dirty tricks within their code segments?

such a big coporation, but intel has to rely on using little dirty tricks to compete with its rival. what a good model for us to learn from.

 

[Ycon]

Intel isnt in ANY need to do that plus why would they want to do that considering that in 3 months any hardware site could prove them wrong?

 

[Mind_Rebuilding]

Intel isnt in ANY need to do that plus why would they want to do that considering that in 3 months any hardware site could prove them wrong?

Intel can do this because some of us will halt the purchase to wait for Cornoe.

Also from the Prescott benchmarks, Intel had done this before.

 

[Viperabyss]

oh yeh... AT is also known for performing unfair benchmarks w/ server cpus.
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2644&p=3
they did 32bit test on both opty and xeon, when they knew opty performs better in 64bit condition. in this situation, it clearly favors int-hell, who doesn't really know how to incorporate 64 bit tech with dual core, and only has advantages in 32bit.

ooo wait.. before i forget, AT did 32bit tests, so that means disadvantages for AMD because AMD only incoporated 32bit as "complement measures". does this mean opty is worse than xeon? it only means xeon performs better than opty under 32 bit. but as more companies use 64 bit servers, AT test would be inconclusive, or to state the fact, opty performs better than xeon in 64bit, which is the trend for the future.

anand tech + int-hell = the best lying team of all times