Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Conroe (intel) vs AMD SERIOUS ONLY

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 12, 2006 4:07:43 AM

Ok, there has been alot of talk lately about the Conroe and how its going to be so much better than AMD's stuff. Also going through all that is a nightmare due to all of the AMD fanboys AND INTEL fanboys. So before you post anything, THERE IS NO FANBOY-ISM HERE! Only facts, i want this to be a SERIOUS thread unlike some of the other mindless dribble ive seen on this topic. Now lets get started!

Intel Claims that there conroe with be 20% or whatever faster than all of the current stuff out today. But is it possible that this is going to turn out like the mac's. Where the Core Duo only got 2x speed if it was beieng run with programms made for that core?

More about : conroe intel amd

March 12, 2006 4:10:01 AM

Quote:
Ok, there has been alot of talk lately about the Conroe and how its going to be so much better than AMD's stuff. Also going through all that is a nightmare due to all of the AMD fanboys AND INTEL fanboys. So before you post anything, THERE IS NO FANBOY-ISM HERE! Only facts, i want this to be a SERIOUS thread unlike some of the other mindless dribble ive seen on this topic. Now lets get started!

Intel Claims that there conroe with be 20% or whatever faster than all of the current stuff out today. But is it possible that this is going to turn out like the mac's. Where the Core Duo only got 2x speed if it was beieng run with programms made for that core?
Hate to break it to you but regardless this is going to end badly. And this has also been done a million times. We don't know yet which is better, anyone that tells you different is most likely a fanboy.
March 12, 2006 4:18:57 AM

I know but im hoping to get some REAL information on the battle. Not just: "OMG AMD IS THE BEST AND CONROE IS JUNK" or... "OMG INTEL IS ALWAYS THE BEST AND CANNOT BE BEAT" so im trying to keep this strictly facts only. But from the looks of it INTEL has the upper hand... http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716

Done with FX-60@2.8 All updated BIOS. So far things are not looking good for AMD from these results. Just remember that the mobo used on the intel is a normal one that is out right now so its nothing special.
Related resources
March 12, 2006 4:55:10 AM

The only fact is we won't know how good it will really be until it is sold to the public.
March 12, 2006 5:21:27 AM

:D 

This was an Intel controlled and administered test and just like any AMD controlled and administered test should BE IGNORED without a fair and properly administered test by an independent and objective 3rd party!!!

That's right folks I do not trust AMD's or Intel's own benchmarks!


The Fact is Intel chose the motherboard, CPU and drivers for a REASON.

It was an Intel controlled and administered test so it was automatically RIGGED.

I reject their results until the product actually launches and we can test actual PRODUCTION hardware.

I am just as skeptical about AMD benchmarks - so please do not try to challenge my statement.

Intel's marketing dept. routinely selectively publishes benchmarks in which their products beat AMD by a wide margin.

These benchmarks should be taken with a mountain of SALT -- most of the time they are RIGGED, FAKE, unreliable and highly questionable.

I want to see REAL, fair and properly administered tests by multiple independent and objective 3rd parties!!

Thank YOU

Live long and prosper :D 
March 12, 2006 5:52:50 AM

And to those who suggest that Anand knows which cup the pea is under, Anand is the one with the pea in his hand.
Just look at the # of hits his site has gained. That's pure gold.
Do you think for 1 second that Anand is interested in killing that goose?

(For those not used to the three cups and a pea trick, a mark is shown a pea being put under a cup. The gypsy then moves the three cups around, and bets the mark he cant guess which cup the pea is under. In reality, at that point, the pea is in the gypsy's hand.
I hope everyone knows of the tale of the goose that laid the golden egg)
March 12, 2006 6:05:33 AM

Seriously, from my perspective the numbers add up.

+10% 4mb cache
+10% 4 execution units
+5% SSE improvements
-5% Non-Ondie memory controller.

Now AMD would have to put out a DDR2 K8L with extra cache to even be competitive.

Although it may have come out of nowhere and blindsided AMD, at least they are making their transition to a new socket and may still have some crystals to insert.
March 12, 2006 6:18:44 AM

I have to disagree with you linux. The system setup is legit. Everything there, except the conroe, you are able to get right now. I understand what you are saying about it not being the final product. But if the final product and the preview has a 10%-20% difference... well i just dont think that is going to happen.
March 12, 2006 6:22:54 AM

Anandtech wasnt the only site to run the benchmarks.
March 12, 2006 6:39:30 AM

Quote:
+10% 4mb cache
+10% 4 execution units
+5% SSE improvements
-5% Non-Ondie memory controller

1 for cache? This is not netburst, 3-5% is more realistic
2 This isn't Itanic, an extra EU will do a little,but only when out of order exec is busy.
3 May even be a little more.
4 Again not netburst, 5% is too high
You forgot the extra stages, that could be a major penalty. At 14 stages, it could be as high as 20%.
March 12, 2006 6:43:24 AM

Oh yes, I'm sure that nexhex is far less interested in site hits than Anand.
Wonder what kind of lotery Intel used to pick who got the big wet kiss?
March 12, 2006 6:54:47 AM

I'd imagine they would be.
March 12, 2006 7:25:08 AM

Let's compare Opterons vs. Xeons here:

Currently 2 x 940 CPUs with 1 OMC each and 4 stix of PC3200 have 2 TIMES the memory bandwidth = 12.8GB/s

4 x 940 CPUs with 1 OMC each and 8 stix of PC3200 have 4 TIMES the memory bandwidth = 25.6GB/s

8 x 940 CPUs with 1 OMC each and 16 stix of PC3200 have 8 TIMES the memory bandwidth = 51.2GB/s

In the Xeon line memory bandwidth is

1/2 with 2 CPUs

1/4 with 4 CPUs

It doesn't scale at all!


With socket 1207 AMD will be able to easily add Quad Channel RAM or Dual Memory Controllers for Dual-Core CPU's so:

You have 1 PHY CPU

2 cores

2 on board memory controllers

2xDual Channel RAM -- 2 stix / Core -- 4 stix total for TWICE the memory bandwidth!

In a 2way Dual Core SMP Opteron 1207 you would QUADRUPLE your memory bandwidth = 51.2GB/s MAX Theoretical Memory Bandwidth

In a 4way Dual Core SMP Opteron 1207 you would have 8 TIMES the bandwidth = 102.4GB/s MAX Theoretical Memory Bandwidth

in an 8way Dual Core SMP Opteron 1207 you would have 16 TIMES the bandwidth = 204.8GB/s MAX Theoretical Memory Bandwidth

It scales very well.
March 12, 2006 7:27:53 AM

Quote:
Anandtech wasnt the only site to run the benchmarks.

Andandtech RERAN the tests and reviewed some problems they encountered. The problems involving drivers, BIOS, memory timings and such were addressed and it was decided the system was more than legit. The original test where Conroe held a +40% advantage was redone, and it got the 20% advantage predicted.
I highly doubt Intel somehow put a super-processor in their machine or hindered the FX60. They would be REALLY bad PR, and Intel owns AMD in sales because of marketing. They wouldn't be so retarded as to rig results and expect nobody to figure it out.
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2006 7:29:54 AM

Quote:
Seriously, from my perspective the numbers add up.

+10% 4mb cache
+10% 4 execution units
+5% SSE improvements
-5% Non-Ondie memory controller.

Now AMD would have to put out a DDR2 K8L with extra cache to even be competitive.

Although it may have come out of nowhere and blindsided AMD, at least they are making their transition to a new socket and may still have some crystals to insert.


Sorry i have to disagree, Cache doesnt matter really (all depends on architecture), Execution engines same deal, SSE improvements - as in SSE4 arnt used cause nothing would support it yet, and on die memory conrtoller (or lack of) would hamper performance, thats whats coming up after conroe i suppose, it supposed to come in 2008?

Look at the P4 design - 2x2mb cache didnt do anything, and northwoods 512k clock for clock the chip is quicker then the Prescott with 1mb cache.

Conroe is a Pentium M on steroids with twice the fsb, cache and an up to date alu/fpu etc aswell as the best bits from P4 added, the architectures potential shows, and it can get better as can AMDs design, altho Intels architecture may be better cause its only just begun.

Intel for once seems like its on track (looks to be the best run in history) and did everything right - Fast (P4 launch - slow, hot and expensive etc), Efficent (colder and faster then the previous gen), and schedual is looking good to keep infront of AMD - 45nm when AMD gets 65nm (and 3+ghz with headroom wheree as AMD is getting close to the 90nm limite, quite impressive actually), Quad core looking good and in 2008 integrated memory controllers for an even more impressive boost.

Im actually hoping AMD will return where they are in the AthlonXP days - cheap and quick (P4c was quicker, but still within the same class and ), and like those days that seemed bad for AMD they came back stronger then ever (A64 - best run sofar by AMD?), but on the other hand I dont think anyone would mind an X2-4400 for half the price then now even if performance isnt on par with Intels offering.
March 12, 2006 7:40:20 AM

All that theory looks nice, but it doesnt have anything to do with reality...
Conroe is a 4-issue core (w00t, 4-issue core, its gonna own everything!) but still any processor hardly can process 1 instruction per clockcycle.

@ topic:
Its obvious that AMD is not going to be able to match Conroes performance (I do think that everyone agrees on this one), but that means that AMD is finally gonna lower the extremely high prices of their dual-cores and perhaps even move the FX to sub-1000$. That would be a nice thing for some of my mates (AMD Fanboys) if they could finally get some dual-core :) 
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2006 7:47:34 AM

Quote:
The only fact is we won't know how good it will really be until it is sold to the public.


That's the point. Everyone who claims else is just naive. plain and simple.
March 12, 2006 7:50:25 AM

Quote:
All that theory looks nice, but it doesnt have anything to do with reality...
Conroe is a 4-issue core (w00t, 4-issue core, its gonna own everything!) but still any processor hardly can process 1 instruction per clockcycle.

@ topic:
Its obvious that AMD is not going to be able to match Conroes performance (I do think that everyone agrees on this one), but that means that AMD is finally gonna lower the extremely high prices of their dual-cores and perhaps even move the FX to sub-1000$. That would be a nice thing for some of my mates (AMD Fanboys) if they could finally get some dual-core :) 

Man, its naive to think Intel will them take that sector too. Intel can mass produce, giving them the ability to produce really cheap fair performing processors. Celeron's are great and just toned down prescotts/cedar mills, and Intel has some cheap ass Pentium D's at 2.66/2.8 that are the cheapest dual core's you can buy. So, for performance versus price, AMD wins, but for sheer power of cheapness Intel has it.
March 12, 2006 7:55:13 AM

Quote:
The problems involving drivers, BIOS, memory timings and such were addressed and it was decided the system was more than legit. The original test where Conroe held a +40% advantage was redone, and it got the 20% advantage predicted.
March 12, 2006 7:56:46 AM

Quote:
All that theory looks nice, but it doesnt have anything to do with reality...
Conroe is a 4-issue core (w00t, 4-issue core, its gonna own everything!) but still any processor hardly can process 1 instruction per clockcycle.


Let me ask you something.

Do you know how many operations per clock cycle a P4 can perform? How about an AMD64? Pentium M?

Please do tell.

Thank you.

Quote:

@ topic:
Its obvious that AMD is not going to be able to match Conroes performance (I do think that everyone agrees on this one), but that means that AMD is finally gonna lower the extremely high prices of their dual-cores and perhaps even move the FX to sub-1000$. That would be a nice thing for some of my mates (AMD Fanboys) if they could finally get some dual-core :) 



Forgive me, but your thesis is Conroe pwnz all? Is that correct? Yet you reject any CPU AMD might respond to the conroe with?

I presume you are an engineer working for AMD and are intimately familiar with all the cores they have under development.
March 12, 2006 8:02:42 AM

And, for those who liked the Conroe preview, we have a preview of two Intel chips destroying an opteron
March 12, 2006 8:04:38 AM

So the original results were completely invalid.

Is that not what Anandtech actually conceded?

Several very bright people including people from VoodooPC knew these results were not right and Anandtech had to go back and correct them and admit there were problems with them.... hmm.... this does not pass the smell test or any other test for that matter.

Intel's entire marketing department deserves to spend 25-life in a federal resort for the wonderful job they did.
March 12, 2006 8:08:41 AM

Quote:
And, for those who liked the Conroe preview, we have a preview of two Intel chips destroying an opteron



Oh my gosh..... in the name of all that is holly...... what kind of benchmarks are these????????


Quote:


Where are the dual-core Opterons?!?

I'm sure I will catch a ton of heat about including a pair of Opteron 246s in this comparison. The truth of the matter is... They are the only Opterons I have to test with. I have been in touch with AMD recently to plead my case and they have promised to rectify this situation very soon. I will definitely rerun all the numbers (and add a few more, I'm sure) if/when that happens.




The author of the article admits this is not a fair test??? What are you trying to say here?

How would Intel like it if I compared an Opteron 285 against a Pentium I @ 60MHz without any cache??????

PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
March 12, 2006 8:13:21 AM

Quote:
So the original results were completely invalid.


How so? There's practically no difference between both results.

Quote:
Is that not what Anandtech actually conceded?


Nope.

Quote:
Several very bright people including people from VoodooPC knew these results were not right and Anandtech had to go back and correct them and admit there were problems with them


What problems?

Quote:
In the media encoding tests we saw absolutely no performance impact other than a 1 second reduction in iTunes encoding time. F.E.AR. at 1024 x 768 saw a reasonable gain of 4%. Quake 4 remained virtually unchanged.
March 12, 2006 8:17:14 AM

Quote:
So the original results were completely invalid.


How so? There's practically no difference between both results.

Quote:
Is that not what Anandtech actually conceded?


Nope.

Quote:
Several very bright people including people from VoodooPC knew these results were not right and Anandtech had to go back and correct them and admit there were problems with them


What problems?

Quote:
In the media encoding tests we saw absolutely no performance impact other than a 1 second reduction in iTunes encoding time. F.E.AR. at 1024 x 768 saw a reasonable gain of 4%. Quake 4 remained virtually unchanged.







This power consumption graph is AWESOME

The new Intel CPUs clearly pwn the Opterons!!!!!!!!!

I will have to write my congressional delegation and urge them to buy as many of those machines as possible so we have to import more oil from the Middle East and totally trash the environment.

This is GREAT!!!!!!!!!!

OPEC is going to LOVE us!!!!!!
March 12, 2006 8:21:03 AM

Thanks for completely ignoring everything I said and linking to a power consumption chart and ranting about it in large type.
March 12, 2006 8:22:30 AM

Yes we're all aware the opterons are better then the P4 xeons.
March 12, 2006 8:23:05 AM

Quote:
Thanks for completely ignoring everything I said and linking to a power consumption chart and ranting about it in large type.


Please forgive the large type some people on these forums have trouble reading small type.

I apologize.
March 12, 2006 8:28:57 AM

Yes I can see that.

Quote:
And, for those who liked the Conroe preview, we have a preview of two Intel chips destroying an opteron


Never heard of that site before.
March 12, 2006 8:30:43 AM

Quote:
Yes we're all aware the opterons are better then the P4 xeons.



Thank you sir!

And we can all agree the Conroe is better than the P4s as well because it is based on the PIII / P6 architecture which is better than the P4 netburst architecture.

The Israeli Intel team did their homework and for that they deserve our respect!

How much better remains to be seen when the production version is released and compared to the new production version AM64s.
March 12, 2006 8:37:30 AM

Actually, there were two sites that gave the same scores. The other was german. For prescott's 20%, the review came from a japanese site. It was 20% faster than the northwoodC.
Begin to understand why I dont believe Intel's 20% faster previews?
After the dust settles on conroe, I will bring one home, and test it. It wont get my seal of approval for my customers before that.
March 12, 2006 8:40:55 AM

Quote:
Actually, there were two sites that gave the same scores. The other was german. For prescott's 20%, the review came from a japanese site.


Well to be fair they aren't high profile sites.

Quote:
Begin to understand why I dont believe Intel's 20% faster previews?


Oh definately but Intel knew they had a dud and thats when things like that happen, just like Nvidia with the FX series.

Quote:
After the dust settles on conroe, I will bring one home, and test it. It wont get my seal of approval for my customers before that.


I agree, always best to do things yourself.
March 12, 2006 8:47:51 AM

I agree. I rather see 3 or 4 differnt tech sites to get real facts. I dont care if Intel or amd wins. I would like the public to know.
March 12, 2006 9:28:15 AM

Quote:
I agree. I rather see 3 or 4 differnt tech sites to get real facts. I dont care if Intel or amd wins. I would like the public to know.


Thank YOU!

I applaud you SIR! :trophy: :trophy:
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2006 10:16:27 AM

Quote:
I agree. I rather see 3 or 4 differnt tech sites to get real facts. I dont care if Intel or amd wins. I would like the public to know.


Thank YOU!

I applaud you SIR! :trophy: :trophy:

i second that, if only mike would agree to that!!!!
March 12, 2006 10:18:51 AM

Quote:
I agree. I rather see 3 or 4 differnt tech sites to get real facts. I dont care if Intel or amd wins. I would like the public to know.


Thank YOU!

I applaud you SIR! :trophy: :trophy:

i second that, if only mike would agree to that!!!!


I say we wait and see.

Patiently.
March 12, 2006 10:45:24 AM

I say this I use both systems. Each systems has good years and bad years. You can say this with everything. To stock market to Gold and silver prices. (That why I buy gold and silver when they are cheap and sell them when they are high)

But one note I dont want Intel or Amd to fall. If it happens we will be paying higher prices.

Amd athlons where great for a while untel what 2200+ Then intel seem to be king untel moving from northwood to presscott. Then amd seem to be king. If intel wins some it will show each company has good years and bad ones. I dont care about that.

One major fact when it get to 1 to 20% differnce in speed You really dont tell a differnce. But when it get higher we might see a differnce.
March 12, 2006 10:53:26 AM

That's my only concern right now. I've been waiting and seeing for quite a while and really,if it weren't for Pressler 2005 would have ended a lot worse. I'm positively sure Intel has learnt their lesson and that Conroe will beat AMD M2 socket. By what margin,we'll see.
AMD stated they haven't got ANYTHING special for 2006. Maybe the Conroe results made them change their mind? Hope so cause if there is no real competition Intel will raise prices sky high(like AMD did with the FX single cores).
March 12, 2006 10:57:06 AM

ComputerGeek In anyrate what will happen. It will help lower prices in both systems if amd loses. If intel loses They will lower there prices. It the only safe way for any company. It also might force amd to get into the lower nm.
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2006 10:58:20 AM

"AMD's marketing dept. routinely selectively publishes benchmarks in which their products beat Intel by a wide margin.
Intel's marketing dept. ALSO routinely selectively publishes benchmarks in which their products beat AMD by a wide margin. "

Nonetheless, the press was given a chance to clearly view bios settings, device drivers, game versions/demos, and a nice wide variety of games were benchmarked, and the 20% margin of victory was pretty much across the board, including games (UT2k4) which had been previously known as being rather "weak for Intel".

I, for one, hope AMD can close this gap to perhaps as little as 10% with a tweak here and there and use of DDR2/1066 or 1333, etc...; but as it appears now, this will be a case of the P2-350 vs. K6-2/350, and the COnroe is looking quite nice! (Dare we even hope for the Conroe to successfully OC by even 200-400 MHz?)

All we desktop fans need now is, a good 'ole fashioned pricewar, with COnroes available for $199! :-)
March 12, 2006 10:58:39 AM

Quote:
But one note I dont want Intel or Amd to fall. If it happens we will be paying higher prices.


EXACTLY!! As has been said many times before....the competition is good for us all (consumers).

/wipes drool from mouth - low priced opty
March 12, 2006 11:05:05 AM

What I do Cochise is watch both companys and view the facts when they come in. One website will show anything. It a group of comapanys that show facts. It like Antivirus programs if one could delete all virus we would not have to use 2 3 antivirus programs.

All we can do is wait and see what Amd dose. If they lose they will work on something better. If they dont they will do like they been doing for the last year. Keep the crown and wait. I hope intel wins so it Forces Amd to work on new tech and give us something to hope for.
March 12, 2006 11:08:03 AM

Well that's the main reason why i love competition and i love it more if Intel is ahead :D  (fanboyism eh).
March 12, 2006 11:14:38 AM

I love the leap froging of both systems. I wish Amd was as strong as Intel. But That a another matter. But price ver cpu I agree with u. Right now both my computers are Intel. But there two laptops. But we all know Intel make better laptops. But later Amd might change that. like intel might make a better server. Or cpus. That three jumps of each

I hope it something like this

Amd wins in Servers for a while then intel wins
Intel wins at desktops for a while and then amd
Intel wins at Laptops for a while then Amd wins.

So at least Amd wins 1 or 2 of the 3 as intel. wins 1 or 2 at a time Out of 3. So neather company is doing bad.
a c 102 à CPUs
March 12, 2006 1:54:25 PM

Supposedly the biggest increases with the Conroe vs. the Core Duo are higher clock speeds, four FPUs and ALUs per core (up from something like 1 and 2 per core), twice the shared cache, and a 1066 MHz FSB. I think that #1 and #3 are really the big deals in the performance increase as the Pentium M architecture has weak FPU performance vs. the K8s and Intels have been memory bandwidth-starved, and it gets even worse as you have TWO CPUs fighting for the same FSB with the Core Duo.

And last but not least, they are supposedly going to be less expensive than AMD's comparable chips.
a c 102 à CPUs
March 12, 2006 1:59:56 PM

Yes, I think that the 20% numbers are more or less legit. 40% is an enormous gain but haven't the AMDs been beating the Intels by something around 20% in games and some number-crunching-intensive benchmarks for some time? The Opterons beat the Xeons even more that 20% in those apps.

I would fully expect that Intel would be able to pull a reversal of that with a brand-new microarchitecture, given its large resources to draw upon. If they merely matched AMD's year-old chips based on a 3-year-old core with their brand-spanking-new chip on a smaller process, Intel would face a stockholder revolution.
March 12, 2006 2:05:07 PM

Anand said he would have one in his lab soon.
Intel said, "sooner than you think."
20% did not come from "rigging." That's mindless.
The Pixar guys story at IDF showed even in the sever front Intel will have a large lead. He is using them now for the next movie, "Cars."

The 128 bit SEE will do all SSE instructions in one clock, other cpus will need two. Macro opp fusion will eleminate many more cycles. The four issue core will give even more IPC. New prefetch will keep the out of order execution working with very few pipeline stalls. That is not all of it, just what comes off the top of my head.
!