Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Con-roe

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 20, 2006 11:23:12 PM

So, which part of CON-roe(note the emphasis) is clocked at 2.4GHz? Are there some internals clocked at maybe>2.4GHz? Let's wait and see until a REAL product ships and we can all have a CLOSE look at what's going on.


RE: AMD future.
Intel have been selling underperforming crap for many years and made $billions so why should'nt AMD-if that proves to be the case?':p '


RE: Super PI.
So here is the killer app. we have all been waiting for!!! STOP all gaming, business apps. etc, just do Super PI!!

More about : con roe

April 20, 2006 11:25:57 PM

Quote:
So, which part of CON-roe(note the emphasis) is clocked at 2.4GHz? Are there some internals clocked at maybe>2.4GHz? Let's wait and see until a REAL product ships and we can all have a CLOSE look at what's going on.


RE: AMD future.
Intel have been selling underperforming crap for many years and made $billions so why should'nt AMD-if that proves to be the case?':p '


RE: Super PI.
So here is the killer app. we have all been waiting for!!! STOP all gaming, business apps. etc, just do Super PI!!


The locals make another alt account.
April 20, 2006 11:51:49 PM

Quote:
RE: AMD future.
Intel have been selling underperforming crap for many years and made $billions so why should'nt AMD-if that proves to be the case?':p '


Because, AMD hasnt any brainwashing phrase like "Intel Inside"

For YEARS the average joe has been bombarded with that, and I haven't seen many AMD ads on TV

In fact, where I live, ppl think of AMD as a cheap/crap/WTF? cpu brand, sad but true
Related resources
April 20, 2006 11:55:26 PM

Well, AMD has sure made their share of cheap crap in the past, and that rep is hard to shake...
Just like Intel trying to shake the rap of sluggish performance...
April 21, 2006 12:37:14 AM

back in 2001 my friend had an Anthlon xp

i thought WTF ??? it must be slow and a waste





8O
April 21, 2006 12:41:03 AM

Quote:
Well, AMD has sure made their share of cheap crap in the past, and that rep is hard to shake...


For the sake of avoiding a sh17storm (aka flaming) I'll not say a word about AMD doing crap or not...

BUT, what I will say is that when you make a crappy product you have to make one twice as good as the competition to mend for it
April 21, 2006 12:49:29 AM

Quote:
back in 2001 my friend had an Anthlon xp

i thought WTF ??? it must be slow and a waste





8O


But ypur friend realises that his Rig overclocked to 1700mhz like mine and can hold a strong fight against the

(Netburst)aka/.Shyttburst--- Pentium 4 Family
I can still out bench most of the Non-HT Pentium Computers No matter what speed With my 1700+@ 1700mhz (136X12.5)
April 21, 2006 4:08:12 AM

oh really eh? post some of your benches.
April 21, 2006 1:49:26 PM

Can you? :lol: 

And Parrot, what stuff is that?
I cant get the point of this topic...
April 21, 2006 2:16:45 PM

Anyone else just wishing AM2 and Conroe would just come out so people will shut the f*ck up and stop making countless threads dedicated to praising something that isn't even out yet.

Christ. And my parents wonder why I don't consider myself Catholic anymore. If there was a just and loving god he'd strike down all these idiots.

Seriously. Some of you will never loose your virginity to anything but your right hand (or left) as you wack it to a f*ckin CPU benchmark.
April 21, 2006 3:01:35 PM

i second that.. the waiting game is killing me,
i am on economic embargo from spending any more computer money, till
1. direct-x 10 vid cards hit
2 conroe / amd2. whatever else those 2 numbnuts can release.
3. standard on what freaking ram, 667 / 800 / 1000 / 1333?
April 21, 2006 4:56:20 PM

Quote:
Anyone else just wishing AM2 and Conroe would just come out so people will shut the f*ck up and stop making countless threads dedicated to praising something that isn't even out yet.

Christ. And my parents wonder why I don't consider myself Catholic anymore. If there was a just and loving god he'd strike down all these idiots.

Seriously. Some of you will never loose your virginity to anything but your right hand (or left) as you wack it to a f*ckin CPU benchmark.


I couldn't agree more
April 22, 2006 3:34:25 PM

Quote:
Anyone else just wishing AM2 and Conroe would just come out so people will shut the f*ck up and stop making countless threads dedicated to praising something that isn't even out yet.

Christ. And my parents wonder why I don't consider myself Catholic anymore. If there was a just and loving god he'd strike down all these idiots.

Seriously. Some of you will never loose your virginity to anything but your right hand (or left) as you wack it to a f*ckin CPU benchmark.


Ummm-you obviously have many unresolved issues! No prizes for guessing how you lost YOUR virginity!!! You also want to kill people, or at least get someone else to do it for you. I think people in WHITE COATS will pay YOU a visit soon!!!!!!!!!! If you don't like the thread, then don't join in-there is no compulsion to do so!!!
April 22, 2006 6:31:40 PM

hehe, seems like Intels Finally lost its Virginity to AMD-"FX" line. They're finally starting to compare Processers head to head, going against their " never compare processers to anyone else execpt our own"

Check this video out

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-84485335598896...

can any one translate? because he seems just to go on about Intels improvements rather than why it's really better..AhhhHemm(*rigged) AHEhHeM!!
April 22, 2006 6:47:53 PM

Quote:
hehe, seems like Intels Finally lost its Virginity to AMD-"FX" line. They're finally starting to compare Processers head to head, going against their " never compare processers to anyone else execpt our own"

Check this video out

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-84485335598896...

can any one translate? because he seems just to go on about Intels improvements rather than why it's really better..AhhhHemm(*rigged) AHEhHeM!!

Again, not sure why you are posting this in every thread. He was accurately comparing the performance between the two systems in the benchmark he was presenting. That is all.

If you want to see a benchmark with a more grounded reference outside of control from Intel, here is a link to the bit-tech.net guys doing their standard FEAR timedomo benchmark which they can compare to their own in house, tweaked FX-60 system.

Conroe Benchmark

Long story short, thier tweaked in-house outside-of-intel-control system gets 253fps while the conroe demolishes it with 346fps. It appears that the conroe performance might be even BETTER than the Intel sanctioned benchmarks have shown so far.

Cheers!
April 22, 2006 7:53:33 PM

François Piednoel, Senior Performance Analyst chez Intel... chez, aka with, but whatever. Awesome source :roll:
April 22, 2006 9:35:36 PM

i not a fanboy but intel is like freaking wal-mart...on top of the world and the over advertise over AMD
April 22, 2006 9:56:02 PM

Just as awesome as the "dual-core duel"?
April 22, 2006 10:11:58 PM

Wow, those benchmarks are about worthless. They compare a next gen Conroe, to a current gen AMD. WTF is the point in that? Of course the newer gen of processors are going to be better. But I really don't care who is better, as long as I get a good bang for my buck. I just want some faster toys.
April 22, 2006 10:20:37 PM

Correction, prodigical son, those benchmarks are comparing Conroe to an OverClocked FX-60 stock at 2.6GHz, but benchmarked for comparison using 2.8GHz...
That is the equivalent of the FX-62, which is future technology also.
April 23, 2006 4:46:56 AM

Quote:
i not a fanboy but intel is like freaking wal-mart...on top of the world and the over advertise over AMD


Well why it's true that intel's revenue is about the same as wal-mart (38b give or take a few billion), they do at least pay their employees a little more. Intel employee on average >100k, while a wal-mart employee on average <16k.
April 23, 2006 12:42:39 PM

Yeah, If intel Stared Paying all their 100K empolyees that much their profits might skyrocket, but you gotta consider that Most Intel Employees have wasted half their lives Going to anf fro University to get a pittyfull degree or diploma then worked their asses of just to apply and Wait for Intel to accept them. After all that they get in and make 100K. Notbad i think they would deserve it. on the other hand Wal-mart workers making 16K a year. wow overpayed :twisted: !!!! they dont deserve more than 10K for their High School Dropout Diploma
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2006 12:55:40 PM

To whichever site's credit (the site that benched them at decent resolution), numbers at 640x480 are not really all that impressive, if the advantage has disappeared by 1280x1024. However, it appeared Conroe still had approx 20% framerate advantage at high res, which is quite startling...
April 23, 2006 2:00:06 PM

Yes, I do, then it'll be something else that we will grow weary of.
I thought they wanted the Bald Eagle population to grow, someone screwed up and let the Morons go at it too.
The future is alarmingly uncertain...........
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2006 2:35:25 PM

Maybe its been answered in another thread, this guy is just talking about the RIG.

They're running quake4 wich is acccording too him the benchmark that shows the most conservative improvements.

They're using a RD580 in the Amd system with 2-2-2 1T ram, with the latest bios and everything that people online complained about.

The reporter also mention to him its the first time Intel use a AMD system too show off and he said yeah and its probably the last time too.

Anyway, intel seams in too regain as much share as possible, they're making huge price cut and are waiting to throw conroe in the wild. So lets just wait and see =)
April 23, 2006 3:27:55 PM

Quote:
To whichever site's credit (the site that benched them at decent resolution), numbers at 640x480 are not really all that impressive, if the advantage has disappeared by 1280x1024. However, it appeared Conroe still had approx 20% framerate advantage at high res, which is quite startling...

I guess you aren't familiar with benchmarking techniques. When trying to benchmark a CPU, you aften turn the graphics resolution all the way down (hence 640x480) to remove any possible video card induced bottleneck. This provides an opportunity to show any limitations that the CPU brings to the table. In this particular case, the Intel Conroe chip performed way better than anything else. That is all.

Cheers!
April 23, 2006 4:03:11 PM

Right, at higher res and color depth, the bottleneck is the GPU, not the CPU, when you are dealing with high end CPU's that is...
This would not be the case using a Celeron 500MHz tho... you gotta have big guns first...
April 23, 2006 8:41:09 PM

Quote:
hehe, seems like Intels Finally lost its Virginity to AMD-"FX" line. They're finally starting to compare Processers head to head, going against their " never compare processers to anyone else execpt our own"

Check this video out

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-84485335598896...

can any one translate? because he seems just to go on about Intels improvements rather than why it's really better..AhhhHemm(*rigged) AHEhHeM!!

Again, not sure why you are posting this in every thread. He was accurately comparing the performance between the two systems in the benchmark he was presenting. That is all.

If you want to see a benchmark with a more grounded reference outside of control from Intel, here is a link to the bit-tech.net guys doing their standard FEAR timedomo benchmark which they can compare to their own in house, tweaked FX-60 system.

Conroe Benchmark

Long story short, thier tweaked in-house outside-of-intel-control system gets 253fps while the conroe demolishes it with 346fps. It appears that the conroe performance might be even BETTER than the Intel sanctioned benchmarks have shown so far.

Cheers!

re read what the website says more carefully

in specialk this part:
We also used an Intel configured AMD system, which was a 2.6GHz FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz and configured with low latency DDR400 memory.
it speaks for itself ;) 

when you see an AMD box that is NOT MADED BY INTEL , please.. tell us :D 
April 23, 2006 9:28:00 PM

Quote:
hehe, seems like Intels Finally lost its Virginity to AMD-"FX" line. They're finally starting to compare Processers head to head, going against their " never compare processers to anyone else execpt our own"

Check this video out

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-84485335598896...

can any one translate? because he seems just to go on about Intels improvements rather than why it's really better..AhhhHemm(*rigged) AHEhHeM!!

Again, not sure why you are posting this in every thread. He was accurately comparing the performance between the two systems in the benchmark he was presenting. That is all.

If you want to see a benchmark with a more grounded reference outside of control from Intel, here is a link to the bit-tech.net guys doing their standard FEAR timedomo benchmark which they can compare to their own in house, tweaked FX-60 system.

Conroe Benchmark

Long story short, thier tweaked in-house outside-of-intel-control system gets 253fps while the conroe demolishes it with 346fps. It appears that the conroe performance might be even BETTER than the Intel sanctioned benchmarks have shown so far.

Cheers!

re read what the website says more carefully

in specialk this part:
We also used an Intel configured AMD system, which was a 2.6GHz FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz and configured with low latency DDR400 memory.
it speaks for itself ;) 

when you see an AMD box that is NOT MADED BY INTEL , please.. tell us :D 

You fool, did you read the VERY NEXT SENTENCE??

Quote:
The Conroe result speaks for itself, pretty much - we've included our own reference lab numbers from back home for comparison.
April 24, 2006 6:39:40 PM

Quote:
Well, AMD has sure made their share of cheap crap in the past, and that rep is hard to shake...
Just like Intel trying to shake the rap of sluggish performance...


Yep, remember the 386, 486 and K5...K6 wasn't much better, and K7 had glory for a few months. Looks like it took AMD 5 generations to get it right, Intel slipped up in one and appears to have righted itself in just one.

Funny how history is sooo easily forgotten...darn it people, data is data is data....

AMD had a great product in K8, it is nearing the end of that life cycle. Intel has a great up coming product, it will be interesting to see AMD answer this new challenge.

MY GOODNESS!! People want to go back to the dawn of computing to support Intel. If there is anything WORSE than cheap crap, then it is EXPENSIVE CRAP-something Intel is good at doing!!!!!!!!
If people want to go as far back as the 486, then they should not forget the Cyric M1SC-that beat the hell out of any Intel 486!!

Talking about forgotten data, anyone remember the FDIV bug of the Pentium-this from the Great Intel-HA HA HA...

I won't embarrass anyone by mentioning the shortcomings of the Pentium Pro, Itanium et al.

Let's suppose all the hype about CONroe is true. How much do you think it would cost Intel to produce such a chip?Furthermore, how much are they going to sell it for? My guess is it will be a loss-leader for Intel. By the time it actually ships, I suspect that AMD will have something to put Intel into a bit of a spin.

The K8 is nearing the end of its life cycle and Intel have ONLY NOW got a reply!!!!!!(I rest my case)

A lot of you appear to be missing the point of my original post. "Spud" appears to have got the point though-so ask him.
April 24, 2006 9:23:38 PM

Quote:
Well, AMD has sure made their share of cheap crap in the past, and that rep is hard to shake...
Just like Intel trying to shake the rap of sluggish performance...


Yep, remember the 386, 486 and K5...K6 wasn't much better, and K7 had glory for a few months. Looks like it took AMD 5 generations to get it right, Intel slipped up in one and appears to have righted itself in just one.

Funny how history is sooo easily forgotten...darn it people, data is data is data....

AMD had a great product in K8, it is nearing the end of that life cycle. Intel has a great up coming product, it will be interesting to see AMD answer this new challenge.

MY GOODNESS!! People want to go back to the dawn of computing to support Intel. If there is anything WORSE than cheap crap, then it is EXPENSIVE CRAP-something Intel is good at doing!!!!!!!!
If people want to go as far back as the 486, then they should not forget the Cyric M1SC-that beat the hell out of any Intel 486!!

Talking about forgotten data, anyone remember the FDIV bug of the Pentium-this from the Great Intel-HA HA HA...

I won't embarrass anyone by mentioning the shortcomings of the Pentium Pro, Itanium et al.

Let's suppose all the hype about CONroe is true. How much do you think it would cost Intel to produce such a chip?Furthermore, how much are they going to sell it for? My guess is it will be a loss-leader for Intel. By the time it actually ships, I suspect that AMD will have something to put Intel into a bit of a spin.

The K8 is nearing the end of its life cycle and Intel have ONLY NOW got a reply!!!!!!(I rest my case)

A lot of you appear to be missing the point of my original post. "Spud" appears to have got the point though-so ask him.

What did I do now?
April 27, 2006 6:40:48 PM

'8)' Well Spud, no one is asking you so I guess I should say what I mean.

The NetBurst architecture has a feature termed "Rapid Execution Engine"-this signifies the fact that the ALUs are clocked at 2X the core frequency-
which means that a 1.4GHz Pentium4 has ALUs clocked at 2.8GHz! I suspect that this is what Intel is doing with CONroe.

All these benchmarks on the Net are nothing to get excited about anyway! Why?
Because this product has not yet shipped and there is no equivalent AMD product. Not even the forthcoming AM2 processors can be compared as they are current generation CPUs ported to work with DDR2.
April 27, 2006 7:14:00 PM

Quote:
The NetBurst architecture has a feature termed "Rapid Execution Engine"-this signifies the fact that the ALUs are clocked at 2X the core frequency - which means that a 1.4GHz Pentium4 has ALUs clocked at 2.8GHz!


You know, the more I read this, the more I say... "Who cares?"

Why is that such a big deal? If it gives us better-performing processors, then what is your problem with it? I could understand if Intel were selling a 2.0GHz CPU and then UNDERCLOCKING portions of it... but if portions of the chip are running faster and it means we get better performance... I say go for it.

There's nothing stopping AMD from doing the same thing.

(No, I'm not an Intel fanboy... but then I'm really not an AMD fanboy either. Good performance for a decent price is what I'm all about).
April 27, 2006 7:20:13 PM

Well in about 2 months retailers should have Conroe and motherboards supporting them should hit in a couple of weeks. There are multiple engineering samples floating about, two of which I saw sell on ebay.
Time is getting very near now and we all will know soon enough.

Do you not believe it to be a fast processor stock and at a lower price than current offerings?
April 27, 2006 7:29:55 PM

Quote:
The NetBurst architecture has a feature termed "Rapid Execution Engine"-this signifies the fact that the ALUs are clocked at 2X the core frequency - which means that a 1.4GHz Pentium4 has ALUs clocked at 2.8GHz!


You know, the more I read this, the more I say... "Who cares?"

Why is that such a big deal? If it gives us better-performing processors, then what is your problem with it? I could understand if Intel were selling a 2.0GHz CPU and then UNDERCLOCKING portions of it... but if portions of the chip are running faster and it means we get better performance... I say go for it.

There's nothing stopping AMD from doing the same thing.

(No, I'm not an Intel fanboy... but then I'm really not an AMD fanboy either. Good performance for a decent price is what I'm all about). Say that to MadModMike, he'll get mad. He insists that there is no grey area, that you must be a fanboy of something. It is not possible to favor performance over a certain product.
April 27, 2006 7:38:24 PM

Quote:
The NetBurst architecture has a feature termed "Rapid Execution Engine"-this signifies the fact that the ALUs are clocked at 2X the core frequency - which means that a 1.4GHz Pentium4 has ALUs clocked at 2.8GHz!


You know, the more I read this, the more I say... "Who cares?"

Why is that such a big deal? If it gives us better-performing processors, then what is your problem with it? I could understand if Intel were selling a 2.0GHz CPU and then UNDERCLOCKING portions of it... but if portions of the chip are running faster and it means we get better performance... I say go for it.

There's nothing stopping AMD from doing the same thing.

(No, I'm not an Intel fanboy... but then I'm really not an AMD fanboy either. Good performance for a decent price is what I'm all about).

I didn't think my post was that subtle but YOU missed the point(in fact, you missed several, but I shall bring up one).
Amongst other things, this is about misrepresentation. If Intel have a nominal rating for a processor, say 2GHz, but some of the internals work at
say 4GHz, then is it fair to compare it to an AMD processor rated at 2GHz or even 3GHz and claim superior performance??Surely the comparison should be with a 4GHz AMD processor!GET IT??
April 27, 2006 7:47:58 PM

Alright. I get your "point".

Now explain to me how these ALUs are running twice as fast as the clock rate of the processor...
April 27, 2006 7:48:31 PM

So you want Intel to mark their 1.4GHz P4's to a 1.4/2.8 or say a 2GHz CPU?

Or do you want them to be forced to run all internals at 1.4GHz to comply with the core speed rating? What about using slower 200MHz memory quad pumped? Should that matter too and be included in the naming nomenclature?

Is AMD guilty of any of this scrupulous activity or is this just Intel specifically pointed.
April 27, 2006 7:52:08 PM

Quote:
Alright. I get your "point".

Now explain to me how these ALUs are running twice as fast as the clock rate of the processor...
Erm, I was being sarcastic, but anyway, MMM does think that way.
April 27, 2006 8:12:51 PM

Are you just joking or are you really that challenged?
Its a feature of the architecture, go crying if you want.
I bet you wont moan when theres a comparison between a 2000MHz HTT Athlon64 and a 800MHz (QDR) FSB P4.
April 27, 2006 8:40:06 PM

Just want to add to the fire. I hate to say it (no I don't), but I see nothing really revolutionary about Conroe. Everything seems quite logical in a normal progressive way. Intel decided to go back to basics, tweak and reform an old design and make an efficient processor. Good for them. But, being that it still uses technology they have from existing (read older generation cpu's) designs, I don't see what the fuss is about. The SSE instruction set seems to be very important in 3d rendering. Am I wrong here? Ok, then if you can process twice as many SSE instructions per clock, wouldn't you have a faster processor for these types of games? And wouldn't that be most noticable at lower resolutions as well? And wouldn't it be a relatively easy thing to change how one instruction set is processed? Flame on!
April 27, 2006 9:07:44 PM

Not sure.... but what doesn HTT have to do with it..... the memory still only runs as fast as it's is rated to run..... just cause you have a 2000HTT does not mean that the memory runs that fast.... if you set the memory to run at DDR600 that is what it runs at..... maybe I missed something though.
April 27, 2006 9:25:10 PM

Why start a thread like this ? you are a moron, everything in the conroe is clocked @ 2.4 ghz and up for the more powerfull models, btw amd isnt the future their small company will die much quicker then intel will. You do know that amd is just a small pin prick in the giant intel. If you would like to argue that the conroe isnt the amd trouncer then id like you to bring in some facts. Other wise i challenge you to proove to me that amd isnt going to get owned by the conroe this year.
April 27, 2006 9:39:36 PM

wow Mike.... you almost sound like you would rather AMD did not exist.... maybe you should rethink that if that is actually the case..... we will end up with another microsoft if AMD goes away..... then you might as well make your own cpu's..... they would be better..... competition is good, and if you are smart, you will hope that AMD answers back with something faster than Intel. I do..... then I hope Intel goes up by another 20% and lower prices and so on..... am I making sense?
April 27, 2006 9:46:16 PM

Yeah, you're making sense. Why? You're speaking logically. Why can't others follow suit? I definately do not want another Microsoft, or Wal-mart, etc. Even if performance of Conroe does stay above anything AMD offers this year, I WILL NOT be buying one of Intel's CPU's. To me, this would be like giving arms to Iraq to fight Iran with, or buying WWII tech from Germany, or voting for Bush. I said "flame on!" and I meant it. PS I hope Samsung DOES get into the CPU competition, and honestly, ATI and Nvidia could use some more pressure, too, but I can't justify buying S3 graphics just yet.
April 27, 2006 9:46:45 PM

Quote:
Why start a thread like this ? you are a moron, everything in the conroe is clocked @ 2.4 ghz and up for the more powerfull models, btw amd isnt the future their small company will die much quicker then intel will. You do know that amd is just a small pin prick in the giant intel. If you would like to argue that the conroe isnt the amd trouncer then id like you to bring in some facts. Other wise i challenge you to proove to me that amd isnt going to get owned by the conroe this year.


':lol: ' FACT: you are an IMBECILE!!
April 27, 2006 9:56:52 PM

Quote:
Why start a thread like this ? you are a moron, everything in the conroe is clocked @ 2.4 ghz and up for the more powerfull models, btw amd isnt the future their small company will die much quicker then intel will. You do know that amd is just a small pin prick in the giant intel. If you would like to argue that the conroe isnt the amd trouncer then id like you to bring in some facts. Other wise i challenge you to proove to me that amd isnt going to get owned by the conroe this year.


I can't prove to you that Conroe will own AM2, or vice versa BECAUSE THE GOD DAMN CHIPS AREN'T EVEN OUT YET! I WISH THAT PEOPLE WOULD STOP SPECULATING ABOUT THESE FUTURE CPU'S, AND HAVING STUPID ARGUMENTS ABOUT CHIPS THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN BUY!

Oh, by the way, AMD's profits went up 70% in Q1, and they're busy stealing Intel's market share. If Dell used AMD, AMD would be the bigger chip maker. Dell is Intel's biggest customer; Intel would be scared silly if Dell decided to use AMD, as well.
April 27, 2006 9:59:43 PM

Quote:
Yeah, If intel Stared Paying all their 100K empolyees that much their profits might skyrocket, but you gotta consider that Most Intel Employees have wasted half their lives Going to anf fro University to get a pittyfull degree or diploma then worked their asses of just to apply and Wait for Intel to accept them. After all that they get in and make 100K. Notbad i think they would deserve it. on the other hand Wal-mart workers making 16K a year. wow overpayed :twisted: !!!! they dont deserve more than 10K for their High School Dropout Diploma


I work at wal-mart and make 23k a year. :p  Also, most of the people I work with graduated high school, and many of them are going to college part time while working full time. I know it's off topic but I just wanted to dispel the notion that all Wal-mart employees are moronic dropouts.

That being said, I think everyone just needs to wait and see how well Conroe performs when it is available for retail sale. Let's hope that Conroe kicks ass, that way we AMD will have to make an even BETTER chip, etc. etc. Like someone else already said, it's the competition between the two that will spur performance growth, and we, the consumers, will benefit.
April 27, 2006 10:09:35 PM

Quote:
Are you just joking or are you really that challenged?
Its a feature of the architecture, go crying if you want.
I bet you wont moan when theres a comparison between a 2000MHz HTT Athlon64 and a 800MHz (QDR) FSB P4.



'8O' You don't know your HTT from your FSB from your ELBOW!
Who's CHALLENGED NOW?!!
April 27, 2006 10:12:28 PM

I have looked at S3 as well.... just not time yet.... but getting there..... they are the next closest competitor.... and I think they will be able to compete on the high end in the future.... at least I hope so.
!