Conroe Benchmarch

[sareiodata]

Could this be true? I mean did they really get their hands on Conroe?

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=794&cid=1

I actually thought Intel increased the numbers a little bit!

 

[iterations]

Could this be true? I mean did they really get their hands on Conroe?

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=794&cid=1

I actually thought Intel increased the numbers a little bit!

It is a bit old, but still a very interesting read. I'm looking forward to see what numbers are reported from the more reputable sites when the NDA is up and people can report their own in-house data. I'd like to see how they change (or don't change, either way) compared to that complete thrashing in that article. I think the 2nd half of this year will be an exciting time to build or buy a new PC.

Cheers!

 

[YO_KID37]

If a Conroe and a Opteron 175 Are Priced the same along with the Motherboards. I'm the Happyest Boy ever!!!!, Im getting a Conroe and a Opteron 175

 

[pengwin]

i wont believe any benchmark until i see the CPU on the market and have multiple websites run benchmarks

also Tom;s CPU guide should list Opterons on it

 

[Mike995]

Beleive those benchmarks considering there are many conroe platforms floating around the internet and they are showing the same results that Intel did at IDF take a look at these links and youll see where the truth lies, btw look at how close the 2.66 ghz A 64 4400 + performs in comparasin to the IDF benchmark, they didnt cheat considering that is a synthetic benchmark and there wouldnt be any fooling it unless the systems were tampered with, which they cannot considering the numbers are soo close from 140 mhz youd probably only get 200 more points on pc mark 2005. Btw the opeteron isnt even competitivily priced with the conroe. Anand ran their own Quake 4 demo which they even stated the athlon 64's like and they found a higher performance gap between the conroe and amd 64 the conroe was 30 % faster instead of 20 % like in the Intel demos showing they were concervative. At GDC intel also switched out the motherboard and changed what was criticized about the AMD platform, RD480 chipset and such. Was all replaced by the RD 580. Intel IDF PC mark 2005 benchmark=5552/ 2800 mhz= 1.98 points per mhz. Forum Benchmark PC mark benchmark=5240/2664 mhz=1.96 points per mhz, I dont see how its feasible that they cheated. Amd is going to be seemlessly wrestled to the ground and shown whos boss this year around july.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=97609
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=97395

 

[Parrot]

Could this be true? I mean did they really get their hands on Conroe?

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=794&cid=1

I actually thought Intel increased the numbers a little bit!

YAWN, YAWN, YAWN.
Comparing apples to oranges!!

 

[xombie2000]

All jokes aside, what would be a fair comparison to you Parrot?

 

[mad_fitzy]

DO YOU THINK YOU COULD WAIT UNTIL ITS OUT AT LEAST BEFORE YOU TALK ABOUT IT NON FU<KING STOP. SAME WITH AM2.

 

[Mike995]

Yea really... considering the processors in AM2 arent even changing we can compare current SKT 939 platforms to conroes.

 

[iterations]

DO YOU THINK YOU COULD WAIT UNTIL ITS OUT AT LEAST BEFORE YOU TALK ABOUT IT NON FU<KING STOP. SAME WITH AM2.

No it is not possible, and it is a stupid thing to ask for.

Conroe's performance is a very interesting topic and there are leaked chips out there providing very real data. If you want to avoid Conroe discussions, I suggest you take a vacation from the Internet, or learn to not click on threads with Conroe in their title (like this one).

 

[Mike995]

^^ agreed.

 

[RichPLS]

Keep in mind also that Conroe as previewed and benched so far is using officially unsupported boards, and reports are of various bugs and glitches while getting hardware to perform.
I expect slightly better performance upon official release.

 

[The_Rev]

I've been benchmarching all day and now my legs are really tired.

 

[jkflipflop98]

B1's are the launch stepping. Good guess.

 

[ak47is1337]

Could this be true? I mean did they really get their hands on Conroe?

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=794&cid=1

I actually thought Intel increased the numbers a little bit!

=p
I remember when anandtech screwed up the test and we had Conroe with 40% performance increase instead of 25% because they forgot to check resolutions. That got so many AMD fanboys going...
BTW, some Conroes have been leaking around. I heard FUGGER had one but couldn't get it to POST.

 

[RichPLS]

It would be sweet if Conroe pushes AMD's hand to fight back and release some more 939 chips to keep some marketshare, like 3GHz X2's or even 3.2GHz on 65nm and at reasonable prices!!!

 

[ak47is1337]

It would be sweet if Conroe pushes AMD's hand to fight back and release some more 939 chips to keep some marketshare, like 3GHz X2's or even 3.2GHz on 65nm and at reasonable prices!!!

doubt it :roll:

 

[ak47is1337]

The reason they aren't saying anything is because:
A. They are not stupid. They know AM2 release will get blown away.
B. AMD is elitist about who gets to know what's happening. It's crappy marketing, and they had better change or lose the limelight.
C. AMD only talks when they can taunt their opponent like they did during K8.

 

[RichPLS]

That is sorta the intent of my post... Nothing to offer yet that is ready, so scale down current architecture to 65nm and hold on to some of their current market with faster chips while they complete their next generation.

 

[jkflipflop98]

I saw something the other day I shouldn't have.
Intel isn't the only one that's got "Next-Gen" alot sooner than you think.

 

[Mike995]

Yea lol, its like when the IDF benchmarks first came out amd fans scremed ITS NOT FAIR, conroe is the future amd is current. Compare to AM2, the am2 benchmarks mustnt have pleased them..... Its like when ppl complained about the RD 480 chipset. Theres a really good reason why Intel used this, because the badaxe board for the conroe is only 8x pci-e, same with the dfi RD480 they used.... it was fair I dont see why ppl complained. But at GDC intel used an RD580 board for the amd system and the results didnt change.

 

[Caboose-1]

I saw something the other day I shouldn't have.
Intel isn't the only one that's got "Next-Gen" alot sooner than you think.

Ooooohhhhh, gossip, do tell...

Edit: I am supposing this is in response to the other page of my post...
You know, I am having a hard time reading AMD, after re-reading my own post I need to becareful and think about what I am saying. In all honesty, it seems ludicrous to think or suggest (as I may have implied in the previous page of this thread) that AMD has not been researching the next latest and greatest thing. It's just that all the info you hear from AMD in "interviews" and public quotes is that K8 is here to stay and will undergo evolutionary changes. I think that may not be the wisest path.

Jack Yeah no joke.