Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

COnroe is faster, but AMD is going in the right direction.

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 25, 2006 2:42:11 AM

IMHO (your opinions)

From preliminary tests, the Intel Conroe should be a spectacular CPU and should boast some impressive speeds. The AM2 however is nothing really spectacular.

However, AMD is not boasting anything for AM2 but at least maintained the performance (no performance loss from 939 CPUs) as well as launching a full range of CPUs from low to high end. This is preparation, for the future.

AMD are not concentrating on AM2 neither. The are also working (and succeeding) in the Server market and Dell.

What that means. If you buy a new AMD you can still get budget CPUs for the new socket and garenteed the same performance (especially for games) with the new socket for a good price (useless you go for high end).

Conroe will be fast, but I (<< maybe I missed something) see no low end CPUs for Conroe yet. Therefore it will be quite high priced, compared to AM2 3000+ chips. It will take some time to get established and get lower in price. In which time (say 12 months) AMD could come up with something to challenge the Conroe on its AM2 socket.

As the CPU market gets interesting I must congratulate Intel (if the preliminary tests are correct) as they made the gaming and CPU market a lot more interesting.
May 25, 2006 2:47:47 AM

Quote:
IMHO (your opinions)
Conroe will be fast, but I (<< maybe I missed something) see no low end CPUs for Conroe yet. Therefore it will be quite high priced, compared to AM2 3000+ chips. It will take some time to get established and get lower in price. In which time (say 12 months) AMD could come up with something to challenge the Conroe on its AM2 socket.


Conroe E6300 is being offered at $209, Athlon 64 X2 3800+ AM2 is being offered for $303.
May 25, 2006 2:48:53 AM

Quote:
Conroe will be fast, but I (<< maybe I missed something) see no low end CPUs for Conroe yet. Therefore it will be quite high priced, compared to AM2 3000+ chips.


They are doing celerons you know or core solo (lame) Not to mention their dual cores are cheaper.

Quote:
AMD are not concentrating on AM2 neither.


Yes they are.
Related resources
May 25, 2006 3:11:14 AM

I'm just excited that Intel can stand up to AMD again. A dominated industry is an industry without progressiveness. Just look at what Firefox has done for IE. Go Conroe! Kick AMD in the nards! Let's see what AMD pulls out in response. Maybe nothing, maybe they'll get there crap together and do something equally as great as Conroe, like they did with the first FX chips.
May 25, 2006 3:21:13 AM

Agree with you first point.

Disagree on second point.

AM2 is big news here, but not as big in other areas.

Dell supporting AMD has make it to general news, and should have an impact on the general publics image of AMD. This took a lot of effort on AMDs part.

The server market acceptance also took a lot of effort. It took about three years and only Q3 last year did I see some market penetration. SUN microsystems and IBM x86 servers using AMD Opterons are where they are concentrating on as well.

BTW, Intels effort in the Server market is also active with the new Clovertown four-core CPUs, which AMD should follow soon
May 25, 2006 3:32:32 AM

I would like to see what AMD is planning for AM2 before I give it my endorsement as being headed in the right direction.....
May 25, 2006 3:36:39 AM

Quote:
IMHO (your opinions)
Conroe will be fast, but I (<< maybe I missed something) see no low end CPUs for Conroe yet. Therefore it will be quite high priced, compared to AM2 3000+ chips. It will take some time to get established and get lower in price. In which time (say 12 months) AMD could come up with something to challenge the Conroe on its AM2 socket.



If I remember correctly, won't the folks at AMD be jumping into a new socket about a year or 18 months after AM2 is released, or has that been changed (or is my wishful mind being..... too wishful)?
And I also thought this was supposed to be sort of a transitional socket anyways.
May 25, 2006 3:58:50 AM

As to be reported in Thursday's Wall Street Journal; Intel is planning to mainstream the new "Conroe." Nathan Brookwood a market researched from Insight 64 feels that because of Intel statements Intel is confident is can churn out high volumes of chip soon and be able to offer chips to suit mainstream PC price points of $1,000.

"We can abbreviate this as good news from the factory," Mr. Brookwood said.

For those with a subscription you can read it here. LInk to a preview of article from WSJ

If Dell, e-machines or gateway can sell a complete Conroe computer for a thousand with monitor, etc... (and in time for the Christmas sales season) Intel through Core Duo will be able to cover all bases, power, price and performance.

What will or can AMD do?
May 25, 2006 4:00:12 AM

Quote:
Conroe will be fast, but I (<< maybe I missed something) see no low end CPUs for Conroe yet. Therefore it will be quite high priced, compared to AM2 3000+ chips.


They are doing celerons you know or core solo (lame) Not to mention their dual cores are cheaper.

Quote:
AMD are not concentrating on AM2 neither.


Yes they are.
I really can't wait to hear about the single core Conroes (will it even be called Conroe?). I assume the performance will be akin to that of the Pentium M of today, which is already pretty impressive for single core. As long as they're competatively priced with the single-core Athlon64s, then core 2 solo (think that's gonna be the name?) should be a pretty decent deal.

One has to ask, if Core 2 duo is to compete with AMD's X2 line, and Core solo to compete with AMD's Athlon64, what will compete with the Sempron line? It sounds as if intel plans to kill off the Celeron name after the Netburst Celeron Ds run their course. I find this to be a little disturbing honestly. The new chips from Intel will be rolling back the prices on the highend market, but at the expense of the low end? Hopefully that will not be the case. :?
May 25, 2006 4:08:09 AM

Quote:
One has to ask, if Core 2 duo is to compete with AMD's X2 line, and Core solo to compete with AMD's Athlon64, what will compete with the Sempron line?


I'd imagine core solo would take on the sempron and the A64.
May 25, 2006 5:43:01 AM

Quote:


However, AMD is not boasting anything for AM2 but at least maintained the performance (no performance loss from 939 CPUs)


I don't know if i completely agree with that. The FX, and higher speed X2's

are seeing small gains, IF and only IF you use low-latency PC5400, or

PC6400.(Still needing faster timings).If you look at the mainstream parts,

3200+ - x2 3800+, they actually loose performance compared to s939.

HP, and many other OEM's are most likely going to throw in the cheapest

RAM they can, which isn't going to perform as well. For the enthusiast,

like most people in here, that will lay out big bucks for high-end RAM, or

those willing to overclock the low-end units, their is miniscule gains to be

had. Just my perception...Correct me if i'm wrong. I'm not saying that

AM2 doesn't have better "potential", or brighter future, just not such a

great deal now. Also, most tests of AM2, are using the newest chipsets,

which may also skew the results towards AM2. So, really, i think they did

suffer a performance hit (in general), CPU wise, with AM2.
May 25, 2006 6:44:36 AM

If you guys go on xtremesystems, then you would know that people are pwning amd with conroe over and over again with different benchmarks and overclocking.

Second, Intel announced its strategy at making a new core every 2 years. Since Intel has more funding and a larger company, its easier for them to pull a core out of thier arse a lot sooner then AMD. Second, AMD is just working on AM2, and they will not have at least new plans till late 2007, early 2008 for k10 (the only real competitive over Conroe) since K8l's only big thing going for them is high FPU, wich isnt that huge anymore in gaming. (a lot of it is intigrated into the core itself, thats why Conroe focused on ALU cause of SIMD having larg FPU)

But on sale right now, a semeron 2800+ AM2 is on sale for 80 bucks, heck thas a good deal!
May 25, 2006 7:07:11 AM

hmm i honestly have know idea what amd could be coming up with next (i don't know who does), but i guess quad-core processors are a possibility, and with amd switching to 65nm fabrication (bad pun, sorry) by before the end of this year (supposedly), you never know how many cores you could fit on a chip.
May 25, 2006 7:12:59 AM

Quote:
If you guys go on xtremesystems, then you would know that people are pwning amd with conroe over and over again with different benchmarks and overclocking.

Second, Intel announced its strategy at making a new core every 2 years. Since Intel has more funding and a larger company, its easier for them to pull a core out of thier arse a lot sooner then AMD. Second, AMD is just working on AM2, and they will not have at least new plans till late 2007, early 2008 for k10 (the only real competitive over Conroe) since K8l's only big thing going for them is high FPU, wich isnt that huge anymore in gaming. (a lot of it is intigrated into the core itself, thats why Conroe focused on ALU cause of SIMD having larg FPU)

But on sale right now, a semeron 2800+ AM2 is on sale for 80 bucks, heck thas a good deal!


I do go to XS, and see what they are achieving. I suggest you re-read my

post, as i was disagreeing about AM2 maintaining s939 performance. I

didn't even mention Conroe. :roll:
May 25, 2006 7:20:37 AM

I thought K8L had an additional ALU, FPU, and enhanced SSE. Then again, AMD hasn't been too forthcoming with info lately, so who knows.
Even though K10 is expected before the next Core2 revision, I would be the last to say that K8 came out on schedule.
May 25, 2006 7:38:28 AM

1Tanker

I must agree with you and correct myself. Yes there is a slight performance loss with the AM2.

But they may just be teething troubles.

I remember AMD blowing the world away with the 1G barrier leaving the PIII core behind.

This time Intel may be the one doing. On the other hand....Conroe is partially based on the PIII core, so does AMD have something up their sleeves?
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 119 À AMD
May 25, 2006 7:43:11 AM

Even though the K8L is delayed until 2008, I think AMD is doing the right thing. Instead of introducing a new socket, memory controller, 65nm die shrink and a new CPU core, AMD is doing it in stages. That give them time to tweak each "improvement" to make sure they work properly before applying then to the final K8L CPU.
May 25, 2006 7:57:54 AM

Quote:
Even though the K8L is delayed until 2008, I think AMD is doing the right thing. Instead of introducing a new socket, memory controller, 65nm die shrink and a new CPU core, AMD is doing it in stages. That give them time to tweak each "improvement" to make sure they work properly before applying then to the final K8L CPU.

Well at least, as many reviews have stated, AMD waited until DDR2 800

RAM was available, because if they had released them earlier...with 533,

it really would have looked bad. I give them credit on their timing. :) 
May 25, 2006 12:14:47 PM

Seeing AMD adding 65nm and these next generation Improvements on different areas.. It's just a Battleground check on if these parts will work well or not. And then they'll put them all togeather into the K8L Core and run it like a dream. because nothing stays the same fore more than a year or two. So whatever year it's waiting to come out. it'll come out to atleast match or most likely Beat the Next Generation Core 2 Duo
May 25, 2006 12:19:10 PM

I still dont see the point in switching to DDR2 over enthusiast DDR1 modules. I have a set of 1 gig sticks running at 500 mhz @ 3-3-2-5 latencies, and the top end infineon sticks can reach 550+ Mhz at the same latencies.

Is DDR2 really noticably better then these?
May 25, 2006 4:03:47 PM

Quote:
But on sale right now, a semeron 2800+ AM2 is on sale for 80 bucks, heck thas a good deal!
Yes, but in 3 days for the same price you can buy the Celeron D 352.
!