Conroes performance may not be as significant as expected...

[MrsD]

No surprise there. Especially considering how they pimped prescott as the greatest next gen processer ever.
The price on the X6800 will be $999 in quantity. Right in line with the current high end processors available today.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/26/conroe_to_debut_on_23_july/

 

[Atolsammeek]

That some new info. I hope it unture but we dont know.

 

[1Tanker]

No surprise there. Especially considering how they pimped prescott as the greatest next gen processer ever.
The price on the X6800 will be $999 in quantity. Right in line with the current high end processors available today.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/26/conroe_to_debut_on_23_july/

All that shows is that the 3.33E Extreme Edition, is being kept in the back

room. Why come out with your top chip, when you don't even need it. The

real showstoppers are the lower-end parts, that are beating AMDs high-end

at some major price advantages. You'll have to try harder than that to

take some of the limelight away from Core Processors. :roll:

 

[namralaks]

well said tanker

 

[1Tanker]

No surprise there. Especially considering how they pimped prescott as the greatest next gen processer ever.

Not really. What they said was that it was going to scale much higher than

Northwood, which it did. What it didn't do was scale to 10 GHz like some

people thought. It was mostly a larger cache, SSE3, and a die shrink. Not

to mention longer pipeline, and enhanced prefetchers. They didn't keep the

pipeline increase a secret. Northwoods on LN2 are good for about 5 GHz.

Prescott on LN2 is good for 7.2-7.6GHz. So they were, in fact right.


Do you get 9-INCH to dig up these articles for you. That way, you can

actually start discussing the article, before half the forum tells him to

turn off caps.

 

[Atolsammeek]

Northwood was alot better then Prescott. It ran cooler and Faster. It took changing the die size to do any help. It was like the frist p4 was a joke agenst the p3. Untel P4 could you hyperthreading and so on and had a higher ghz chip.

Mybe some of you should read this website basicly it what tg was talking about. http://www.hkepc.com/

 

[Ycon]

Thank you Mike, now leave again.

 

[chuckshissle]

You need to consider that the chip they are testing are only a "demo". The final Core chips would be more stable and more overclockable. Even the $530 E6 can beat the $1k FX-60 and it has been proven many times in both real applications and benchmarks such as SuprePI and 3DMark. The Core are breaking records and taking new grounds, no one can deny that.

 

[Atolsammeek]

Ycon quit acting like a child. Really this is good info for intel fanboy. Low end stuff comming out. You know not everyone has tons of money.

 

[Atolsammeek]

Very ture on that Chuckshissle. I think this is a good thing for Intel to do. Release low end chips so people who dont have alot of money can buy something that will not make them go bankrupt.

 

[Ycon]

Read -> Think -> maybe Think again -> Post

simple, eh?

 

[Atolsammeek]

here have a baby bottle that will cool you down.

Let see. You like to insult people. But you get upset when someone insults You. Oh well that how life is.

1 You can act like a ture Man or Woman. Read the info and do more research. Which I did and you did not.
or
2 You can act like a child and make Tomshardware forums a disgrase?

Fanboys are for children.

 

[MrsD]

I'll ignore that last comment from the peanut gallery.
I only insult the little kiddies like yourself that deserve to be insulted by their immature behavior and stupid posts.
Seconly I raised 4 little boys like yourself, so maturity is in the eye of the beholder. I could care less who insults me, your opinion is accepted just as well.

Why come out with your top chip, when you don't even need it. The

real showstoppers are the lower-end parts, that are beating AMDs high-end

Haha. They get better and better. Would you care to elaborate on what chip Intel has that is beating AMD's high end? Right, none!
Thanks for our input oh ignorant one.

 

[qurious69ss]

No surprise there. Especially considering how they pimped prescott as the greatest next gen processer ever.
The price on the X6800 will be $999 in quantity. Right in line with the current high end processors available today.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/26/conroe_to_debut_on_23_july/

OK I give up....what the hell does your title "Conroes performance may not be as significant as expected" have to do with a roadmap???

 

[qurious69ss]

I'll ignore that last comment from the peanut gallery.
I only insult the little kiddies like yourself that deserve to be insulted by their immature behavior and stupid posts.
Seconly I raised 4 little boys like yourself, so maturity is in the eye of the beholder. I could care less who insults me, your opinion is accepted just as well.

Why come out with your top chip, when you don't even need it. The

real showstoppers are the lower-end parts, that are beating AMDs high-end

Haha. They get better and better. Would you care to elaborate on what chip Intel has that is beating AMD's high end? Right, none!
Thanks for our input oh ignorant one.

The T2600 mobile chip...comes to mind. Clock for clock it beat the FX60, for shame......a mobile chip.

 

[JonathanDeane]

Threads like this are just bait anyway so Intel isnt releasing its top end chip on the 23rd. Hmmm well I guess people who wanted it will have to wait a bit longer but thats ok most people where planning on buying the low to mid range parts anyway. The 1K$ parts are nice for PR but they dont sell alot of them anyway

 

[Whizzard9992]

The T2600 mobile chip...comes to mind. Clock for clock it beat the FX60, for shame......a mobile chip.

lol



Well, keep in mind that Intel has been saying that the EE line of procs may not see the same 40% performance boost that the mid-stream will see. There's been no 'official' info about the EE lineup performance gain. So far, everything about Conroe has proven to be legit.

I am definately dissapointed that the new EE proc isn't going to be touting the 1333 FSB, though There were rumors that they were having problems with the 1333 FSB on Conroe, but until now I dismissed them as such. I was considering getting an EE until I read this. If the E6700 can hit 3GHz+ OC on air-cooling, there's not much reason to invest in an EE unless you really want some hand-picked silicon.

I'm also dissapointed to see such a small difference between the mid-stream and the EE clock speeds. This means it's unlikely the mid-stream Core 2 Duo will clock more than 2.93 GHz iff the shelf

Haha. They get better and better. Would you care to elaborate on what chip Intel has that is beating AMD's high end? Right, none!
Thanks for our input oh ignorant one.

Actually, every conroe bench to-date has beaten the AMD lineup, FX-60 included (no real FX-62 vs. Conroe benches yet) . Don't forget that, not too long ago, AMD was the underdog.

 

[jkflipflop98]

That info can't be right. we have 3.33 running under 90w full load and its not gonna be the EE? If it turns out to be true then it's the marketing g-men - not us.

 

[tmac]

And If Conroe does. I'll be laughing at you!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Heyyou27]

The T2600 mobile chip...comes to mind. Clock for clock it beat the FX60, for shame......a mobile chip.

I'm not saying Mike is right, but the T2600 does not have 64-bit support. :?

 

[iterations]

Actually, every conroe bench to-date has beaten the AMD lineup, FX-60 included (no real FX-62 vs. Conroe benches yet) . Don't forget that, not too long ago, AMD was the underdog.

Just FYI there has now been a real FX-62 vs. a stock 2.6GHz Conroe test here:

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=5692

And as expected, the Conroe wins in every real world test. Here are the results:

Hexus has gotten their hands on a 2.6GHz Conroe system and did some benchmarking against a real AMD-supplied 2.8GHz FX-62. I've quoted the real-world benchmarks below:
Benchmark/System: % Faster/slower than AMD Athlon 64 FX-62
Realstorm Raytracing 2004: 19.09 faster
DivX encode - multithreaded: 23.78 faster
WAV conversion multithreaded: 24.50 faster
CINEBENCH multi-CPU render: 15.77 faster
KribiBench v1.1 - Jetshadow model: 51.32 faster
Far Cry - 1024x768 - speed: 39.47 more
Quake 4 - 1600x1200 - 4x AA 16x AF: 3.67 more <-- graphics card limited
Splinter Cell: CT - 1600x1200 - 4x AA 8x AF: 0.88 more <-- graphics card limited

 

[13vs7]

#1
I personally don't care who comes out on top, I'm buying the better product, but I don't appreciate the, let's say "marketing schemes", that intel uses to get sales..
#2
I don't get how come almost no one takes this into consideration: AMD has an old cpu on a new platform for the benefit of the ddr2 memory only (read: OLD CPU / they just changed the platform), while conroe is a NEW cpu. Ofcourse it's gonna be faster, it has to be!
#3
Anyone who buys a product of one particular company in the cpu price range just because they like them better, not considering the performance facts are ignorant about tech, have more than enough money to spend or are idiots.

Anyone who says conroe's gonna suck or be slower than any amd cpu on the market right now is an idiot. That applies to anyone who thinks that AMD is not going to strike back too.

Everyone who says AMD's going out of buisness because of this is an idiot.

Anyone who thinks that each of the two companies are gonna stay on top forever just because they like them better is, well, confused about how things work in the technology industry and an idiot.

 

[nukemaster]

Why are people soooooooo amazed that a new CPU is beating an old one(K8 vs Core)
if u ask me it is long due for Intel. If they where any other company they would have lost much more business. After all the netburt architecture was crap(even more so a low speeds under 2.4)

Does it surprise anyone that they have adapted the best of the Pentium M and what they learned durring netburt(p4) to make this new CPU kick some ass?

when the K8's came out was this form nothing but a shit shoot then too?
Like..... K8 at 2 gigahertz “slaps” P4 @ 3.2? Intel's Going out!!! and the like... or are Intel fan boys just worse then AMD ones?

I cant wait for the PS3 and Wii to come out....lol.....this forum will be nothing but flames....

 

[conroe]

No surprise there. Especially considering how they pimped prescott as the greatest next gen processer ever.
The price on the X6800 will be $999 in quantity. Right in line with the current high end processors available today.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/26/conroe_to_debut_on_23_july/

"We were told just after Christmas that it would be a 3.33/1333 part, and that story was corroborated by multiple sources.
The XEs they are showing to the press, however, are 2.97/1066 parts. What will they really be?

Short answer: 2.93. Longer answer: 2.93, because that was 'enough'."
- http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31995

Why release that much above the compition? They can store up the top bin and release when this happens.

 

[gOJDO]

No surprise there. Especially considering how they pimped prescott as the greatest next gen processer ever.
The price on the X6800 will be $999 in quantity. Right in line with the current high end processors available today.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/26/conroe_to_debut_on_23_july/

Can you bold any part where is said that Conroe will not be fast as all the f*cking benchmarks are proving. WTF is your problem?
Are you lieing to us or you are lieing to your self?

It appears that Intel will be introducing its new Desktop Core 2 Duo E6000 series earlier than previously expected. While industry sources hinted to a September launch date at the beginning of this year, slides obtained by enthusiast website HKEPC Hardware indicate that the desktop processor, formerly code-named Conroe, will make its debut on 23 July.

There are no changes to the lineup and pricing we reported earlier, the slides however do provide a sequence number for Intel's Core 2 Extreme for the very first time. The chip will carry the designation "X6800" and will be priced at $999. Surprisingly, the slide indicates a clock speed of only 2.93 GHz for the chip - in contrast to the 3.33 GHz that was previously rumored - and a 1066 MHz front side bus - instead of a 1333 MHz version that is supported by the processor's next generation chipset and also by the chip's sister model, the server processor "Woodcrest" (Xeon 5100 series).

As the slides appear to originate from Intel's regular vendor briefings, the information provided by HKEPC Hardware is credible - and would indicate that Intel's performance advantage over AMD - at least on the high end - may not be as significant as generally expected.

I really feel soory about you and your sufferings becouse of the Intel motherf*cker wipping the floor with your love.