Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"Conroe's Aquille Heel Found"

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 16, 2006 11:29:48 PM

After all the benchmark frenzy brought by many respectable hardware sites like Anandtech and many others which moisted the panties of many of the intel ******, there's no doubt that Conroe is the performance king once running on 32-bit software. Even suffering from well-known cache trashing, it's amazing that such a processor can keep up and sometimes surpass up to 10% all of AMD's offerings.

Anyhow, just as I stated a long ago (about intel being too quiet about conrunt's 64-bit performance), I've found this jewel:

Quote:
Finally, there is a weak point in the 64bit mode which corresponds
The result to here was the overwhelming victory of Core 2, but to tell the truth there was a weak point in the unexpected place. It is 64bit.


With saying, when it can send the kind of program which this time it tests on Windows XP of 64bit, there is no change of the efficiency which is conspicuous (this is same even with Athlon 64). Problem was compiled in one for 64bit Windows, it is generally known 64bit native application.

Especially, the almost same functional application is offered, "Panorama Factory" (being able to connect the plural pictures, when the software which makes the photograph of 360 degrees) and "sakura editor" (text editor), "7-Zip" (the advanced compressed software) you look at the result it can grasp situation well (graph 15 - 17). As for Core 2 Duo being good, 40%, native application has become low speed stability, depending upon when as for Athlon 64 which 64bit native edition vis-a-vis efficiency raising. As a result, when with "7-Zip" it is 32bit, when FX-62 which is the speed of Core 2-2.4GHz, is 64bit it reaches the numerical value which is approached to Core 2-2.93GHz, even with "Panorama Factory", as for Core 2-2.4GHz with 32bit FX-62 which is the lath has decorated the reversal top at a stroke in FX-62 make a foolish mistake, reaching up to "sakura editor".


With AMD expanding K8L's 64-bit performance, there's no doubt that intel will have to play the catch-up game all over again.

Make your own conclusions. 8)

www.akiba.com[/i]
July 16, 2006 11:32:31 PM

He meant Achilles' Heel.
July 16, 2006 11:34:18 PM

Quote:
He meant Achilles' Heel.


Baron being a spelling nazi toward a fellow AMD fanboy..... How ironic....
Related resources
July 16, 2006 11:41:37 PM

Hopefully There more test on Amd and intel chips dealing with 64 bit.

I m not saying it right or wrong.
July 16, 2006 11:51:03 PM

Much to learn, I see.
July 16, 2006 11:55:55 PM

Looks like Baron's BS thread was just locked. A mod needs to go ahead and lock this one as well. This one has already gone straight to hell.
July 16, 2006 11:58:45 PM

Quote:
Make your own conclusions. 8)


OK, I will

Tell me, how much 64bit software are you running at the moment anyway?

If you're running some, it shouldn't take you PC long to rearrange these words into a sensible order:

clutching
You
straws
are
at.

To simplify your task, I have capitalised one word and applied punctuation to another.
July 16, 2006 11:59:28 PM

Quote:
Looks like Baron's BS thread was just locked. A mod needs to go ahead and lock this one as well. This one has already gone straight to hell.


Locking the threads is just a short term solution.

The users in question need to be banned.
July 17, 2006 12:03:28 AM

Poor 9nm every AMD has been carved up by core and core 2. Just stay away from razor blades and you'll be fine.
July 17, 2006 12:08:32 AM

Quote:
Poor 9nm every AMD has been carved up by core and core 2. Just stay away from razor blades and you'll be fine.



and also avoid.....

busy intersections

sleeping pills

really tall cliffs

handguns

rifles

shotguns

knives

rat poison

concrete blocks in the middle of a pond
July 17, 2006 12:10:28 AM

Quote:
Make your own conclusions. 8)
You're a fool quoting a hardly credible website? It's possible that Core 2 Duo's 64-bit performance is not as spectacular as it's 32-bit, but I'll wait for a credible website to show this, not something you've posted.
July 17, 2006 12:11:11 AM

Quote:
After all the benchmark frenzy brought by many respectable hardware sites like Anandtech and many others which moisted the panties of many of the intel whores, there's no doubt that Conroe is the performance king once running on 32-bit software. Even suffering from well-known cache trashing, it's amazing that such a processor can keep up and sometimes surpass up to 10% all of AMD's offerings.

Anyhow, just as I stated a long ago (about intel being too quiet about conrunt's 64-bit performance), I've found this jewel:

Finally, there is a weak point in the 64bit mode which corresponds
The result to here was the overwhelming victory of Core 2, but to tell the truth there was a weak point in the unexpected place. It is 64bit.


With saying, when it can send the kind of program which this time it tests on Windows XP of 64bit, there is no change of the efficiency which is conspicuous (this is same even with Athlon 64). Problem was compiled in one for 64bit Windows, it is generally known 64bit native application.

Especially, the almost same functional application is offered, "Panorama Factory" (being able to connect the plural pictures, when the software which makes the photograph of 360 degrees) and "sakura editor" (text editor), "7-Zip" (the advanced compressed software) you look at the result it can grasp situation well (graph 15 - 17). As for Core 2 Duo being good, 40%, native application has become low speed stability, depending upon when as for Athlon 64 which 64bit native edition vis-a-vis efficiency raising. As a result, when with "7-Zip" it is 32bit, when FX-62 which is the speed of Core 2-2.4GHz, is 64bit it reaches the numerical value which is approached to Core 2-2.93GHz, even with "Panorama Factory", as for Core 2-2.4GHz with 32bit FX-62 which is the lath has decorated the reversal top at a stroke in FX-62 make a foolish mistake, reaching up to "sakura editor".


With AMD expanding K8L's 64-bit performance, there's no doubt that intel will have to play the catch-up game all over again.

Make your own conclusions. 8)

www.akiba.com[/i]


No. What 9inch says is true. Really. I mean it. Honest. No kidding. Heres the proof: http://sharikou.blogspot.com/

Peace
July 17, 2006 12:27:20 AM

If you want to see a full suite of benchmarks run in 64-bit you can go to PlanetAMD64. They reviewed Conroe in both 32-bit and 64-bit Windows so you can see a real comparison.

http://www.planetamd64.com/index.php?showtopic=24551

Quote:
Yes you heard right Planetx64.com (that's the same people that run PlanetAMD64.com) has had the chance to test Intel's new flagship the Core 2 line.
They compare the Core 2 Duo E6700 and the Core 2 Extreme X6800 against the AM2 X2 5000+ and FX-62.

"The evaluation as it stands is still enough to show that Intel has finally pulled their collective heads out of the sand and gotten back into the performance game… and with a vengeance. They were not satisfied with meeting the AM2’s performance, they surpassed it significantly."

They used DDR2 800 with 4-4-4 timings and Raptors in Raid 0 so AM2 was not disadvantaged by latency issues. No Conroe RAID problems were reported. Conroe is definitely conclusively number one whether in 32-bit or 64-bit. And this is from an AMD fansite supporting 64-bit technology too.

Now go ahead and tell me PlanetAMD64 and their sister site PlanetX64 are paid Intel pumpers.

What's more, even in your site, the second set of charts which look to be Vista 64-bit results look better. Isn't that why people keep promoting 64-bit? Because Vista is coming. Well, Core 2 seems to do alright. The site themselves even say, the results will change once software is recompiled for the Core 2 architecture as well as Core 2's implentation of 64-bit support which is probably different from K8 and Netburst.
July 17, 2006 12:29:21 AM

Quote:
No. What 9inch says is true. Really. I mean it. Honest. No kidding. Heres the proof: http://sharikou.blogspot.com/

Peace
Who doesn't go there for unbiased reviews on new hardware? :lol: 
July 17, 2006 12:29:56 AM

Quote:
If you want to see a full suite of benchmarks run in 64-bit you can go to PlanetAMD64. They reviewed Conroe in both 32-bit and 64-bit Windows so you can see a real comparison.

http://www.planetamd64.com/index.php?showtopic=24551

Yes you heard right Planetx64.com (that's the same people that run PlanetAMD64.com) has had the chance to test Intel's new flagship the Core 2 line.
They compare the Core 2 Duo E6700 and the Core 2 Extreme X6800 against the AM2 X2 5000+ and FX-62.

"The evaluation as it stands is still enough to show that Intel has finally pulled their collective heads out of the sand and gotten back into the performance game… and with a vengeance. They were not satisfied with meeting the AM2’s performance, they surpassed it significantly."

They used DDR2 800 with 4-4-4 timings and Raptors in Raid 0 so AM2 was not disadvantaged by latency issues. No Conroe RAID problems were reported. Conroe is definitely conclusively number one whether in 32-bit or 64-bit. And this is from an AMD fansite supporting 64-bit technology too.

Now go ahead and tell me PlanetAMD64 and their sister site PlanetX64 are paid Intel pumpers. You just had to bump this back to the top, didn't you?
!