Yeah That's Core 2 power there. But better be careful posting something like that here... you may shatter the dreams of dome dillusional peeps on these boards.
why do you hate AMD so much - true the Core 2 can beat athlon but the AMD opteron remains the best flagship processor all computer exterts are saying that same word.
why do you hate AMD so much - true the Core 2 can beat athlon but the AMD opteron remains the best flagship processor all computer exterts are saying that same word.
I think you're missing the point. The dual Opty machine should not lose any of the benchmarks to a single C2D machine. This just attests to the C2D's efficient architecture, and looks very promising for 2P machines.
why do you hate AMD so much - true the Core 2 can beat athlon but the AMD opteron remains the best flagship processor all computer exterts are saying that same word.
I don't think you get it... that's TWO... yes TWO Dual Core Opterons... against a single Core 2 Extreme.
And no Computer experts are saying the Opteron is the best flagship processor. If so... what experts? Could you link us?
I think most people don't hate AMD, it's just that they absolutely love the new C2D . Most people just want the best bang for the buck. There is a very big margin between "hey, look at how AMD sucks" and "wow, look at how powerful this C2D is". Unless I have good reason to interpret something as "hateful" I assume people here have good will behind their comments.
I have been a satisfied owner of AMD CPUs for the past 5-6 years and the few systems I built for myself or others have always been AMDs. But hell, my next machine will probably be a C2D unless I get good, non peculative, reason to wait for K8L.
Talking about K8L (sounds like a toy company name to me ... but hey, Wii sounds crap to but it's not going to stop me from getting one ), if it beats C2D, most people will just switch back to AMD without a second thought and, hopefully, be amazed at how much it's better than C2D. Things like that happens when technology evolves.
Also, if you carefully read the article again, the author in no way is putting down the 2P Opti system against the C2D; they're giving it 8.9 out of 10 stars. Keep in mind that this is a comparison of a 2P system against 1P system. If you are not a fanboy, you'll be glad to know what a 2P C2D Woodies would do side by side against a 2P Opties.
Also, if you carefully read the article again, the author in no way is putting down the 2P Opti system against the C2D; they're giving it 8.9 out of 10 stars. Keep in mind that this is a comparison of a 2P system against 1P system. If you are not a fanboy, you'll be glad to know what a 2P C2D Woodies would do side by side against a 2P Opties.
It's freaking crazy. You know what a 2P xeon would do.
Their next test will be a 2P Woodie system against the 2P Opties. I would really see the true performance of dual Woodies next to the amd counterpart. It can't be by mere coincidence that Apple is putting them in their new high-performing boxes. Also, I haven't seen any comparison of such system yet, i.e. Amd or C2D against Woodies-based systems.
Then why are they building the world next fastest supercomputer (IBM Roadrunner) with Opterons (and cells) insted of woodcrests?
Same reason that guys like Baron Matrix and 9-inch would spent $2000 on an AMD system, that would get beat by a $1200 Intel C2D system. Baron is afraid of "learning" an Intel BIOS...he admitted that...no sh*t!!
Then why are they building the world next fastest supercomputer (IBM Roadrunner) with Opterons (and cells) insted of woodcrests?
Because Opterons scale better. Due to the fact that they use a Hypertransport links between each processor as opposed to Intel Woodcrests Xeons shared FSB is the main reason why Opterons will out perform Woodcrest Xeons in 8-Way or more configs. Quad Core still has Intel ahead of AMD (Quad core or Quad CPU actually). It's when you hit configurations of 8 or more that Opterons really shine.
Sadly.. not too many people need 8-way or higher configurations.
Then why are they building the world next fastest supercomputer (IBM Roadrunner) with Opterons (and cells) insted of woodcrests?
As far as I know, IBM/Sony & Motorolla were developing risc-based processors for Apple not so long ago. Also, IBM had a partnership with AMD helping them with their processor-development platform; I think they still have that partnership together or so.
Thus, when Apple made the switch to Intel-based procs. one can expect IBM/Sony & Moto to be really pissed off as Apple has always been (for as long as I can remember) considered the cradle of modern PC -to an extent.
That might be one of many reasons why, which it really doesn't surprises me at all, that IBM is going with AMD/Cells-based procs. for the DOE supercomputer project.
Ugh, with Apple switching over to Intel, I have more reason to hate them. They should just die off. Before, they actually were trying to be different, using IBM processors instead of the mainstream Intel, but now that they switched, their just PC's running a different OS. If I was going to buy an OS, I'd get windows, because I see no point in spending hundreds of dollars every other year buying the new Apple OS's.
Anyone have a good reason to get apple computers now? Anybody?
AMD opteron remains the best flagship processor all computer exterts are saying that same word.
No they aren't.
All computer experts are currently saying that C2D is not only a faster architecture in general, but are far more efficient eg greater performance per watt.
Anyone who denies this is a moron; the benchmarks speak for themselves. Sure, AMD may be able to get closer in terms of price/performance ratio with intelligent pricing at the lower end, but at the high-end they definitely lose out. However, given that even the low end C2D processors overclock extremely well even under air cooling, I cannot see any reason whatsoever why anyone would buy into an AMD system at this stage.
Don't get me wrong. I'm an AMD user, I currently have a San Diego 3700+ overclocked to FX-55. However, I'm quite certain my next system will be C2D - not just because of the great performance in dual-core apps / general tasks but also because of great gaming performance. This is something that the dual-core AMD's simply don't do a good job of. My San Diego at stock will beat anything upto a 4400+ in most games. I'd consider this pretty poor from a company's top-flight CPU's. Imo AMD's dual-core CPU's took a step back from gaming performance the moment they were released.
My other reason for choosing a C2D will be the thermal properties of the new chip. One of my greatest considerations for any new machine is silence, and I believe that a Core 2 Duo processor (given its low thermal output and enhanced power saving / throttling technologies) is the number one choice for any quiet system right now. Lower temperatures require less cooling its as simple as that. That means less fans, at lower speeds, and thus less noise.
So, to summarise. We have a new processor line from Intel that not only takes the performance crown from AMD's dual-core CPU's (which can only compete through significant pricing drops) but is also a good all-rounder. It performs great in OS-related tasks eg archive handling while remaining great in games, plus it performs great in single or dual-core accelerated professional tasks such as video/audio editing and 3D content creation.
And it does all this with lower power consumption, lower thermal output / operating temperaturs, and while offering a stronger upgrade path.
Then why are they building the world next fastest supercomputer (IBM Roadrunner) with Opterons (and cells) insted of woodcrests?
Because of existing infrastructure. IBM has built a couple of them already, they know how to do that. Woodcrest is too new and more importantly, was not available in planing phase of Roadrunner.
Wait a year to investigate once again what is used to build supercomputers.
rrlarose@hotmail.com 
. Most people just want the best bang for the buck. There is a very big margin between "hey, look at how AMD sucks" and "wow, look at how powerful this C2D is". Unless I have good reason to interpret something as "hateful" I assume people here have good will behind their comments.
), if it beats C2D, most people will just switch back to AMD without a second thought and, hopefully, be amazed at how much it's better than C2D. Things like that happens when technology evolves.
Baron is afraid of "