beginning the end of conroe hype.

[GotaLoveIMC]

Check this review, you will be surprised how conroe's benchmarks are begriming to deteriorate and some truthful and meaningful results are materializing.
This is a great news for consumers, because it clearly shows it’s best not to make hasty decision wasting your upgrade money on wrong system. And as always said: it’s best to wait till dust settles, Intel crusaders run out of options and steam, and truth prevails.

The Bottom Line



We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today. The fact of the matter is that real-world gaming performance today greatly lies at the feet of your video card. Almost none of today’s games are performance limited by your CPU. Maybe that will change, but given the trends, it is not likely. You simply do not need a $1000 CPU to get great gaming performance as we proved months ago in our CPU Scaling article.


When it comes to playing games, the only persons that need to be even a little concerned with upgrading their CPU to a Core 2 processor, might be those with high-end SLI, CrossFire, or GeForce GX2 video cards and we have yet to even prove that due to testing limitations we ran into. Then and only then, you might see an Intel Core 2 processor deliver a performance advantage.


Lastly, I would advise everyone that is thinking of rushing out and purchasing their latest upgrade that we are sure to see HUGE pricing slashes out of AMD before the end of the month.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxobmV3cw==

 

[gr8mikey]

You aren't real smart are you? The type of testing that they did in that review was so clearly a gpu bottleneck, that you could have ran a $100 PD805 through those tests and not been more than 5 fps different from those $1000 cpu's

 

[Action_Man]

Poor mike, stay away from razor blades.

 

[gr8mikey]

This has gotta be a real gut-wrenching day for you isn't it Mike.

If he is smart, he will run down to the store and get him a nice tall bottle of booze. That should enable him to effectively resist the overwhelming amount of data that he will be facing today.

 

[Scarchunk]

I'm shocked that you would quote an article that states this in there testing methods. How do you explain this?

"The ONLY difference that we experienced is that we did have to lower a couple of settings with the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 platform compared to the Intel platforms. This was the internal and external shadows. Luckily the shadow sliders there are “notched” so it is easy to know exactly what position they are in. With the Intel CPUs we were able to have this 5 notches up which is in the middle of the slider for those shadow options. When we tried these same settings on the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 platform we found performance to be overall lower than the Intel CPUs and not playable. By moving those sliders down a couple of notches to 3 notches on the slider performance was now playable."

The FX went from 39 FPS to "unplayable" with two settings tweaked, while the Core 2 handled it just fine. Seems like those two settings put quite a load on the FX instead of just the limiting to the GPU.

 

[Artmic]

Please no more HardOC's reviews tonight, i laughed enough :lol:

 

[carlhungis]

Poor Mike. It will be a long wait for K8L (or KL8 as Jack put it earlier)

 

[gr8mikey]

Good review Jack! That reviewer was very colorful and entertaining.

 

[MagicPants]

I'm wondering how these guys got to be hardware reviewers. Either they don't know what a bottleneck is or they intentionally looked for ways to bottleneck it at the gpu. For anyone interested a bottleneck in computers means that a computer will only work as faster as it's slowest (or most overburdened system).

Think of two car assembly lines:

:arrow: On the first one person polishes the tires, one person tunes the radio, and the last person assembles the rest of the car.

:arrow: On the second one person makes the frame, one person installs the drive train, and the last person installs the interior and paints the car.

Which line will make more cars? On the first line would it matter if the person that tunes the radio was superman?

The testsetup for this review was like the first line, because it overburdened the graphics card.

 

[xcetera]

The conclusion I've reached after reading that review is that E6700 performs nearly the same as X6800 but for almost half the price. And that both Intel chips perform better than the top of the line FX-62.

Better "apples for apples" comparison would have included a FX-55 and X2 4600 as they would be similarly priced to the E6700.

 

[teh_squaterer]

I'm wondering how these guys got to be hardware reviewers. Either they don't know what a bottleneck is or they intentionally looked for ways to bottleneck it at the gpu. For anyone interested a bottleneck in computers means that a computer will only work as faster as it's slowest (or most overburdened system).

Think of two car assembly lines:

:arrow: On the first one person polishes the tires, one person tunes the radio, and the last person assembles the rest of the car.

:arrow: On the second one person makes the frame, one person installs the drive train, and the last person installs the interior and paints the car.

Which line will make more cars? On the first line would it matter if the person that tunes the radio was superman?

The testsetup for this review was line the first line, because it overburdened the graphics card.

Really, if you bought a 7900GTX, are you going to play on medium settings, no AA or AF, at 1024 x 768?

 

[Legenic]

what was with hardocp benchmarking the core 2 and athlon in games with the graphics settings maxed out? don't they know they're basically benchmarking the graphics card? they might as well rename the review.

point is, and has been for a while, that the main thing to look at is the gfx card if you're buying a pc for gaming. the impressive thing with core 2 is that, not only is it every bit as good or better than AMD in gaming when tested at top resolutions (which hasn't been the case for some time for intel with the P4), but it's a top performer in every other benchmark as well. core 2 is really well rounded cpu.

 

[Action_Man]

I'm looking forward to your next blog update. :lol:

 

[jaguarskx]

Check this review, you will be surprised how conroe's benchmarks are begriming to deteriorate and some truthful and meaningful results are materializing.
This is a great news for consumers, because it clearly shows it’s best not to make hasty decision wasting your upgrade money on wrong system. And as always said: it’s best to wait till dust settles, Intel crusaders run out of options and steam, and truth prevails.

God damn stupid fanboys!!!!

If all you care about is gaming performance then read the following review:

Games against CPUs. Part II.

Open your god damn f**king eyes!!!!

When you use high resolution it becomes a GPU reveiw, not a f**king CPU review!!!

LOOK AT THE F**KING CHART!!!

If you want to play Battlefield 2, then f**k the Athlon FX and Conroe. Get yourself a damn Athlon 64 3200+ or the slightly slower Pentium 4 670.

Here's another chart dumbass:

Get yourself a f**king Sempron 3400+, or Celeron D 326!!!

Damn, even an Athlon 3200+ or Pentium 4 670 seems to come close enough to provide highend performance i Serious Sam.

Wanna play Quake 4?

Get yourself a f**king Athlon 3200+, or Pentium 4 670!!! They seem to be close enough to the FX-57!!!

How about Call of Duty 2?

The performance of the Celeron D 351 or Sempron 3400+ are pretty close to the performance of the Pentium 4 670 and FX-57 given that they are budget CPUs.

If all you can do is spew out sh!t from your f**king mouth, then STFU!!!

Stop being a damn brandname Fanboy, and focus on performance!!!!

AMD had turn in the spotlight. Now it's Intel's turn. For how long? Who knows?

 

[GotaLoveIMC]

wow, didn’t realize Intel has released the sewer gate and let million flies buzz out of S**t hole.
This thread was posted here for the consumers and those members trying to sort things out. Not for you Intel maggots.
But I am glad you flue here polluting the forum.
To those genuinely interested in knowing more- please do not be disgusted by these Intel maggots and their odor. This review clearly indicates that in game GPU matter the most and con-roe is no better than AMD. So don’t be fooled by “cooked benchmarks” these Intel magots force you to believe.
There are tons of more reviews and benchmarks that are materializing, and which I am going to post the links here from time to time.
But as a warning, bring your bug spray when visiting this thread. As you can see, the Intel maggots and sewer flies have infested the Forumz.
More to come.

 

[Action_Man]

You rock mike. :lol:

 

[CptCpu]

And what about programs that don't require a good graphics card? Like media encoding?

 

[butitoy]

great post.


and where the heck is the fanboy who started this thread?

 

[turpit]

You know there are other reviewers, with apparently more reviewing skill, besides HardOCP, I kinda liked this one:

http://www.gdhardware.com/hardware/cpus/intel/conroe/X6800_E6700/001.htm

We’ve got to hand it to ol’ AMD; they’ve kept things entertaining for us and have done a lot to help propel the performance of desktop and server CPUs a great deal forward.

But this is where their little parade comes to a screeching halt – why? Because in the most simplistic of terms, Conroe (dubbed Core 2 Duo) kicks the Athlon64 right in the balls and doesn’t look back.

Interesting read. They noted Core 2 uses an off die memory controller. I wasn’t aware of that. Sorry, I haven’t been as faithful in my reading of the Conroe sticky thread as I should have been, so please forgive my questions if they have already been addressed elsewhere, and my stupidity if I have misinterpreted the information.

The point the reviewer makes that an off die memory controller allows for easier improvements is clearly valid. However, considering the generally accepted view that AMDs on die controllers provided significant performance gains, does it seem wise for Intel to have left the controller off die?

I realize there could have been savings in terms of die area, which could have translated directly to increased yield, but if so, would the savings have been significant enough to justify leaving the controller off die?

Or, was the P4/netburst arch just so inefficient in terms of memory handling relative to Core 2 arch that an off die controller causes no significant performance loss?

If there was a significant performance penalty for leaving the controller of Core 2’s die, how much of a performance increase do you estimate the Conroe would realize if it had the controller on die?

Do you think Intel could have anticipated significant gains in the future with improved controllers? If so, might that not imply that the design they're using at this time leaves something to be desired?

Or, was it something simple, such as AMD has that feature copyrighted?

At a very uneducated guess, it would seem, assuming that performance loss was negligible, any gain in yield would justify the decision. To me, this seems like a sound assumption, but is it?

This just has me very curious as to why an arch feature that seemed to be proven would not have been used.

Peace

 

[turpit]

wow, didn’t realize Intel has released the sewer gate and let million flies buzz out of S**t hole.
This thread was posted here for the consumers and those members trying to sort things out. Not for you Intel maggots.
But I am glad you flue here polluting the forum.
To those genuinely interested in knowing more- please do not be disgusted by these Intel maggots and their odor. This review clearly indicates that in game GPU matter the most and con-roe is no better than AMD. So don’t be fooled by “cooked benchmarks” these Intel magots force you to believe.
There are tons of more reviews and benchmarks that are materializing, and which I am going to post the links here from time to time.
But as a warning, bring your bug spray when visiting this thread. As you can see, the Intel maggots and sewer flies have infested the Forumz.
More to come.

I was wondering how long it would be before Mike resumed his true form.

Question answered.

 

[Legenic]

wow, didn’t realize Intel has released the sewer gate and let million flies buzz out of S**t hole.
This thread was posted here for the consumers and those members trying to sort things out. Not for you Intel maggots.
But I am glad you flue here polluting the forum.
To those genuinely interested in knowing more- please do not be disgusted by these Intel maggots and their odor. This review clearly indicates that in game GPU matter the most and con-roe is no better than AMD. So don’t be fooled by “cooked benchmarks” these Intel magots force you to believe.
There are tons of more reviews and benchmarks that are materializing, and which I am going to post the links here from time to time.
But as a warning, bring your bug spray when visiting this thread. As you can see, the Intel maggots and sewer flies have infested the Forumz.
More to come.

I thought everyone understood that intel was running the benchmarks at low reslutions to eliminate the gfx card from the equation as much as possible and just show the power of the cpu. apparently you didn't get that. after all, the systems were evenly matched anyways.

what's with the propaganda?

 

[Skidd]

WTF!?!

GotaLoveIMC

You have some serious issues. You are so convinced of your own little world that you live in that you can’t even see faults in your own posting. You and Fan boys like you DISGUST me. Every time I see a post such as this I wonder to myself what kind of idiot you are. Mommy must have dropped you one too many times on that tiny little head of yours. Freak!

 

[turpit]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I believe the question was answered by his 3rd post...

How many posts does it take to get to the chocolatey center of a GottaloveIMC bias tootsy roll tootsy pop?

One..... two..... Threeee -- yep it's mike.

(You youngsters may not follow this joke).

:lol:
Lol, yeh, 9 inch is showing thru one of his alter egos in one of the other threads too

 

[the_vorlon]

Lets see what Anandtech had to say.....

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795

The Core 2 Extreme X6800, Core 2 Duo E6700 and E6600 were pretty consistently in the top 3 or 4 spots in each benchmark, with the E6600 offering better performance than AMD's FX-62 flagship in the vast majority of benchmarks. Another way of looking at it is that Intel's Core 2 Duo E6600 is effectively a $316 FX-62, which doesn't sound bad at all.

Summary for AMD fanboys...

The $316 intel part beets AMD bests chip..

Needless to say the next 2 speed bins destroy the FX-62...

More Bad news....

At default voltage the X6800 reached a stable 3.6GHz (13 x277). This is a 23% overclock from the stock 2.93GHz speed at stock voltage. It is also an important overclocking result, since it implies Intel could easily release a 3.46GHz or 3.6GHz Core 2 processor tomorrow if they chose to.

Summary for AMD fanboys...

And yes, Intel right now, out of the gate, has two or three speed grades in reserve...

I am sure, and indeed hope, that AMD has a great response to Core in the months and years ahead. - But guys, if Athlon x2 vers Core was a heaveweight boxing match, the ref would have stopped it in the first round.... This thing is over....

 

[JonathanDeane]

WTF!?!

GotaLoveIMC

You have some serious issues. You are so convinced of your own little world that you live in that you can’t even see faults in your own posting. You and Fan boys like you DISGUST me. Every time I see a post such as this I wonder to myself what kind of idiot you are. Mommy must have dropped you one too many times on that tiny little head of yours. Freak!

hey hey hey now be gentle at least he is admitting conroe is equal to his beloved athlon hahahah thats progress ! I bet intel will crank up the speed next month too maybe a 3.2Ghz EE ? anyway like so many have said "The next few days will be mighty entertaining"