Last message on previous page:

 
Hey wait
 
Anandtech did a test and Conroe did in fact beat the FX processor
 
i'm neither an intel fanbpy nor an amd one, i'm just a performance fanboy
 
so if intel tops amd then this is what we all have to accept

But there doing it from a older amd cpu Fx 60 vers a newer unreleased Intel chip.  So I still think the test are not valid.  
 
That untel  
 
1 Intel or amd released there chips.  When you can buy them on Pricewatch.com Or any Frys eletronics.
2 Untel The test are done with More then one tech site.  Like tomshardware and other tech sites.  
 
Then there Small thing that can happen on prereleased cpu.  Let take a few p4 recall when they frist came out.  Intel heat problem last few years.  Amd Might have problems with am2 chips.  Many things can happen in a few months we just have to wait and see.  
 
Right Now I see this a group of 5 year old boys and girls going My brother is better then yours.  Then trying to prove it When no one seen your brother.
 
So people quit acting like children and wait.

 
Hey wait
 
Anandtech did a test and Conroe did in fact beat the FX processor
 
i'm neither an intel fanbpy nor an amd one, i'm just a performance fanboy
 
so if intel tops amd then this is what we all have to accept
 
finally a noob that makes some sence! kudos

 
 
Indeed I agree.
 
And I would like to add this:
 
All the Intel fans are going around bragging about Conroe and its derivatives and they have not even been released yet.
 
Currently AMD64 is still a better architecture and the AMD64 will continue to be better for some time.
 
We know that Intel will try to steal the performance crown, they might have an opportunity to do that, albeit briefly, with the Conroe.
 
The irony in all this and hypocrisy shown by Intel fans is what has me very upset.
 
When Intel has a processor that consumes 200W MORE power than a faster AMD64 CPU that's fine with them -- when Intel produces a CPU which seems to consume maybe 10 - 30W less than AMD's current design all of a sudden it's a MIRACLE -- Intel is all that and power consumption is super important all of a sudden!
 
Power consumption was not important in the P4 series now of all of a sudden it's the HOLLY GRAIL!
 
Intel fans have been saying MORE_GHz=BETTER for many years which is utterly FALSE by the way but now that Intel has an engineering sample with a much lower core clock they are bragging how Intel can suddenly [ allegedly ] match or beat AMD64 clock for clock and now their position is GHz DOES NOT MATTER.
 
The lies and the hypocrisy is very disturbing.
 
The truth is we do not know how well the PRODUCTION version of the Conroe will perform, we do not know how well it will scale and we certainly do not know what AMD is going to respond with.
 
AMD is not going to sit idly by while Intel releases a new CPU - you can be sure of that.
 
My main objection is that we are comparing apples and oranges and I have a BIG problem with the Intel controlled benchmarks that were published all over the place to give Intel bragging rights.
 
Let's just say Intel carefully selected the components used in their benchmark to show their new CPU in the best light.
 
They claim their brand new CPU is 20% faster than AMD64 is NOW - even if we accept those figures for a moment, despite any problems with the benchmarks, you have to take into account that the Conroe they demonstrated was their new flagship CPU at the highest clock they are planning to release. This means that a higher clocked AMD64 without major modifications would very likely match or beat Conroe's performance.
 
So if that is the case, what is Intel left with? Well quite honestly not much, except maybe power consumption if those numbers are in fact correct.
 
Now if you examine this carefully -- Intel MAYBE gets a 20% boost by switching to 65nm and they can barely match or beat the AMD64 @ 90nm. Do you realize what this means?
 
If the Intel product has trouble matching or beating the older AMD64 @ 90nm imagine how much trouble they are going to be in when AMD switches to 65nm and later 45nm.
 
It is NO wonder Intel is in such a rush to migrate from 90nm to 65nm to 45nm to 30nm as soon as they possibly can. They are obviously hoping that will be their saving grace.
 
AMD is just playing it cool and letting Intel spend billions desperately trying to upgrade their manufacturing process to 65nm and later 45nm while they sit pretty on an older 90nm design which has the same or nearly the same performance.
 
If recent history is any indication AMD's new design @ 65nm will very likely match or beat the Intel design @ 45nm.
 
Not to mention the OMC will continue to give AMD the advantage and as they improve their HT buses they should have no trouble at all continuing to scale up their memory bandwidth.
 
Intel is still bandwidth starved while the 2xx and 8xx Opterons SCALE like crazy.
 
But you know what we won't know for sure until we actually see how this plays out.
 
So I say we all CALM DOWN & wait and see.

Hey RowdyRob, here's an idea.  Instead of asking questions about a processor that is not even out yet to people who have no clue of what they're talking about, why don't you wait until Tom's Hardware does a non biased review on it.    
 
It is absolutly amazing how many people ask questions that have already been answered, or are going to be answered In the near future in the Tom's Hardware review section of their site.  One would think that someone who would register to the Tom's Hardware forums would actually read the review site, but is that the case?  F*ck no, we'd rather ask questions to people who don't know. :?

 
...?
 
Just curious why are you replacing your ultra d? I just bought one my self.

geez i cant wait till am2 comes out then well have a fair fight

It will be next year for a "fair" fight . 65nm to 65nm.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30250

 
Fair fight? I'm a tad perplexed by this statement. Let me explain why.
The processor war
 
Intel Pentium vs AMD K5 (both 80586 Processors)
Intel Pentium II vs. AMD K6 (both 80686 Processors)
Intel Pentium III vs. AMD K6/2/3 (both 80686 Processors)
Intel Pentium 4/B/C/E vs. AMD Athlon/XP (K7) (both 80786 Processors)
Conroe vs. AMD Athlon64 (K8 ) (both 80886 Processors)
 
Technically it is a fair fight. Intel has always released a processor and AMD has always retaliated. AMD jumped the gun twice with first the K7 and then the K8. Intel retaliated both of those times.. first with the Pentium 4 and now with the Conroe.
 
So AMD's Athlon64 is in fact of the same generation as Intel's Conroe. Thus they are fairly comparable.

The real battle is current gen, vs. current gen.  So AMD is winning, then Intel will.  Next year is up for grabs.

conroe i meant by ddr2 and if you ever spam me agian i'm gonna find you and destroy all your intel procs.

 
I have a feeling like AMD has a few tricks up its sleeve, including increasing cache size.  This could help it compete with Conroe.

Peace on earth, goodwill to all!

I HAVE ONE Opteron 165 and get 22078 and 10041 in Sandra in 32 BIT. Hmmm something seems fishy here. My Opteron is at 2.5ghz by the way. Not bad for ONE Dual Core CPU!!!!!!!!!!!

conroe i know its you who files most of these abuse reports agianst me