Intel beats AMD with new CPU! Hell FrozeN?

[OrangeSoul]

WOW just look at the performance Intel got over AMD

http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713&p=4

[LispyGlitter2]

next you'll be telling me pigs can finally fly :( *pets her AMD*

[oldaccount1]

Sweet. Is the Conroe a P4? Are they ever going to do a P5?

[Lighthalzen]

Well, at least Intel is improving, good to hear. More competition is better so we get more with less. (Usually)

[salterbomb]

lol

i just posted that in the other thread. those benchmarks are amazing. conroe for me.

[Deathray]

About time Intel woke up :)

[Digitalx]

still dosent mean im gonna buy there crap lol

[amrinders87]

Very nice, this is going to heat up the cpu wars again.

[BlueFighter]

:wub:

Looks like they finally start making it worth liking them also :D

[freeeekyyy]

still dosent mean im gonna buy there crap lol

AMD is the one who, for years, made CPUs that would overheat all the time and fry just by looking at them.

[metallithrax]

because you can eally tell the difference between 350(AMD) and 532(INTEL)frames per second

[Rob2687]

Goo Intel!

[jamend]

Nice scores, but I'll bet that the 65 nm Athlon 64's that should be available alongside the Conroe won't be clocked at just 2.8 GHz.

[TheElite]

now if it doesnt cost an arm and a leg, i'll buy it!

[Blackice]

very good news. Competition always benefits the consumer. Hopefully these are still affordable.

[KeeperOfThePizza]

I am for certain AMD will respond and win.

[ObiWanToby]

Simply amazing, competition is good. Now everyone needs to slash 50 bucks off all their processors :p

[phot0nic]

AMD is the one who, for years, made CPUs that would overheat all the time and fry just by looking at them.

huh? I've used nothing but AMDs on my personal computer for about 8-9 years now, and never had any problems with overheating... in fact, no problems at all. One the other hand, I knew plenty of people that had problems with Intel chips (not overheating, though), and that's why I stuck to AMD. I've always preferred them, and I'm not sure what you're talking about.

[Quillz]

because you can eally tell the difference between 350(AMD) and 532(INTEL)frames per second

Seeing as that's a pretty significant difference, I'd say you can tell the difference.

[Stokkolm]

You can't say that Intel has beaten AMD when this a next gen Intel chip vs a current gen AMD chip. If you want to be fair then we'll wait for the next gen AMD benchmarks.

[User6060]

theres a pic of a quad core intel there, i want benchmarks of that

[salterbomb]

to the people who are saying that we should wait for the next gen AMD chips, when is that going to be? the AM2 chips are same architecture as the ones out now, the only difference being they will have DDR2 support.

and even then, the article firmly states that they have no idea how AMD is going to come up with a 30-40% performance increase to match what this intel chip is doing. the conroe chip is destroying that overclocked FX-60.

[shihchiun]

Seeing as that's a pretty significant difference, I'd say you can tell the difference.

No, you can't. Anything above 60 FPS or so looks the same, unless you've got Fraps or something telling you your frame rate. It would make a difference in other programs, where speed does matter.

[[bear]]

holy hell

[AJerman]

I said several months ago that Intel would be back on top very shortly. This is just the start. I'm an AMD user myself right now at least, I used Intel when they were better, I could care less what company you are, I go for whatever is best at the time. Anyone with half a brain knows that companies like this go in cycles of who is better than the other. Normally once one company starts to fall behind quite a bit, they just produce mediocre products while spending more time developing the "next big thing". Intel and AMD do it, ATI and Nvidia do it, they all do it.