Intel beats AMD with new CPU! Hell FrozeN?

[NienorGT]

Personally, I DON'T CARE of Intel or AMD...

/Me want the best processor, so Conroe look better :D

[gwai lo]

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.

You've never heard of the Athlon series problems? Overheating and flakey chipsets, flakey motherboards, and really hot processors. AMD didn't implement the auto-shutdown feature back on the Athlons, so could literally melt down. Guess you got lucky....pre-1999 AMD was pretty horrible.

As long it doesn't heat up like a nuclear power station.

40% reduced power consumption

im quite impressed... but doesnt this chip come out in like Q4? what would amd have by then? 5000+ and higher... so the gap will deminish... although i havent seen any plans for amd to release a 3GHz cpu this year... 2.8GHz should be the limit for 2006.

AMD's next big jump is going to be to 65nm, which isn't due to happen till later this year. Conroe is expected late summer or fall. Also, the review was done with the 2.66 GHz Conroe vs a processor AMD can't even ship...Conroe is still expected in the 3+ GHz range. I don't think AMD has an entire architecture up their sleeve.

Anyone who's been around the game for awhile knew from the start...all the crap AMD has been pulling the past couple of years...they just woke a sleeping giant.

I don't think they've been pulling "crap", the K8 was one pretty well. Just look at the raw numbers out there...and then there's the integrated memory controller...hypertransport...

So if hell freezes now, 1969-1999 must have been pretty cold...

Edited March 8, 2006 by gwai lo

[hotwire]

if the price is the same i would love intel.. but nah. im gonna stay with AMD :D

don't want to not have money to eat for 1 month just because of a freaking cpu

[NienorGT]

Come on :rolleyes: You're comparing tomorrow's technology to something that came out yesterday. Of course future chips from Intel are going to beat AMD's chips that were released last year! When AMD releases something comparable and Intel beats it, I'll give Intel the credit, but until then don't get to excited.

*cough* *cough* The AMD AM2 Actual test have shoved that with the RAM at 667MHz (RTM will be 800) is same or lower that the Sck 939 today counter parts... So I personally don't expect any hyper boost of performances in the nextgen AMD CPUs...

More over, AFAIK the Conroe will be cheaper than the A64x2 AM2 at same speed... (I can be wrong on this and anyway no final price as been told...)

[Mprime]

Final Words

While we're still comparing to Socket-939 and only using RD480, it does seem very unlikely that AMD would be able to make up this much of a deficit with Socket-AM2 and RD580. Especially looking at titles like F.E.A.R. where Conroe's performance advantage averages over 40%, it looks like Intel's confidence has been well placed.

Also keep in mind that we are over six months away from the actual launch of Conroe, performance can go up from where it is today. We also only looked at the 2.66GHz part, the Extreme Edition version of Conroe will most likely be clocked around 3.0GHz which will extend the performance advantage even further.

AMD still does have some time to surprise us with AM2, but from what we've seen today, they are going to have to do a lot of work to close this gap. We saw performance today in the two areas that we were most concerned about with Conroe: gaming and media encoding, and in both Intel greatly exceeded our expectations. Also remember that Conroe should be lower power than the AMD offering we compared it to, although we weren't able to measure power consumption at the wall in our brief time with the systems.

Going into IDF we expected to see a good showing from Conroe, but leaving IDF, well, now we just can't wait to have it.

More from the show as we get it...

Amd's up and coming cpu with DDR2 will likely smoke any comparable Intel offering. But it's great to see the competition and improvements.

[gwai lo]

if the price is the same i would love intel.. but nah. im gonna stay with AMD :D

don't want to not have money to eat for 1 month just because of a freaking cpu

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29504

It's not set in stone, but prices will probably be in that ballfield.

Amd's up and coming cpu with DDR2 will likely smoke any comparable Intel offering. But it's great to see the competition and improvements.

If it matters any...Conroe's TDP is 65w and the FX-60 is 110w at stock. AMD is going to have to pull off something amazing. In addition to process transition, we're supposed to see low power dual cores...but that's still quite a margin to make up.

[freeeekyyy]

Amd's up and coming cpu with DDR2 will likely smoke any comparable Intel offering. But it's great to see the competition and improvements.

Did you read the article?

[sundayx Veteran]

goooo intel. back in competition

[P.M.K]

Good to hear. We need the Competition.

[Mprime]

Did you read the article?

still remains to be seen. Anyone can have their take on any given situation. They actually have no room to make such wild assuptions. We'll just have to see.

[TEX4S]

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

and better products

About time Intel woke up :)

who's saying they woke up ?

still dosent mean im gonna buy there crap lol

I agree - screw em.....and screw ATi - LET THE FLAMING BEGIN !!!!!!! :D

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

bout time

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

Exactly - now a few people are going to look at this benchmark result and start talking smack all throughout Hardware Hangout Forums about how AMD soxorz, and intel pwns j00 !! and all that crap - because 1 CPU is 1/100000 of a millisecond faster....so if you ran your computer over a time longer than the age of the known universe - you would see a slight improvement

[drshdw]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29504

It's not set in stone, but prices will probably be in that ballfield.

If it matters any...Conroe's TDP is 65w and the FX-60 is 110w at stock. AMD is going to have to pull off something amazing. In addition to process transition, we're supposed to see low power dual cores...but that's still quite a margin to make up.

Have you read about the 35W TDP dual core X2?

Also, with the move to 65nm, most of the dual cores are now 55W TDP or something around there.

FX-60 is still 90nm..it's not fun to compare a 65nm chip that isn't out in the market to a 90nm that's actually beign sold.

And I wonder how Conroe will scale, with like 4 dual core processors on a board, that tiny fsb bus....STILL. -.-

Edited March 8, 2006 by aznx

[Hurmoth]

*cough* *cough* The AMD AM2 Actual test have shoved that with the RAM at 667MHz (RTM will be 800) is same or lower that the Sck 939 today counter parts... So I personally don't expect any hyper boost of performances in the nextgen AMD CPUs...

More over, AFAIK the Conroe will be cheaper than the A64x2 AM2 at same speed... (I can be wrong on this and anyway no final price as been told...)

If I'm not mistaken Conroe is 65nm, so you won't be able to compare Intel Conroe until AMD comes out with a 65nm processor, which AM2 won't be. Now I won't argue that AMD is going to be behind Intel for a change, but that doesn't mean that the comparable processors won't beat Intel's processors.

[TEX4S]

Amd's up and coming cpu with DDR2 will likely smoke any comparable Intel offering. But it's great to see the competition and improvements.

Uh.....dont know what youve been smoking but there hasnt been a bit evidence stating a big performance gain with the new core.

DDR2 isnt a big gain over DDR, with the stratospheric clock settings, the RAM timings have to be loose as hell, thus much more latency - and I state again - we are talking about synthetic benchmarks which the regular user, even power user cant tell a bit of difference unless youre calculating for Pi or something and want to wait for 35,000,000 years to see a benefit. (and yes Im exaggerating)

[nekrosoft13]

I don't mean to play mod, but don't troll.

then don't,

[gwai lo]

Have you read about the 35W TDP dual core X2?

Also, with the move to 65nm, most of the dual cores are now 55W TDP or something around there.

FX-60 is still 90nm..it's not fun to compare a 65nm chip that isn't out in the market to a 90nm that's actually beign sold.

And I wonder how Conroe will scale, with like 4 dual core processors on a board, that tiny fsb bus....STILL. -.-

Well, people were comparing the new A64's to the old Pentium 4 northwoods. No one agreed with me when I said they were comparing different generations...however the Prescotts came out pretty horrible...but yes. We still can't compare the two companies directly. However, a 40% margin on paper looks pretty hard to make up..

The FX-60 was overclocked, so it's not even being sold. ;)

Yeah, a the Intel guys (the ones who work for Intel) over at [H] were talking about how the platform is the limiting factor now. The processors are set to take off, Intel has to work on a new platform to keep up with them now.

What's this NGMA thing? :|

[nekrosoft13]

Uh.....dont know what youve been smoking but there hasnt been a bit evidence stating a big performance gain with the new core.

DDR2 isnt a big gain over DDR, with the stratospheric clock settings, the RAM timings have to be loose as hell, thus much more latency - and I state again - we are talking about synthetic benchmarks which the regular user, even power user cant tell a bit of difference unless youre calculating for Pi or something and want to wait for 35,000,000 years to see a benefit. (and yes Im exaggerating)

plus performance even goes down for DDR2,

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/02/21/a_l...form/page9.html

[kaffra]

finally i can upgrade my p4 northwood

[P!P]

Good to hear Intel has regained control. For a while, it appeared Intel would fade into the night. Being a little bit of an Intel fan myself, it's good to see that Intel is number one in a benchmark. Of course, some people will think say AMD is better. Which, in some cases, is true. AMD is the underdog which people like to support, when they started getting better benchmarks, it even got more support.

[Circaflex]

AMD will still be hinderend no matter what people say, maybe not to the average user but for many top overclocks in the world, their IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) is often the cause of the infamous "cold-bug," many well known overclockers who visit XS are switching over, the cold-bug just hurts so much.

But if you think Conroe is impressive wait until you see the OC performance of Penryn which is a 45nm "Conroe"...

[drshdw]

Well, people were comparing the new A64's to the old Pentium 4 northwoods. No one agreed with me when I said they were comparing different generations...however the Prescotts came out pretty horrible...but yes. We still can't compare the two companies directly. However, a 40% margin on paper looks pretty hard to make up..

The FX-60 was overclocked, so it's not even being sold. ;)

Yeah, a the Intel guys (the ones who work for Intel) over at [H] were talking about how the platform is the limiting factor now. The processors are set to take off, Intel has to work on a new platform to keep up with them now.

What's this NGMA thing? :|

Northwood and Prescott weren't really different generations, those were respins basically of Willamette, just like how you have Sledgehammer/Clawhammer, Venice/San Diego, etc. Those were all respins, not new CPUs as a whole.

FX-60 was o/c'd...so it's not even being sold? Wtf? Atleast you can buy the first part, the FX-60. Where the hell are you gonna find a Conroe at 2.66ghz? :rolleyes:

Intel's limiting factor is that crappy FSB.

NGMA? What?

[Valerus]

Yay! Competition! :D

[gwai lo]

Northwood and Prescott weren't really different generations, those were respins basically of Willamette, just like how you have Sledgehammer/Clawhammer, Venice/San Diego, etc. Those were all respins, not new CPUs as a whole.

FX-60 was o/c'd...so it's not even being sold? Wtf? Atleast you can buy the first part, the FX-60. Where the hell are you gonna find a Conroe at 2.66ghz? :rolleyes:

Intel's limiting factor is that crappy FSB.

NGMA? What?

uh...looking for a fight or something? :blink:

[VanishingPixel]

Whether you're an AMD or Intel fan, I think the fact that each of these companies keeps topping the each other's best is good news for all of us. We, the consumers, benefit from this close competition. Not only do we get the choice of newer, improved, and faster processors, but also the fact that the older(relative term :D ) models drop in price more quickly, making it even more affordable for all of us as well.

I like the fact that Intel scored on this one, just as I will be glad when AMD scores one above Intel in the next round, which I don't doubt at all. :yes:

One thing that we all can agree on after seeing the results of this tug-of-war is that competition is good. :cool:

[Oompa]

That's sweet. I can't wait to see what AM2 offers though.