Intel beats AMD with new CPU! Hell FrozeN?

[amrinders87]

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.

I agree. This intel chip beats the AMD by pretty big margin. But regardless of AMD responding, we as consumers have a better chip.

[Omn1]

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.

True that, but they have the compare the new Intel chip against something. This shouldn't be about whether the next gen Intel beats a current gen AMD. Instead, it should be about the performance gains we can see with the newest-of-new processors. Why doesn't everyone always freak out when a new product it better then it's predecessors? Shouldn't that kind of be a given? If that weren't the case then it would be a sad day in technology indeed. Maybe a more helpful statistic would be to compare the next gen Intel with a current gen one? That'd be alot better then trying to incite a flame war by posting mix-and-match comparisons. Also, the differences you see there are probably with impossibly high-end machines where the CPU is the restricting factor. What about posting the difference between the chips on mid-high end gaming machines? I could care less about the difference in chips on a machine with 8 Nividia 15900GTX video cards runnning in SLI with 2TB of DDR5 ram running at 10000 MHz :wacko:

[nekrosoft13]

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

improving? more like takind over?

anyone wanna buy me amd system? no need for it soon

[Xerxes]

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

There won't be a Pentium 5, from what I understand Intel droped the Pentium name and the new chips are going tobe called something else now so I understand (correct me if I'm wrong)

[freeeekyyy]

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.

You think that a difference like that won't be noticed in other uses, like video encoding, or straight number crunching?

[salterbomb]

There won't be a Pentium 5, from what I understand Intel droped the Pentium name and the new chips are going tobe called something else now so I understand (correct me if I'm wrong)

nah, you're right. intel threw out the pentium 4 architecture with these new chips. the pentium D is the last of that era.

[+Elі Subscriber²]

Good, perhaps I ll end up the year with Windows Vista and one of these dual or quad core Intel chips :)

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

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

God no, the Pentium line as far as I know (I might be mistaken so correct me if I'm wrong) is pretty much in its final stages. Conroe will most likely be a part of their Core series and well I can't wait to see this beast in a Power Mac.

[ev0|]

There won't be a Pentium 5, from what I understand Intel droped the Pentium name and the new chips are going tobe called something else now so I understand (correct me if I'm wrong)

You are right. They're going to be Called Intel 'Core' now.

the Core Duo and the Core Solo are going to be dual and single core respectively.

[nekrosoft13]

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.

playing UT 2007 you would notice, when for example your frames on amd will drop to 20, and intel will be about 40

[shihchiun]

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.

Yeah, I mean there used to be a time (before this) when Intel was better than AMD. I don't see what the big deal is.

playing UT 2007 you would notice, when for example your frames on amd will drop to 20, and intel will be about 40

Um, yes. I said you wouldn't notice the difference between 300 and 500 FPS, or anything higher than 60-ish.

Edited March 8, 2006 by shihchiun

[freeeekyyy]

improving? more like takind over?

anyone wanna buy me amd system? no need for it soon

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

[madmatt]

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

Intel ditched that naming convention.

[freeeekyyy]

You are right. They're going to be Called Intel 'Core' now.

the Core Duo and the Core Solo are going to be dual and single core respectively.

As far as I know, the "Core" line is just for the low-end laptops and such.

[amrinders87]

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.

Thats not the point. The point is the margin that it is beating it by.

[AcdShdw]

and how much does this CPU cost?

[Chosen One]

I will NEVER in a billion years ever buy a Intel :x :x

[freeeekyyy]

and how much does this CPU cost?

I saw some pricing info, and the most expensive, high end one, excluding the Extreme Edition, is less than $600.

[jamend]

As far as I know, the "Core" line is just for the low-end laptops and such.

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

That doesn't leave much room to doubt that you don't know what you're talking about...

[freeeekyyy]

I will NEVER in a billion years ever buy a Intel :x :x

Why not?

That doesn't leave much room to doubt that you don't know what you're talking about...

AMDs admittedly have gotten better, but look at their history. Don't be a blind follower, "majesty."

[+virtorio MVC]

I will NEVER in a billion years ever buy a Intel :x :x

Why is that?

[Japlabot]

They have almost got the crown (for now). The only things they need to do now is produce release Merom (Conroe with EM64T) and some chipsets for OEMs to use in Desktop boards (with Dual PCIe x16, etc). They then need to market the Intel Core as a replacement for the whole LGA775 Pentium 4/D line (Might be a little tricky since they have been pulling the "More GHz = More Performance" bandwagon for so long now).

Oh, and lower prices.

[Chanser]

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

[fr8t]

Waiting for the dust to settle in the next few months... Then i'll be "lab-rat" for the next gen. bleeding edge toys that'll be out for vista.

[freeeekyyy]

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

According to the article, the Extreme Edition is les than 100Watts. At 65nm and 3.3 GHz, did you expect something higher? Obviously, intel knows the issues with their chips, and are addressing them.