Jump to content

New Intel chips, is there reason for concern?


Recommended Posts

Anandtech has posted an article regarding Intels new 65nm processors.

 

The contents of which were disturbing for an AMD fanboy such as myself. The Athlon X2 @ 2.8GHz CPU was almost 40% slower than the 2.66GHz Conroe.

 

I don't think that AMD will be able to make up this deficite with the move to DDR2.

 

As an enthusiast I can only say that if in 6 months Intel is the leader in performance, my money will reluctantly go to an Intel based system.

 

EDIT: I kind of forgot the link.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

no way, amd is the winner.

 

my new home computer, Athlon 64 3200+ which goes on 2000 mhz (stock) is as twice as powerful in mathematical computations than my work computer which is Pentium4 2.93MHz...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The contents of which were disturbing for an AMD fanboy such as myself. The Athlon X2 @ 2.8GHz CPU was almost 40% slower than the 2.66GHz Conroe.

 

I think there was much more than met the eye in that review.

 

I think its likely that something was wrong in the crossfire setups. I think it odd they used that instead of a single card on a more proven chipset, though perhaps Intel didn't have a board that supported their new processors yet. Keep in mind also that some people here have trouble making the RDX work properly.

 

In short, you can't really use this as a good comparison. (As far as I'm concerned)

 

Also keep in mind that this is what competition is all about, this is what's supposed to happen. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to declare a winner based on those tests and the R480 chipset.. I'm glad to see that Intel may become comptetive again.. It will only lead to better CPU's and other components to follow suit. I'm only a fan of whoever is offering me the best product for my money at the time I choose to upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something about those systems seemed to be modified. This statement:

 

As far as we could tell, there was nothing fishy going on with the benchmarks or the install. Both systems were clean and used the latest versions of all of the drivers (the ATI graphics driver was modified to recognize the Conroe CPU but that driver was loaded on both AMD and Intel systems).

 

...makes me question whether or not the drivers recognized the AMD FX-60 CPU.

 

Although they do state:

 

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.

 

Without a RD580 AM2 platform to compare it to, and the differring CPU die size (90nm versus 65nm) the results seem a little too un-balanced.

 

Of course, this is only a preview and the results should be taken with a grain-of-salt until valid benching has been performed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another case of benchmark building....

 

EMC made a reputation on doing this. They would build a specific system designed just to crush everyone else's fSpecs. It was ridiculous, because when you actually benchmarked any EMC storage system, the REAL arrays never came close. You can not trust pre-production benchmarks, because rest assured that the system (core) was optimized for this test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been benchmarking my bull crap detector for years against reviews like this.

 

Here's the bull crap detector in action with BOLD text.

 

First line, second paragraph and continuing...

---

Intel setup two identical systems: in one corner, an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz running on a DFI RD480 motherboard. And in the other corner, a Conroe running at 2.66GHz (1067MHz FSB) on an Intel 975X motherboard.

---

'nuff said!

 

I'm getting that old THG sinking feeling about anadtech! I hope this is an abberation in their otherwise fine reputation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been benchmarking my bull crap detector for years against reviews like this.

 

Here's the bull crap detector in action with BOLD text.

 

First line, second paragraph and continuing...

---

Intel setup two identical systems: in one corner, an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz running on a DFI RD480 motherboard. And in the other corner, a Conroe running at 2.66GHz (1067MHz FSB) on an Intel 975X motherboard.

---

'nuff said!

 

I'm getting that old THG sinking feeling about anadtech! I hope this is an abberation in their otherwise fine reputation.

 

 

 

Ha yea the fact intel set up the system is far more than enough to make it questonable forget that they were modded drivers and not on the highest performance board. Maby they had Toms hardware set the system up there results are way off too.

 

When Anand or someone else sets up the system themselves with retail parts with retail drivers then you can beleve this. Anand should be ashamed this is worse than gossip because they make it look legit.

 

Unfortunatly Intel has every reason to lie right now they are bleeding to death both in the retail and server market. Even if they can put off some transistion to AMD untell they get somthing cloce to equal at the cost of reputation they will be better off.

 

I would like to see AMD big enough so intel can not force them out of a market by right of a monopoly though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

noooooooooo :(

 

im such a huge AMD fanboy :(

 

but hey, if Conroe can be this good, then i believe AMD will come out with a better CPU! i wont be able to buy them, but still....... :P its all about the competition. if aMD keeps staying on top, they wont research new and better product as rigorously as if intel had something better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

noooooooooo :(

 

im such a huge AMD fanboy :(

 

but hey, if Conroe can be this good, then i believe AMD will come out with a better CPU! i wont be able to buy them, but still....... :P its all about the competition. if aMD keeps staying on top, they wont research new and better product as rigorously as if intel had something better!

 

I dont know about that look how the opterons keep getting better even though Intel keeps treading water. But true comitition is good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been benchmarking my bull crap detector for years against reviews like this.

 

Here's the bull crap detector in action with BOLD text.

 

First line, second paragraph and continuing...

---

Intel setup two identical systems: in one corner, an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz running on a DFI RD480 motherboard. And in the other corner, a Conroe running at 2.66GHz (1067MHz FSB) on an Intel 975X motherboard.

---

'nuff said!

 

DDR2 and DDR also identical I suppose..

 

shame on anand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...