road-runner Posted June 5, 2008 Posted June 5, 2008 AMD needs to do something soon... http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/sho...?i=3326&p=1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaGUY Posted June 5, 2008 Posted June 5, 2008 Is that server is being hounded, or maybe my internet is being funky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praz Posted June 5, 2008 Posted June 5, 2008 Is that server is being hounded, or maybe my internet is being funky They're getting hammered because of that article. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaGUY Posted June 5, 2008 Posted June 5, 2008 Just wow, and your right AMD better come up with something... "What Intel did to AMD in 2006, it is doing to itself in 2008. Amazing." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck Posted June 5, 2008 Posted June 5, 2008 Just wow, and your right AMD better come up with something... "What Intel did to AMD in 2006, it is doing to itself in 2008. Amazing." Hahaha as soon as the page loads I will get a glimpse! Glad it seems to be living up to the hype! Integrated mem controllers on Intels are all I have been thinking about for ages!!! **edit** checked it out and a couple points... 1. I HOPE they do not limit the 1366 to the crazy expensive segment and leave the other 99pc of enthusiasts with clock locked chips. Then even phenoms will be a better choice. 2. I hope the integrated mem controller does not cripple their overclocking potential. If they only hit 3.2 ghz or so and most programs and games stay single or dual threaded...I will not get one. 3. The single core scores are impressive but not that amazing...I would not say it is another conroe clock per clock. Sure, it looks amazing with all eight logical cores chugging on select benchmarks, but its single threaded scores get STOMPED by modern high clockspeed dual core chips. That is of course with a huge clock deficit having the chip at only 2.66ghz, but this goes back to point 2 and its overclockability. If it wont pass the low 3ghz range due to funky mem controller errors or something like phenoms then the hardcore benchmarkers will stick to the beastly chips out now for most benches. If the market develops software with more then 4 threads, or it maintains intels amazing overclockability(which I seriously hope it does!!!) THEN the chip will really shine. Give me a 1366 for a resonable price that is happy around at least 4ghz and I will be the first to get one and will be an extremely happy man!!! In addition a "skulltrail" priced 1366 that pukes out at 3.4ghz will never catch on! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaGUY Posted June 6, 2008 Posted June 6, 2008 The big money is in the mid range, who ever wins that war wins alot of market share. You can have all the amazingly fast chips but if they all cost as much as skulltrail, you'll loose alot of $$. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted June 6, 2008 Posted June 6, 2008 Give me a 1366 for a resonable price that is happy around at least 4ghz and I will be the first to get one and will be an extremely happy man!!! In addition a "skulltrail" priced 1366 that pukes out at 3.4ghz will never catch on! Did you read the same article that I did? There aren't any quads...even at 3.4 GHz...that can match the Nehalem at 2.93 GHz. Sure, if you totally restrict it to a compute-based benchmark that's single threaded it won't touch a high-clocked dual (or even single) core but that's not a fair comparison. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted June 6, 2008 Posted June 6, 2008 I have always been an AMD fan, still am but my money goes to the top performer. This is waht scares me the most though for AMD's future in the high end market: "AMD never really caught up to the performance of Conroe, through some aggressive pricing we got competition in the low end but it could never touch the upper echelon of Core 2 performance. With Penryn, Intel widened the gap. And now with Nehalem it's going to be even tougher to envision a competitive high-end AMD CPU at the end of this year. 2009 should hold a new architecture for AMD, which is the only thing that could possibly come close to achieving competition here. It's months before Nehalem's launch and there's already no equal in sight, it will take far more than Phenom to make this thing sweat." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.