this new Conroe is realy all that?

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-06-2007, 06:47 PM
i found nemo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129

I guess C2D being 25% faster clock for clock isn't "that much" to you.

But to the TC, get whatever that suits your needs, don't let fanboys make your decision.

The X2 3600+ is awesome for the price but if you're willing to spend more, an E6300 is great too.

i hope you weren't reffering to me when you said fanboi :slapass: i just don't see conroe being super duper fast other than in pi. and i don't think 25% is accurate. i'm thinkin' more like 10-15%
03-06-2007, 06:55 PM
Charloz24

I like my Conroe a lot!!! Why? Because, I love overclocking and the Conroe remind me of my best overclocking memories : AMD 1700+ DLT3C
03-06-2007, 07:20 PM
Skillz

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenolith

Yes Skillz, AM2 would make more sense in your case.

That's what I thought too, it's just picking out the right motherboard is my problem. I want something that I wont have to upgrade when the new chips come out.
03-06-2007, 07:31 PM
Kurz

Quote:

Originally Posted by PallMall

that's pretty easy, supreme commander loves massive bandwith and pure cpu power, power as in HIGH mhz, the core2duo may be faster, it isn't at stock vs a stock FX74 lol ;)
yet, you clock them both at same levels and it tied up again .
ingame teh 6700 and 8800GTX gets beaten when playing 81x81 maps lol

Do you have a quad core AMD system?
If you do I wouldnt be surprised the AMD beats the Core2Duo.
At several sites like this site.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=re...DpV4AHcAE7fR6g

A lower Clocked Q6700 beats the x6800 system.
Dont spread FUD
03-06-2007, 10:29 PM
shogo_ca

Quote:

Originally Posted by arisythila

LOL. I just happen to be able to spend 10,000 if I want... I did VERY good this last year. :-)

Also, I don't hate Intel, I just don't agree with what they did to me. Which is why i'm in a lawsuit with them. Thats what Intel did to some of us small computer shop people. They hauked a loogy in out 16 Oz Steak, They didn't even say whoops or sorry.
~Mike

Hi, id be curious to hear more of that ehe. What did intel do to small computer shop people exactly?
03-06-2007, 10:34 PM
Spawne32

Quote:

Originally Posted by i found nemo

is cd2 faster than k8, yes by how much, not much. lol.

whatever helps you sleep at night AMD user :lol::D
03-07-2007, 12:46 AM
i found nemo

ha ha ha!
03-07-2007, 03:06 AM
Thasp

Quote:

Originally Posted by i found nemo

is cd2 faster than k8, yes by how much, not much. lol.

I have an opteron 165 and an e6400.

On 9 hour prime stable overclocks(2.7 for windows, 2.4 for linux) on the opteron, and 3.6 GHz on the e6400, I get 15 FPS on the first pass of a video encode on the opteron. Sometimes peaks at 15.5. On the e6400, I get peaks of 21-22, with an average of 19 using the same program, same profile, same source file.

That's.. 25% better, and I paid $130 more for the opteron nine months before getting the e6400($350 vs $220).

You won't notice much difference in gaming or everyday stuff IMO but for what Intel used to always have the upper hand in(encoding & media related applications), it doesn't get better than the new intel chips for now.

I haven't tested both at stock that much, but I am surprised this is being mentioned in the thread. This is the last site I'd ever expect people to be comparing CPU performance at stock speed. :p

I am looking forward to AMD being back on top. I have many silly problems with Intel, on 965 and 975. On 975, if an overclock were stable for the ram at 333 fsb, that same mem speed at 400 would no longer work. This was fixed on 965. However, on 965, I can run memtest at 464 FSB, 3.7 GHz, for nine hours, prime95 for nine hours or more, and sometimes when I boot up and start prime, with the _SAME_ settings and a cool computer, it'll freeze after 1-2 seconds. It makes no sense. AMD platforms have never given me this much trouble so I look forward to them being on top again as soon as possible. :)
03-07-2007, 04:49 AM
akaBruno

Good one Thasp.

I thought the flame wars were over, long ago. So many people have flip flopped over the years. Who cares, anymore? That 1st Athlon that hit 1G made a name for AMD, and won over a lot of hearts, longing for an underdog. Then came the P4 and people flipped over it. Then the A64 brought more to AMD...

Now it's CONROE, the undisputable lightweight champion of the world. If I had the money, I'd build one for sure.
03-07-2007, 05:05 AM
SOLDNER-MOFO64

Quote:

Originally Posted by |3ourne

sigh , you know I have been following alot of the AMD threads lately and it seems all you are doing is tooting your own horn. I dont post much but I couldnt hold back this time. This IS an AMD section. Yes we all know that Conroe is faster than AMD but most of it is number crunching. A decently overclocked AMD rig plays any and every game out there just fine. So what if you are pulling 11 sec Superpi , most of us dont run Superpi each day. To each his own. It seems to me that YOU have something to reassure yourself. We are not misguiding anyone here but has it occured to you that we might , just might , prefer AMD ?? Not to mention the price/performance ratio for AMD is simply AMAZING right now ?? Yes you can get a conroe and overclock it to god knows what speeds but how much would you be paying for the motherboard ?? A lot more than an equivalently equipped decent clocking mobo for AMD .
Then comes the argument that you simply ARE comparing this generation's cpu against AMD's last generation CPU. Surprisingly you are coming off just as bad a fanboi as you so allegedly call others. You have Conroe , great , go jump around with the other Intel users in the Intel section and stop flaming the AMD forums unless you have something substantial to contribute. :slap:

Yeah and I'd like to see BRENTS SM2.0 & 3.0 scores in 3D MARK '06 ;)

Lets see the WAAAAAAAAY higher scores in the 3D department.

For graphix there is no difference virtually. An overclocked AMD will churn out the same if not higher 3D scores with the same graphix card at comparable clocks. :D
03-07-2007, 05:28 AM
rozzyroz

Quote:

Originally Posted by PallMall

that's pretty easy, supreme commander loves massive bandwith and pure cpu power, power as in HIGH mhz, the core2duo may be faster, it isn't at stock vs a stock FX74 lol ;)
yet, you clock them both at same levels and it tied up again .
ingame teh 6700 and 8800GTX gets beaten when playing 81x81 maps lol

i think it has more to do with 2 cores vs 4 imho.
03-07-2007, 06:25 AM
Clairvoyant129

Quote:

Originally Posted by i found nemo

i hope you weren't reffering to me when you said fanboi :slapass: i just don't see conroe being super duper fast other than in pi. and i don't think 25% is accurate. i'm thinkin' more like 10-15%

I usually don't like to argue with fanbois but I do like to debunk their claims.

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2...orclockzf6.jpg

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/4...ockgrapwh1.jpg

Credit goes to JumpingJack of Tomshardware.

Anyway, back to the TC's question. It all depends on your budget and if you're on a tight budget, the obvious choice would be the X2s. If you can spend more, C2D would be the most logical choice.
03-07-2007, 06:49 AM
SOLDNER-MOFO64

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Oh yeah, I find it VERY interesting that you are CHERRYPICKING a benchmark that is going to be GPU bound for a comparison. :fact:

What's wrong, afraid that on the entire SUITE of benchmarks I'm going to WIPE THE FLOOR with you? :p:

EDIT - These comparisons have already been run:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34518

As with any GPU bound benchmark they are virutally IDENTICAL (as expected). So this is really just you putting up smoke and mirrors hoping that no one will notice that what you benchmark is actually the GPU and you can claim a K8 is as fast as a C2D. :slap: :nono:

No you miss my point. A C2D HAS to be overclocked substantially in order to obtain the same 3D SCORES as a similarly clocked AMD64 X2. When people talk of 3D performance, although the C2D can outperform AMD64 in SuperPi it doesn't trancend to greater 3D performance. This was all I was refering to. I know the tests have already been run, hence I said what I did, cos most people know this already.
03-07-2007, 06:56 AM
lapdog

With the release of the 6000+ one thing is made clear: the E6600 has a competitor at stock clocks. The 2.4GHz CD2 is matched by a 3GHz X2. That's better than 25% advantage per clock. :fact:

If you add in overclock ability, power consumption and price the 6000+ is a big looser. :slapass:
03-07-2007, 06:59 AM
SOLDNER-MOFO64

Quote:

Originally Posted by lapdog

With the release of the 6000+ one thing is made clear: the E6600 has a competitor at stock clocks. The 2.4GHz CD2 is matched by a 3GHz X2. That's better than 25% advantage per clock. :fact:

If you add in overclock ability, power consumption and price the 6000+ is a big looser. :slapass:

True. Shame they charge so much for the 6000+ :(

Providing the user is capable of decent OC'ing the C2D like you say will still outperform the 6000+ and at the price you get it for you can't complain.
03-07-2007, 07:16 AM
SOLDNER-MOFO64

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

BULL$%^&.

Look at the CLOCK for CLOCK comparison in the post above you. 3D benches are STILL much faster than in X2.

This is PURE FUD.

Sure thing BRENTY ;)

Closest clocked C2D to my 2806mhz X2 run on the ORB

E6600 @ 2880mhz

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1362437

and my X2 4400 @ 2806mhz

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1031231

just for a quick example
03-07-2007, 07:18 AM
an0nym0us

Quote:

Originally Posted by i found nemo

is cd2 faster than k8, yes by how much, not much. lol.

quit lying to yourself, the benchmarks speak for themselves.
03-07-2007, 07:34 AM
Clairvoyant129

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64

Sure thing BRENTY ;)

Closest clocked C2D to my 2806mhz X2 run on the ORB

E6600 @ 2880mhz

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1362437

and my X2 4400 @ 2806mhz

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1031231

just for a quick example

No if you look at the clock speed of the 8800GTS, yours is higher. No wonder why you got a higher score.:slap:

And for 3DMark, thousands of other factors affect the final score but as you can see, the C2D CPU score is higher than yours. Try running PCMark instead of 3DMark06.
03-07-2007, 07:37 AM
Clairvoyant129

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Thanks for making my POINT for me:
C2D CPU - 2525
A64 CPU - 2142

:slapass:

Exactly.

And besides, my old X2 4600+ @ 2.4GHz could not get a higher 3DMark06 score compared to my E6600. With my E6600 on stock, I can easily break 10K on 3DMark06 paired with a 8800GTX but with my X2 4600+, I can't even get near 10k.

Until Barcelona, it's obvious C2D reigns supreme, I don't understand where all this blind fanboyism comes from.
03-07-2007, 07:37 AM
arisythila

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Thanks for making my POINT for me:
C2D CPU - 2525
A64 CPU - 2142

:slapass:

I think he was talking about performance of graphics. the X2 scored overall higher score than the C2D.

~Mike
03-07-2007, 07:39 AM
Clairvoyant129

Quote:

Originally Posted by arisythila

I think he was talking about performance of graphics. the X2 scored overall higher score than the C2D.

~Mike

Because the system with the X2 had a 8800GTS which was clocked higher.:nono:
03-07-2007, 08:24 AM
SOLDNER-MOFO64

1 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Thanks for making my POINT for me:
C2D CPU - 2525
A64 CPU - 2142

:slapass:

My god your dumb......you know fine well I wasn't talking about CPU scores einstein.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129

No if you look at the clock speed of the 8800GTS, yours is higher. No wonder why you got a higher score.:slap:

It's the closest clocked C2D to my X2 4400 run that there is on the ORB. I'd have to have linked a C2D with lower clocks which wouldn't have made much sense.

Quote:

And for 3DMark, thousands of other factors affect the final score but as you can see, the C2D CPU score is higher than yours. Try running PCMark instead of 3DMark06.

Yes but if you read my post i said SM2.0 and 3.0 scores... not cpu scores....hello?

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

:owned:

Someone got caught CHEATING and trying to tell us it was an HONEST comparison. :nono: :slapass:

Lay off the green pal....got caught CHEATING?????? Are you on drugs????

WTH has cheating to do with any of this? PMSL

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129

Exactly.

And besides, my old X2 4600+ @ 2.4GHz could not get a higher 3DMark06 score compared to my E6600. With my E6600 on stock, I can easily break 10K on 3DMark06 paired with a 8800GTX but with my X2 4600+, I can't even get near 10k.

You can't even get near 10K with an X2 4600+ and an 8800GTX!!!!!!!

You either haven't OC'd your CPU and/or card or your hopeless at it, simple as that.

Jeez look at my 06 link.....I run that on AIR @ 2806mhz and a GTS for crying out loud and it put out 9700. I'd go look again at my benching technique if you genuinely can't break 10K.

THIS ALSO

Clairvoyant129's compared to mine
03-07-2007, 09:07 AM
i found nemo

i hope ur not calling me a fan boi cuz i'm not, not even biased a little. but tomshardware is and they are known not to be very thourough ... not trying to debunk ur attempt to debunk me just that not all of those tests are correct. also ram info too, was it the same ram? same timings? where's details? you can put up all these pictures of graphs but forget to put the info of the ram right here on xs, or even a link??? k' have a nice day.
03-07-2007, 09:07 AM
lawrywild

Why is everyone sh1tting their pants?

1. Core 2 Duo is faster than K8 clock for clock in 95% of apps/games. If you want to claim differently I suggest you go here: http://www.planetamd64.com/

2. Core 2 Duo's overclock more in general, so when this is taken into account core 2 looks a lot better.

3. Core 2 has no pins.. you can call this a minor thing but I for one had a dodgy X2 IHS which I was too scared to lap because of the pins so never had optimum temps. Core 2 = no pins so is easy to lap safely...

HOWEVER,

I did like my X2 and if I wasn't an overclocker, I would've preferred to stick with my X2 just because I loved my ultra-D and was such an awesome motherboard and my X2 rig was solid as a rock.
03-07-2007, 09:08 AM
Supertim0r

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Pall- that's the BEST you got? Can't give us any CPU benches so you stoop to a personal attack?

How disappointing.

Yep, Troman/Pallmall style...

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page