You hit the nail on the head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shpoon
~Mike
Printable View
You hit the nail on the head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shpoon
~Mike
Don't really feel I'm a fanboi of AMD but It looks to me like Conroe is the better processor.
What I would love to see is some good tests running a Single core Opty at 3G or so on AIR against Conroe. Not an FX62 or 5000+.
Got to be a lot of guys like me out there that have had fantastic results with a 14X 939 and wonder if an upgrade makes sense. Unless RHT materializes and does make a difference I can't see moving to AM2.
Now Conroe (even with increased cost of DDR2, new Mobo, and new processor)
may be a different story. But I doubt it.
Just a legit review/test for us poor fuggers that can't afford $1000 processors.
OT: Seems like a lot of personal attacks being posted lately. Disturbing to say the least.
If you want to compare:
AMD X2:
X2 0601TPEW @ 2.95ghz
2gig Ballistix 295
DFI Ultra-D
7900GT 650/900
Powerstream 520
Aircooled (max 3D benchable)
35k
Intel C2D:
E6600 ES step 5 B1 @ 4ghz
2gig team667 @ 900
Bad Axe 304
7900GT 650/900
Powerstream 520
Aircooled (max 3D benchable)
55k
I own both, overclocked AMD and Intel. I'm not an intel or amd fanboy. I'm a "offer the best performance" fanboy.
incase anybody is interested here is my take on the situation. any modern processor can give 60+fps for gaming in any game out there!!!! so wtf does it matter what processor you have for gaming unless for some odd reason you requre to spend hundreds or maybe thousands of dollars to get more then 60fps lol. to me 60fps is plenty for gaming and my amd 3700+ single core with a bit of ocing will give 100+ fps in any game at 640x480 so i am completely gpu bottlenecked no matter what i ever do. and that is a fact and crossfire or whatever doesnt change it.
untill i am gaming and i get less then 60fps and go wtf then turn down visuals and resolution and still get less then 60fps the processor is still fine for gaming.
gaming is all about the gpu!!!
just stay away from low clocked pentium 4 they sometimes get less then 30fps and any settings in some games lol.
gaming in 640x480 :stick:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supertim0r
i dont game in 640x480 its just an example i used to show that no games are cpu limited on most any modern system.
i game at either 1280x960 or 1600x1200 depends on how bad the game taxes my gfx card.
btw i would like to say conroe is much better processor then the a-64 but it just doesnt mean squat when playing games which are always limited by the gfx card because any cpu can keep it over 60fps
if i had to buy a new system right now i would get conroe no question.
Don't forget there are lots and lots of us who do own A64 single cores (which are hardly crappy)Quote:
Originally Posted by aintz
and don't want to go out to buy a new mobo, new DDR2 and a new CPU. (even though I can afford to, I don't feel the need to)
for us buying a cheap X2 as a final (939) upgrade will be a great if not best choice.
definitely conroe? don't think so. unless I owned a slow P4 or AthlonXP and missed out on the A64, Intel would be my choice too.
You don't have to upgrade to DDR2 to get a Conroe, nor spend a lot on a board. There's even Conroe+PCIe+AGP+DDR2+DDR1 boards. So the cost of Conroe over x2 for a 939/754 owner is the cost of the Conroe board: $60-80. With that comes more performance, and drastically more the minute you overclock(just look at xbit labs e6300 review). And Conroe /w DDR1 does as well as /w DDR2(edged it out actually; page 2): http://xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=105113
Hmm that IS interesting. But aren't those like really cheap budgetboards? I never go cheap on my mobo, due to limited OCing options etc. you know what I mean.
either way, thanks for the link.
As the link shows, as well as the board manuals(they're online; pdfs), the overclocking options aren't exactly limited. There's also reviews of the boards for prior revisions(the newer revisions adding Conroe support) so those reviews should apply reasonably well to the updated boards.
Cheap is cheap... I once bought this set of speakers, that said it was 600 watts! It sounded like it was like 5 watts. So I got another set of speakers, and they claimed 25 watts per channel, best speakers I've ever had.
Claims are not what they are claimed sometimes...
~Mike
Here are some more benchies showing us we need not upgrade. Even a overclocked E6700@3.66 is not doing much better than a 3800@2.7;)
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=570&p=5
hehe looking this review i guess p4 M 3ghz has a long way ....:p: or not ! ( single =( )