Printable View
A nice comparison, good work Coolaler.
His FX-60 PI time is weird though, My Venice @ 2.85GHz is faster.
Ddr2 ??
nice work
:clap:
The Super PI time seems right to me, if you check this thread by OPP where he is testing a FX62. You can see he is getting 25.203s @ 3.25GHz :)
Nice compare Coolaler :up:
So are the 3DMark05 and 06 scores showing that both systems are GPU bound? Is that 7900 GTX SLI or just one card?
I can't understand how Conroe would be faster in 3DMark01 and 03, yet about the same in 05 and 06....
:confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durzel
Cause 3dmark 05 and 06 are primarily GPU based tests, 01 is alot of memory speed / timings and CPU overclock. Overclocking a CPU in 05 and 06 doesnt affect the overall score more than a few points.
Fair compare? A $1000 CPU overclocked against a ~$600 CPU at stock speed?
//* AMDboy troll *//
But it wasn't on AM2 with DDR2 memory.. Intel is cheating.. It's unfair... :p:
______
Good job Coolaler.. Can't wait to get mine (23 July is too far...)
Is it under clocked to 2.4 in some of the tests? :confused:
I thought fx-62 would only be am2. fx-60 would be both.
Well Intel finally stepped up to bat with Conroe/Mernom. If its that good @ stock, what happens with the cascade setups and some serious clockage? I haven't bought Intel since my P3-800 that did 1.2ghz but this is gonna be total ownage and I will be switching this winter.
Why is the FSB at 1.2 GHz as opposed to 1066 MHz? And what's up with it being at 2.4 GHz
How overclockable are the conroe chips? Might be good to compare a maxxed out conroe vs a maxxed out FX-62
Hahaha...LMAOQuote:
Originally Posted by wildcard
This is the joke of the day... :slap:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=101190&page=6
dude you missed a few threads :DQuote:
Originally Posted by wildcard
3.7 to 3.9GHz on AIR is it good?.....:)Quote:
Originally Posted by wildcard
i think he was answering this question :Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
>> "How overclockable are the conroe chips?"
Cause X2 seem to be a bit better at multithreads - and the shared cache is also an issue when it comes to single core versus dualcore percentage performance increase..Quote:
Originally Posted by Durzel
superpi does seem slow
http://forums.extremeoverclocking.co...3&d=1131635799
my 4400+ at 2.94 ghz is low 28s
No I mean 3.7 - 3.9GHz ON AIR as for the Conroe CPU......AMD about 3 - 3.15GHz....;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
Because the FX62 is at 3GHz and the Conroe at 2.67GHz.... 01 and 03 benefit more from the efficient architecture. Conroe needs to be a bit higher before overtaking.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Durzel
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
i saw the 6700 at 3.7 and the 6800 at 3.8 who did the 3.9 ??
slaughter
1. slaugh.ter \'slo.t-*r\ n [ME, of Scand origin; akin to ON sla-tra to
slaughter; akin to OE s]leaht slaughter, sle-an to slay - more at SLAY 1:
the act of killing; specif : the butchering of livestock for mar ket 2:
destruction of human lives in battle : CARNAGE
2. slaughter \-*r-*r\ vt 1: to kill (animals) for food : BUTCHER 2a: to
kill in a bloody or violent manner : SLAY 2b: to kill in large numbers :
MASSACRE - slaugh.ter.er n
rape
NOUN: 1. The crime of forcing another person to submit to silicon acts, especially silicon intercourse. 2. The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction. 3. Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.
TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: raped, rap·ing, rapes
1. To force (another person) to submit to silicon acts, especially silicon intercourse; commit rape on. 2. To seize and carry off by force. 3. To plunder or pillage.
ETYMOLOGY: Middle English, from rapen, to rape, from Old French raper, to abduct, from Latin rapere, to seize. See rep- in Appendix I.
OTHER FORMS: raper —NOUN
AMD will be ahead once 65nm A64 is launched, but... I actually think penryn will hit stores VERY close to AMD 65nm,... And 65nm vs. 45nm, back to the current stage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Willis
when OPP, Kingpin and KINC run Conroe... AMD will be delegated to 3rd or 4th page status.
Real thanks for cinebench results :)
lol, but its true :)Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie
45nm isnt planned before 2008 so dont count on it next year
65nm should be ok, hitting 3.4ghz shouldnt be any problem, it could release a 3.2ghz with 90nm, but with higher TDP
@willis
you mean massacre, right?
Well, Im counting on it for Q2-Q3 @ 2007, but what the heck ;)
Charlie, rename "Xtreme Fanboy" :p:
There is no reason for the A64 to beat Conroe even with 65nm. The K8 is just inferior to core and die shrinks will not solve that. AMD can only overtake Conroe with a new architecture and this won't happen for a while. Besides, like you said, Intel has 45nm coming anyway..Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
3dmark 05 and 06 are ghey benchmarks. I would not even spend my time running those benches. I wouldn't run it(no matter what CPU is since it's not system dependent) even if somebody come knock on my door, get on his knees and kiss my shoes and offer me $100 bucks and begging me to run those benches. I'll tell the guy "Get lost".Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
The top benchmarks are:
- 3Dmark 2001
- Quake3
- Quake4
These would be the top three. Case closed.
45nm isnt coming very soon :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by cupholder2.0
I agree, 3dmark 05 and 06 suck ass for benching the system as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez
05 + 01se + Am3.....
Its weird tho.. Futuremark removed ALOT of Conroe based results.. FCGs and Collalers included. If i remember correctly, those were higher then any of the AM2 benches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
I wonder why Futuremark removed the Conroe benches :confused:
Don't say that coz you haven't even seeing a Conroe at 5GHz under LN2 benching 3D with 2 x X1900XTXs at 1GHz/1GHz each under dual-head cascade -100*C.........When the time comes, we'll see......;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
And you will be the one that shows us:D I realy liked your Dothan results. Go Hipro, go get a XE conroe and show themQuote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
George, got those 2* 1/1GHZ cards laying near?? Can you please send them ?? ;)
Over 40 days until launch was the official reason. They also do this with new videocards from both ATi and nVidia so it's not something new.Quote:
Originally Posted by gullf1sk
Heh, heh, heh.......No we need them.....for the time been......:) ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
Come on, send it along with 2x tubes from gorillakos :p:
Joke or not joke, but imo P4 @ 7Ghz is not so bad. There are a few ~55K scores with them which is certainly not bad at all. It is just, that most results were only SP by our japanese guys and they did not bench 3dmark that much :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
And remember there was also so powerful dothan :)
Lol... if you looked back at some of my FX51/53/55/57/60 threads... I was a big time AMD fan boy, too... whatever is faster at the time, you know?Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
Same oppinion Charlie, but, arhh, dont know the word... You moon AMD and say shi*t about them, which isnt appropiate since the crew, which you are a part of, launched a "campaign" telling ppl to behaive as far as fanboyism goes...Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie
Well, I dont think your makin' an example here mate, but hell, call Charles @ phone and have a word with him, he's the boss :)
i thought one of the picture suggest that E6700 was underclock @ 2.4 GHz?? so the benchmark wasnt running at 2.4 GHz??
Imagine how much Quad SLI is limited by CPU :rolleyes: Now take 5 GHz Conroe (which is ~ 7 GHz K8). Ownage :slap:Quote:
I agree, 3dmark 05 and 06 suck ass for benching the system as a whole.
Oh and whoever is saying that K8 will beat Conroe @ 65nm.. PURE BS. If you can use a calculator you can confirm it for yourself.
Conroe owns pure and simple. K8 got NOTHING on it @ 65nm or even at 45nm. I haven't used an Intel in my primary rig since Pentium 3 Coppermine because Intel was crap (with a notable exception of when they got ahead with Northwoods for a bit before K8 came out). Guess what? Intel is going to be ahead now and I will buying Conroe because it is -
1) Much faster (biggest jump in performance since 486->Pentium IMO)
2) Cheaper
3) Lower power consumption
4) Overclocking potential is crazy
5) WTF else do you need?
5) WTF else do you need? Just a board and a chip. LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by idiotec
I think both. He clocked some Conroe scores at 2.7Ghz and some at 2.4Ghz. I also saw him compare SPI times with clock speeds of 1.7Ghz.
A Conroe at 1.7Ghz = 29.625 1M Super PI
AMD FX-62 at 3Ghz = 29.828 1M Super PI
So you can see the difference of the clock for equal scores. :)
I don't think everything will scale this way but it sure is impressive. :clap:
See it here http://www.coolaler.com/modules/news...hp?storyid=470
thats when you keep overclocking mind :)Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
99.9% from pc owners dont overclock their cpu mate
if amd crancks up the speed it will be a tie
at stock i think
nice work and comparison, we know that conroe owns 32bit en single thread due to its large fast cache. can you run a comparison of cinebench in 64bit? i know its a lot of work
you will see what i mean, calculated some test i've seen and for now the difference i performance proffit is really owned by amd
conroe + 17-18% performance
k8 +31-38% performance
there goes the future
Link to results, or just speculation?
Why ? You simply assume AMD will pull a 3.4GHz DC out of its basement just like that ?Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
Frankly I would be surprised if they will match the 90nm speed in the 1st few months of 2007 until yields ramp up and the process matures.
First of all even with less scaling factor Conroe will beat AMD on 64 bit clock-to-clock:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=101497
FX-62 3GHz
1 CPU 422*1.31 = 553
Conroe 2.7GHz
1 CPU 469*1.18 = 553
The second thing is scaling factor which depends on the used aplication. For example context C4D Shading (form Cinebench 2003) (32bit->64bit):
K8 +3-4%
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...46&postcount=1
Conroe +17-18%
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...83&postcount=1
Have you seen swordfish??? - Well, when the hacker got 1 min to get into pentagon, he gets a special service... - Anyhow, THAT I need WHILE benching the gear :DQuote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
I wouold like to see a cinebench cpu render test comparison when these two cpus are at their max air cooling oc
Quote:
Originally Posted by kl0012
ehh nice try, calculate again thast 30% not 3%...:cool:
and the other benches, thats 32 bit, yes conroe has better clock performance... try this again on 64bit
Where exactly I did be wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx