Conroe: The truth?

http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04...ng-busted.html

Quote:

---

However, once you go over the 4MB limit, Conroe is slower than Athlon 64 at the same clock. Both the Cryptography and STREM tests use a lot more than 4MB, larger than Conroe's 4MB cache, and Conroe immediately falls below Athlon 64 on the performance curve.

---

Just as I predicted.. the measly 1066FSB becomes a huge bottleneck.
His point about cache thrashing makes sense as well.

Gamers probably won't notice much of a performance hit since most games are still single threaded, and unless you're running SLI or CF, the FSB doesn't become too much of a bottleneck. BUT... once multithreaded games come out + 2x 16x PCIe mobos and R600 CF or G80 SLI, the FSB will become a MAJOR bottleneck. Imagine the Quad Core Intel CPU coming out next year.... yikes.

When is Intel going to switch to an on die memory controller?? :rolleyes:

Can we say :woot:, because non of the next generation offering is a huge leap from the current gen. Good for people who just bought their comp.

lol, that dude is known to shout out bulls hit....

Please completely disregard anything he says... I'm a big AMD fan, but this is just fanboy bulls hit...

Not to say I don't agree with the old FSB technique to be a major bottleneck, also it is responsible for very hot northbridges which isn't something you want. Intel should switch to a more serial technique like HyperTransport.

He's claiming Conroe can't run 64 bit windows..... :X

But but, I so want conroe to be no better than my X2.

Honestly Conroe has a few more flaws than that.. :p:

Quote:

---

Sharikou, Ph. D said...

First, anything done at IDF was a setup by Intel cowards.

---

Mmmm sounds unbiased to me!

Quote:

---

Sharikou, Ph. D said...

I read some comments saying the 4MB cache is not a gimmick but can be a real boost for performance in some cases. In some sense, that's true, if you are running something like Super Pi 1M for fun.

---

So I suppose that explains the terrible results obtained with the Celeron-M and it's mighty 1MB cache.

Oh and the "measly 1066MHz FSB" is a 1333MHz FSB. It would be better if it wasn't an FSB for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by :banana::banana::banana:in

Mmmm sounds unbiased to me!


So I suppose that explains the terrible results obtained with the Celeron-M and it's mighty 1MB cache.

Oh and the "measly 1066MHz FSB" is a 1333MHz FSB. It would be better if it wasn't an FSB for sure.

---

Well he does have a point in that Intel was anal about not sending a box for Anandtech to do independant tests.... If conroe was bulletproof, what are they afraid of?

The 1333Mhz FSB is only available on the Conroe XE CPUs, and even if it was run on a 2Ghz FSB, there will still be at least a 20-25% increase in memory latency compared to the on die approach, there is NO getting around that.

Don't get me wrong, Conroe will whip AMD's ass in almost all gaming benches when it comes out. It's the aging Netburst FSB (need I remind you that it's been around since the FIRST Pentium4?) that I'm worried about especially once SMP games + quad cores come out.

Basically, these benchmarks were able to expose the weakness of the FSB bottleneck whereas most current gaming benches probably won't.

Well, after everybody saw the brute force of Conroe CPU, people are trying to find it weaknesses. I agree that HT is better when it comes to four cores, but I still don't understand, why people are complaining for dualcores. HT doesn't bring a huge increase in bandwich against FSB, but lower latencies. Just think a little, bandwich isn't the real problem for todays procesors. With a dual channel controller, you have almost 3000MB read and over 1000MB write speed per core. 3000Mb means almost 400 milions 64bits longint variables or alomst 300 milions 10bytes reals. The CPU has also to execute jump and compare instructions, and 300mil floating point multiplication/division is too much event for the fastest which will be released this year. And remember, 80% or more bought AMD 64 for gaming. If scores will be the same in July, those people will buy Conroe, nomatter the better performance in ScienceMark.

What currently needs more than the 4mb anyway. Sure if your running stress test designed to fill out the cache then you have problems but 4mb is a BIG cache and I don't forsee many problems at the moment. Saying that in the future it will not perform as well makes perfect sense. That happens to every processor when the next gen comes out.

This is called pure "hateration". Looks like the fanboys are already into mega spin mode. Just so sad... yet amusing.

Good god. I started reading some of his other articles, I had to restrain myself from punching my laptop in the face.

This guy is a babbling idiot.

Jup, as I said, this guy is known to shout out bulls hit....

But honestly, come on. I seen the numbers.. conroe isn't THAT much faster than an FX-60 for example. I mean compare xeons to opterons, thats a big difference. Compare A64 to Conroe or AM2, they all look to be pretty much the same.

Besides if there were any real hardcore gamers, they would use high quality settings. And that means pretty much little to no CPU bottleneck just because the video card can barely keep up.

You're right, but think about marketing. In my country, if you ask most people (with a few knowledge in IT) about a gaming sistem, they will tell you to choose AMD, although a gamer with a fast video card will always play at high quality settings, where there is no difference between an Intel and an AMD cpu (both "averange" cpus). When CPU does matter, it's useless, because human eye doesn't tell the difference between 200FPS and 300FPS. With Conroe, the situation will be the same, all will tell you to choose Conroe, although there will be no diference (unless you will use CPU power to "emulate" Ageia's phisics engine in future games :p: ).

Actually a better CPU ensures slightly higher lows and although the game's not consistently CPU bottlenecked, it is always at times. A few FPS is a lot in the long run. It could make the difference between playable and unplayable gameplay, or even noticing a frame drop. Better safe than sorry, I sayeth.

Yonah/conroe/merom have proven themselves in pi, even 32m by a decent margin. However one must remember that all the top 03/05/06 scores are all amd, and IMHO getting onto "almost the first page" really means nothing.

It remains to be seen if conroe can deal with the lack of an on die memmory controller and Hypertransport bus. All of the 3dmark scores I have seen so far have been rather lackluster, things that the A64 has already acomplished.

Only time will tell.

That a heavily overclocked a64 just beats a stock midrange conroe is not something that even remotely suggests that amd will have an advnatage is 3dmark - wait until we see some overclocked conroe before you compare it with the 3.5ghz+ phase changed fx60's

But we have seen phase changed yonahs, and they are nowhere near capable of what some of the people have been doing with fx-60s and crossfire, because two of the big problems of netburst have been brought along -- memmory latency from no on die memmory controller and still using a FSB and not something like HTT.

Yonah -> conroe wont change that.

Hell, someone with x1900 Crossfire and a 3+ghz Yonah was only 600 points above Afireinside's 7800GT+170 3d05 scores! Only time will tell.

but where are the yonahcrossfire/sli motherboards? Hell even yonah motherboards are pretty scarse- and overclcking ones are pretty much non existant - their hardly an apples to apples comparison. A maxed out yonah on phase would probably beat a maxed out fx60, and conroe will be a furtherstep beyond yonah in virtually all departments, plus there won't be a cold bug...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onewingedangel

but where are the yonahcrossfire/sli motherboards?

---

The aopen i975 is retail in Japan right now.

Quote:

---

Hell even yonah motherboards are pretty scarse- and overclcking ones are pretty much non existant - their hardly an apples to apples comparison.

---

In the US mabye, but not everyone @ xs is in the USA :slap: We will get it soon. The voltmods for the Aopen board are even out! I would call that pretty apples to apples.

Quote:

---

A maxed out yonah on phase would probably beat a maxed out fx60, and

---

Oh Probably eh?

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/3969/untitled3ua.jpg

I do not think Jason agrees with you.

Quote:

---

conroe will be a furtherstep beyond yonah in virtually all departments, plus there won't be a cold bug...

---

Conroe just gets wider execution cores and a different FSB 1066 vs 667.

And you know it wont coldbug, but that isnt that large of an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kyosen

My latest results
T2600(ES)@3.1G, X1900CF@792.00~796.50/891

3DMark2001SE: 48425
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8946909

3DMark03: 39511
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4730996

3DMark05: 17578
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1946510

3DMark06: 11687
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=238228

AquaMark3: 135796

Screenshots are here:
http://www.oohashi.jp/c-board/c-boar...ne;no=4324;id=

I received ClockGen-1.0.4.4 from Franck:)
I appreciate his great work as usual:toast:
...I hope formal release in near future...

---

I dont think we've seen anywhere near the maximum potential of yonah yet, its still relatively new and motherboard are not widely avaliable wheras the 939 platform is well estabished. Give it some time and I'm sure yonah will beat fx60 - and as a desktop platform conroe will have more options avaliable.

As I posted in the other thread, this blog entry has somewhat of a point.

As "Core" is still not featuring an integrated memory controller, it will slow down more severely than AMD64 once both trash their caches.

How many applications will trash a 4 MB cache is a different question.

Unreal tournament 2007?

this guy is pathetic, plagiator. He took Victor Wang result and post it as his result.

Can you all see- that all is VictorWang number, minus two benchmark with conroe have advantage.

I said, it's a good hoax.

Sigh...:rolleyes:

First rig: Currently Top of 3DMark05 20667

AMD FX60 @ 3.707Ghz "Used Dry Ice" Can't run that 24/7
2x ATI X1900XTX SLI "890/850"

Everyone agrees this is a heavily OC system


Now we take VictorWang's setup
3DMark 05 11258

Conroe @ 2.4Ghz "STOCK"
1x 7900GTX 512MB "622/1880"

This Conroe scores more than half that of a heavily OC system due to this not being in SLI only one card is running.

Just for fun lets add another card and double the score 22516.Allready higher than the the TOP 05 AMD setup. Now it should probably score a little lower or higher "not sure" in SLI than just multiplying the score like I did by two but this setup is still on a BETA BIOS and a STOCK Conroe and for $500 cheaper than FX60 just on the chip alone:)

Conroe will be very interesting :cool:

Intel Leap Years ahead ^_________^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Sigh...:rolleyes:

First rig: Currently Top of 3DMark05 20667

AMD FX60 @ 3.707Ghz "Used Dry Ice" Can't run that 24/7
2x ATI X1900XTX SLI "890/850"

Everyone agrees this is a heavily OC system


Now we take VictorWang's setup
3DMark 05 11258

Conroe @ 2.4Ghz "STOCK"
1x 7900GTX 512MB "622/1880"

This Conroe scores more than half that of a heavily OC system due to this not being in SLI only one card is running.

Just for fun lets add another card and double the score 22516.Allready higher than the the TOP 05 AMD setup. Now it should probably score a little lower or higher "not sure" in SLI than just multiplying the score like I did by two but this setup is still on a BETA BIOS and a STOCK Conroe and for $500 cheaper than FX60 just on the chip alone:)

Conroe will be very interesting :cool:

Intel Leap Years ahead ^_________^

---

damn right:toast:

Adding a extra GFX card won't always double performance even if you do account for Ooverclocking though. We can't estimate the score from that because we have no idea where the test will actually start to become CPU bottle-necked with conroe.

The article is still BS but some of the counter arguments have just as little underlying truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Sigh...:rolleyes:

First rig: Currently Top of 3DMark05 20667

AMD FX60 @ 3.707Ghz "Used Dry Ice" Can't run that 24/7
2x ATI X1900XTX SLI "890/850"

Everyone agrees this is a heavily OC system


Now we take VictorWang's setup
3DMark 05 11258

Conroe @ 2.4Ghz "STOCK"
1x 7900GTX 512MB "622/1880"

This Conroe scores more than half that of a heavily OC system due to this not being in SLI only one card is running.

Just for fun lets add another card and double the score 22516.Allready higher than the the TOP 05 AMD setup. Now it should probably score a little lower or higher "not sure" in SLI than just multiplying the score like I did by two but this setup is still on a BETA BIOS and a STOCK Conroe and for $500 cheaper than FX60 just on the chip alone:)

Conroe will be very interesting :cool:

Intel Leap Years ahead ^_________^

---

Thats pretty crappy reasoning. A stock x1900XTX and a stock FX-60 gets about 11.7k in 3dmark05. And we can see that a heavily OCed FX-60 gets 17k with a heavily overclocked x1900xtx.. Your comparison makes no sense to me at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahmad

Thats pretty crappy reasoning. A stock x1900XTX and a stock FX-60 gets about 11.7k in 3dmark05. And we can see that a heavily OCed FX-60 gets 17k with a heavily overclocked x1900xtx.. Your comparison makes no sense to me at all.

---

Makes sense to me and the dude who posted after me ;)

And how can u justify the price difference ^__^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

But we have seen phase changed yonahs, and they are nowhere near capable of what some of the people have been doing with fx-60s and crossfire, because two of the big problems of netburst have been brought along -- memmory latency from no on die memmory controller and still using a FSB and not something like HTT.

Yonah -> conroe wont change that.

Hell, someone with x1900 Crossfire and a 3+ghz Yonah was only 600 points above Afireinside's 7800GT+170 3d05 scores! Only time will tell.

---

well there arent crossifre yonah boards and the only yonah compatilbe board out has a limit of a 266 FSB and many of them have trouble going over 250 FSB.

certainly there are weaknesses of core architecture, jusst as amd has its weaknesses, but the fact that a stock cpu competes with overclocked FX's at all makes it pretty hard to deny that this is a solid cpu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Makes sense to me and the dude who posted after me ;)

And how can u justify the price difference ^__^

---

Hehe, no it doesnt, there are lots of variables to consider, nice try though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Makes sense to me and the dude who posted after me ;)

And how can u justify the price difference ^__^

---

i have to agree with Ahmad.
when putting 2 cards in SLi or Crossifre the perf gain isnt 1+1=2
ATi and Nvidia wish it would.
Also due to the unknown CPU bottlneck with a Conroe its impossible to say How conroe will react or SLI/crossfire.

and simply cause the person that posts below you agrees with you doesnt make it right.
i think u should check the orb a lil before saying stuff like that.

and your compairing the price of a FX60 that i can buy with the price of a CPu that i cant buy?
ofcourse the FX60 costs a premium atm, it has no real compeition and people are willing to pay that price at this moment.
dont say Conroe will rape the FX60 (as we al know it will) but ur compairing a CPu wich already exists for a while with a thing i cant buy in a store.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starscream

i have to agree with Ahmad.
when putting 2 cards in SLi or Crossifre the perf gain isnt 1+1=2
ATi and Nvidia wish it would.
Also due to the unknown CPU bottlneck with a Conroe its impossible to say How conroe will react or SLI/crossfire.

and simply cause the person that posts below you agrees with you doesnt make it right.
i think u should check the orb a lil before saying stuff like that.

and your compairing the price of a FX60 that i can buy with the price of a CPu that i cant buy?
ofcourse the FX60 costs a premium atm, it has no real compeition and people are willing to pay that price at this moment.
dont say Conroe will rape the FX60 (as we al know it will) but ur compairing a CPu wich already exists for a while with a thing i cant buy ina sotre.

---

Oh okey lets not test the Conroe against the latest AMD have :) Lets leave it..then hear how people will complain how Intels latest Conroe has no reviews out so it must be having problems, Doesnt perform well having yield problems etc and so on.


In my post I stated this:

Quote:

---

Now it should probably score a little lower or higher "not sure" in SLI than just multiplying the score like I did by two but this setup is still on a BETA BIOS and a STOCK Conroe and for $500 cheaper than FX60 just on the chip alone

---

So everyone saying it might this it might that..when I allready suggested IT MIGHT..is pretty pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Oh okey lets not test the Conroe against the latest AMD have :) Lets leave it..then hear how people will complain how Intels latest Conroe has no reviews out so it must be having problems, Doesnt perform well having yield problems etc and so on.


In my post I stated this:



So everyone saying it might this it might that..when I allready suggested IT MIGHT..is pretty pointless.

---

Then as your post has "it might" there is no relevance at all to your post and means it cant be "right" as you already sugested.

Ownd in your own game :cool: .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragex

Then as your post has "it might" there is no relevance at all to your post and means it cant be "right" as you already sugested.

Ownd in your own game :cool: .

---

that doesnt change the fact that he is right... the prices set for conroe are lower then an FX-60 and the cpu is much faster... obviously it isnt available yet, but thats why this thread is in a news forum.

If you don't think it's faster then im not sure what to say... a 2.4 ghz conroe has been shown outperforming an FX-60 in pretty much every bench we can think of. from the looks of it it takes about a 2.7-2.8ghz X2 to be even with the 2.4ghz conroe.

Here is a very very simple Idea.
Make no judgements on it, until you can actually BUY ONE.
Some goes for AM2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragex

Then as your post has "it might" there is no relevance at all to your post and means it cant be "right" as you already sugested.

Ownd in your own game :cool: .

---

So we are not even allowed an opinion or can assume anymore...Whats this world coming too :)

It can or cant be right...Not just it cant ;) as u are suggesting.

Tsk Tsk Tsk We will all have the truth in a couple of months.

Man its funny how SOME ppl i wont name call get all hiper when ur suggesting something... Like what they say is what matters and is right.. :stick:


My post I made is a logic conclusion from if a Conroe scores with a Single card that well ON STOCK..not FX60 3.7Ghz OC in to heaven with Dry Ice then you MIGHT see the Conroe creaming it...

We havent even seen the Conroe's OC potential and everyone in here is allready scrapping the idea...BAH it cant OC very well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

Here is a very very simple Idea.
Make no judgements on it, until you can actually BUY ONE.
Some goes for AM2

---

That would be Ideal..but also a very boring Forum :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revv23

well there arent crossifre yonah boards and the only yonah compatilbe board out has a limit of a 266 FSB and many of them have trouble going over 250 FSB.

certainly there are weaknesses of core architecture, jusst as amd has its weaknesses, but the fact that a stock cpu competes with overclocked FX's at all makes it pretty hard to deny that this is a solid cpu.

---

The Aopen i975xa-YDG is crossfire compatible, and it is a modders board. Random people will pick it up and have that 266 fsb problem, but I dobut people like Hipro or キョセン(Kyosen) will sit down and accept that.

Yonah/Merom/Conroe will be great CPUs, but Only time will tell if they can eventually take the Records that AMD has, and if the speedbump known as AM2 can hold them off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Sigh...:rolleyes:

First rig: Currently Top of 3DMark05 20667

AMD FX60 @ 3.707Ghz "Used Dry Ice" Can't run that 24/7
2x ATI X1900XTX SLI "890/850"

Everyone agrees this is a heavily OC system

---

No crap its an overclocked system. Also, who cares if it runs 24-7? Is this www.dell.com?

Quote:

---

Now we take VictorWang's setup
3DMark 05 11258

Conroe @ 2.4Ghz "STOCK"
1x 7900GTX 512MB "622/1880"

---

Now lets look @ AMD from some random guy:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1915695
2.4ghz X2
1x 7900GTX 512MB "700/1800"
3DMark 05 11242

Im just wrong, Conroe WRECKS AMD!

He is even using an A8N SLI/2gb DDR400!

Quote:

---

This Conroe scores more than half that of a heavily OC system due to this not being in SLI only one card is running.

Just for fun lets add another card and double the score 22516.Allready higher than the the TOP 05 AMD setup. Now it should probably score a little lower or higher "not sure" in SLI than just multiplying the score like I did by two but this setup is still on a BETA BIOS and a STOCK Conroe and for $500 cheaper than FX60 just on the chip alone:)

Conroe will be very interesting :cool:

Intel Leap Years ahead ^_________^

---

You cant double the score for SLI?? LOL?

Look, Yonah/Merom/Conroe are decent, matter of fact they are very fast @ PI, but they are just average with a normal A64 dual core for 3dmark 03-06.

My point is make your own conclusions, and dont succomb to overhyped vaporware, or your a tool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

The Aopen i975xa-YDG is crossfire compatible, and it is a modders board. Random people will pick it up and have that 266 fsb problem, but I dobut people like Hipro or キョセン(Kyosen) will sit down and accept that.

Yonah/Merom/Conroe will be great CPUs, but Only time will tell if they can eventually take the Records that AMD has, and if the speedbump known as AM2 can hold them off.



No crap its an overclocked system. Also, who cares if it runs 24-7? Is this www.dell.com?







Now lets look @ AMD from some random guy:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1915695
2.4ghz X2
1x 7900GTX 512MB "700/1800"
3DMark 05 11242

Im just wrong, Conroe WRECKS AMD!

He is even using an A8N SLI/2gb DDR400!



You cant double the score for SLI?? LOL?

Look, Yonah/Merom/Conroe are decent, matter of fact they are very fast @ PI, but they are just average with a normal A64 dual core for 3dmark 03-06.

My point is make your own conclusions, and dont succomb to overhyped vaporware, or your a tool.

---

Im sorry but we have some people who just cant seem to READ !

I said CANT RUN 24/7 Not CAN !

Also I said and I said this twice... It MIGHT !!! BE MORE OR LESS than what I suggested with the doubling the numbers !! FFS....

Plz stop this :banana::banana::banana::banana:e NOW !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

Quote:

---

Now we take VictorWang's setup
3DMark 05 11258

Conroe @ 2.4Ghz "STOCK"
1x 7900GTX 512MB "622/1880"

---

Now lets look @ AMD from some random guy:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1915695
2.4ghz X2
1x 7900GTX 512MB "700/1800"
3DMark 05 11242

Im just wrong, Conroe WRECKS AMD!

He is even using an A8N SLI/2gb DDR400!

---

Beautifully written dude..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Sigh...:rolleyes:

First rig: Currently Top of 3DMark05 20667

AMD FX60 @ 3.707Ghz "Used Dry Ice" Can't run that 24/7
2x ATI X1900XTX SLI "890/850"

Everyone agrees this is a heavily OC system


Now we take VictorWang's setup
3DMark 05 11258

Conroe @ 2.4Ghz "STOCK"
1x 7900GTX 512MB "622/1880"

This Conroe scores more than half that of a heavily OC system due to this not being in SLI only one card is running.

Just for fun lets add another card and double the score 22516.Allready higher than the the TOP 05 AMD setup. Now it should probably score a little lower or higher "not sure" in SLI than just multiplying the score like I did by two but this setup is still on a BETA BIOS and a STOCK Conroe and for $500 cheaper than FX60 just on the chip alone:)

Conroe will be very interesting :cool:

Intel Leap Years ahead ^_________^

---

:toast:

" need I remind you that it's been around since the FIRST Pentium4?) " lol speaking of old things .... p6 architecture is from p.pro and pentium II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Im sorry but we have some people who just cant seem to READ !

I said CANT RUN 24/7 Not CAN !

Also I said and I said this twice... It MIGHT !!! BE MORE OR LESS than what I suggested with the doubling the numbers !! FFS....

Plz stop this :banana::banana::banana::banana:e NOW !

---

Arguing about what might be is useless. You can have your opinion no problem but dont expect others to take your word for it and adopt the same thinking.

nn_step just said for you to wait for the final results becouse from all your post it can be said that your really hooked on Conroe but yet none has really had it. With your emotions tied to what your saying all your gonna start is a flame war and none wants that.

The guy who posted those scores made a valid point backed up by evidence there is nothing more to it.

As far as SLI/Crossfire go you are just rushing ahead of your self you need to slow down. No setup either SLI or Crossfire has ever had a 100% performance boost over a single card maybe 80% at best so doubling that score is not the way to go.


I tell you one thing i am glad that Intel has a proper contender or it will have later on in the year becouse that will make AMD even more competetive and in the end us the customers benfit.

So the point being you can argue which is fastest all you want but what is really important here is that Intel will get back on its feet, in a way, and that will lower the prices of all CPU's plus speed up the development of new ones.

The saying "It takes two to tango" kind of fits nicley here as withouth competition in a market the company's will just stop doing thier work and just chuck out anything that they can bother to build. Just look at Creative and thier cards, the hardware is good but the drivers are the worst i have ever seen.

Indeed fhpchris great post.:toast:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

Here is a very very simple Idea.
Make no judgements on it, until you can actually BUY ONE.
Some goes for AM2

---

Making judgements about unavailable stuff is a part of digging hardware :toast:

Who will own the ORB 2H06 in you view?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw

Making judgements about unavailable stuff is a part of digging hardware :toast:

Who will own the ORB 2H06 in you view?

---

My mom will, she's certifiably leet!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

Now lets look @ AMD from some random guy:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1915695
2.4ghz X2
1x 7900GTX 512MB "700/1800"
3DMark 05 11242

---

Taking projects at random can go both ways
2.6ghz x2, 7900gxt yet only 10900 3dmarks! So its less than the conroe at 200mhz faster!
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1939453

Im not saying mine is better than yours, but comparing 2 completly different systems and claiming one part of it is responsible for better/worse score is without any real value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ailleur

Taking projects at random can go both ways 2.6ghz x2, 7900gxt yet only 10900 3dmarks! So its less than the conroe at 200mhz faster! http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1939453 Im not saying mine is better than yours, but comparing 2 completly different systems and claiming one part of it is responsible for better/worse score is without any real value.

---

Thanks guys! The score you linked could be lower because of ram or other common operating system tweaks -- either way, your looking at ~300 or less points, which just is nothing. The intresting thing is that the Yonah Celerons with 1mb of L2 cache seem almost just as fast as the 90nm AMD stuff, if not just a little faster(in PI). It would be intresting to see M2 use Z-Ram and have a similar cache. Either way, it will be intresting to see what happens in 2007.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

and just what is making you think scores will scale 100% :slapass:

---

Exactly, CF/SLi doesn't scale 100% on ANY platform...
In 3dmark05, it only 25-35%.... That's it. Single card of 11k means sli/cf score of about 13-14k.

Conroe: The Truth?

no no, i think:

Conroe: Biased Speculation that Shouldn't be Taken Seriously

:p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

and just what is making you think scores will scale 100% :slapass:

---

Of course it won't, but in his comparison you should also take into consideration the gain from overclocking a Conroe as opposed to running it at stock 2.4GHz. That would obviously give it another boost in addition to the normal xx % you get from SLI/Crossfire. It still may not end up being 100%, but my point is there's the CPU overclocking factor too.

I think ppl in here forgot one very basic thing. Let's forget about the numbers for now and just think some very basic thoughts and forget who will own who.

This is competition, and in competition it's only natural for the competitors to swap the performance crown every now and then. A company not ever being able to take the performance crown is a failing company imo. Let's say Conroe might win specific 20 random software benchmark battles in this 65nm vs 90nm battle which would only be natural. It's about time we see such changes. Now in 2007 when AMD launches their own 65nm chips perhaps we see the slight performance favor for the AMD chips and who knows what Intel will counter with then. I'm only saying one company can't always have the lead or there will be no competitors. Intel might have the lead for 6months, AMD might have the lead the 6months after that etc, it always keeps changing but fanboys usually don't tolerate this very well. :rolleyes:

Other than that, a tough competition is always good, forcing the developers to make even more radical changes and improvements in their chips to take back the lead. Thus, we'll see even bigger performance improvements.

There's one thing I don't really like about Intel at this point tho and it's their marketing strategy, other than that I have no problems with neither of them.

This fanboyism really sux tho. :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD

I think ppl in here forgot one very basic thing. Let's forget about the numbers for now and just think some very basic thoughts and forget who will own who.

This is competition, and in competition it's only natural for the competitors to swap the performance crown every now and then. A company not ever being able to take the performance crown is a failing company imo. Let's say Conroe might win specific 20 random software benchmark battles in this 65nm vs 90nm battle which would only be natural. It's about time we see such changes. Now in 2007 when AMD launches their own 65nm chips perhaps we see the slight performance favor for the AMD chips and who knows what Intel will counter with then. I'm only saying one company can't always have the lead or there will be no competitors. Intel might have the lead for 6months, AMD might have the lead the 6months after that etc, it always keeps changing but fanboys usually don't tolerate this very well. :rolleyes:

Other than that, a tough competition is always good, forcing the developers to make even more radical changes and improvements in their chips to take back the lead. Thus, we'll see even bigger performance improvements.

There's one thing I don't really like about Intel at this point tho and it's their marketing strategy, other than that I have no problems with neither of them.

This fanboyism really sux tho. :p:

---

QFT... Without competition, you just get speedbumps every year without any progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

and just what is making you think scores will scale 100% :slapass:

---

Get Glasses :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

DiLTecH:
Exactly, CF/SLi doesn't scale 100% on ANY platform...
In 3dmark05, it only 25-35%.... That's it. Single card of 11k means sli/cf score of about 13-14k.

---

You havent taken into account overclocking. I was not talking about stock systems. If with adding a extra card will add only 35% in 3Dmark05 then you wont be able to hit 20667 in 3DMARK 05.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by widman

this guy is pathetic, plagiator. He took Victor Wang result and post it as his result.

Can you all see- that all is VictorWang number, minus two benchmark with conroe have advantage.

I said, it's a good hoax.

---

Well put.
No one seems to care that the guy didnt add the extra two benchmarks..But they seem to care when I am suggesting something with it MIGHT score higher or lower..:rolleyes:


ADDITIONAL COMMENT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revv23

that doesnt change the fact that he is right... the prices set for conroe are lower then an FX-60 and the cpu is much faster... obviously it isnt available yet, but thats why this thread is in a news forum.

If you don't think it's faster then im not sure what to say... a 2.4 ghz conroe has been shown outperforming an FX-60 in pretty much every bench we can think of. from the looks of it it takes about a 2.7-2.8ghz X2 to be even with the 2.4ghz conroe.

---

Thx you seem to understand.

CARFAX got in contact with one of the sciencemark guyz. He had this to say.

Quote:

---

In any case, I see this as a *strong* showing for Conroe, not a weak one as the blogger claims. In the benchmarks that matter (BLAS, MolDyn, Primordia) Conroe is at least equal to if not exceeding an Athlon at the same clock speed. The fact that in 32-bit mode, an Athlon64 clocked 400 mhz higher cannot exceed Conroe's performance gap is telling

---

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=901

Everyone is saying that Conroe will be great, and we get benches like PI to show that, but no one is thinking that it Might be worse in alot of others -- Including 3d03/05/06, once that 4mb cache is trashed, it is on many occasions slower than a X2, as I have shown.

No one is talking saying that that 2.4ghz X2 with a identical video card can pull similar numbers, or damn near identical numbers -- with one of the slowest S939 boards and a 2gb kit, that is prolly running @ 2T. (A8N sli 1T issues)

I am here to say that these stupid FX-60 comparisons are not valid -- because in some benchmarks a simple dual core A64 will be just as fast at the same clockspeed. Many people on these forums will also be saying that "this 299$ 3800+ beats stock Conroe this or that" at some 3d applications.

Do you not understand that nearly every single 03/05/06 score in the top 10 are all AMD for a reason? PI =/= 3D. I dont think it is impressive that a 65nm DDR2 part can just Tie a DDR1/90nm part.

Yes, in benchmarks like Pi, that do not trash the cache, it is much faster than a A64, but in 3D it just isnt.:fact:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahmad

But honestly, come on. I seen the numbers.. conroe isn't THAT much faster than an FX-60 for example.

---

well it cost about 75% less. :slap:

Before you guys go bantering on about WR, and stuff. You realize, that Conroe is not even in public hands, and we do not even have proper support, or knowledge of steppings yet. While you boast about AMD's WR that the S939 platform has been in retail market 1-2 years, and 6+months for the FX-60.

Until Conroe is released, and for atleast 2-6 months for enthusiasts to gain any knowledge, you won't see any WR, that's for sure.

Anyways, that guy has banters the best BS I've ever seen. Biased BS are certainly entertaining! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

Yes, in benchmarks like Pi, that do not trash the cache, it is much faster than a A64, but in 3D it just isnt.:fact:

---

Actually I tend to disagree with you on that. When looking at cpu performance in 3dmark the best tests are 2001 car and lobby and 03 GT1, comparing Kyosen's Yonah to Mickey Mouse aka Jasons FX-60 we have

(Jason scores first)

car low 673v587
car high 205v174

lobby low 558v505
lobby high 250v225

03 GT1 663v641

Apart from car low that is a maxium of 10% or so in the FX60's favour and considering the Yonah is a mobile chip, is only watercooled and on a non enthusiast motherboard that is not too shabby result. And of course memrom and Conroe are faster. I believe FUGGER has crossfire setup as well as conroe so when all these teething problems with boards and BIOS's are sorted out maybe we will be able to see more clearly. It's looking as if Yonah at least will clock as high as Fx-60 so you have to assume Conroe and memrom will clock as least as high and maybe more so with their netburst/PIII melded new architecture.

I get the feeling this 4mb cache thrashing thing is more a symptom of clutching at straws by people wanting something to be so ( ie FUD ). We shall see though as is said by most rational folk !

Regards

Andy

Regards
Andy

conroe cpus will be faster than AMD cpus for most things when it is released. I think you can synthesize all the data available now and pretty easily come to that conclusion.

What concerns me is the platforms they will release it on. If you're concerned about 3d and gaming then you better hope there are some motherboards much better than Intel's P4 lineup. Intel and nvidia and ATI all dropped the ball on making dual graphics boards that scaled as nicely as AMD platforms. I dont know why but they did... you just cant beat s939 for SLI and CF, thats why all the top scores in any modern 3d benchmark (2001 is obviously excluded here) have been AMD for so long not because of the cpu silicon. Think about it this way: You could have the best clocking FX-60 and get it up to 4ghz and set some records but once a new graphics board comes out, you will be beaten by systems running cpus with much much much lower clocks. For this reason when building a new system i always prioritize funds for video hardware and usually get a lower clocked cpu, i think many of you feel this way too--I dont see any benefit in windows from newer cpus unless you're really concerned about that extra 5 minutes it takes you to encode a DiVX movie once a year. Why more people aren't yelling and screaming about the conroe platform I dont know.

There is no doubt that Conroe will offer a substantial performance increase over the the 1st generation AM2 A64's. Probably in the order of 15-20% clock for clock. This is especially true for single threaded applications that are cache hungry or light multi-tasking.

However it does seem to me that the more heavily one multitasks the less of an advantage the Conroe will have over the A64.

Imagine a scenerio where 1 plays Oblivion on high settings, and has some heavy distributed projects running at the same time. Will Conroe hold as big an advantage? To my (admittedly little) knowledge probably not. As that (Biased) article pointed out, the Conroe is less efficient under very heavy (cache dependent) workloads. I'm not sure what the author did, nor am I sure how Sciencemark works but intuitively I suspect that if you ran two instances of many of those tests, the A64 will come out looking better.

For the Purposes of members here at XS Conroe will be THE cpu to have, no doubt about it it will hammer the AM2 A64.

However as 'bigger and better' applications get developed, and a greater amount of multi-threading takes place the advantange Conroe has will at the very least be substantially diminished. People are starting to use their PC's differently (alot more multitasking of CPU intenisve programs) and most benchmarks we use here don't take that into acoount.

What we can take away from this is that the A64 is still a better design for the future then even 'Core'. Once Quad-Core's come out I suspect that even an A64 based on todays tech. will do very well against its Intel equivalent. I'm not taking into account K8L. For the AM2 doubters out there Quad-Cores is where AM2 platform will truly make a sense as a platform over 939.

For now Intel looks like it will dominate quite substantially the typical workloads of the current market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

What we can take away from this is that the A64 is still a better design for the future then even 'Core'. Once Quad-Core's come out I suspect that even an A64 based on todays tech. will do very well against its Intel equivalent. I'm not taking into account K8L. For the AM2 doubters out there Quad-Cores is where AM2 platform will truly make a sense as a platform over 939.

For now Intel looks like it will dominate quite substantially the typical workloads of the current market.

---

Well said. I believe this will hold true until Intel rids itself of the FSB and moves to an on die memory controller.

And when quad core time comes around, I think Intel will have two choices.

1. Completely revamp the way cores talk to eachother (not using the FSB as they do now)
2. On die memory controller and crossbar switch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxxxRacer

Well said. I believe this will hold true until Intel rids itself of the FSB and moves to an on die memory controller.

And when quad core time comes around, I think Intel will have two choices.

1. Completely revamp the way cores talk to eachother (not using the FSB as they do now)
2. On die memory controller and crossbar switch.

---

Thats what CSI will fix, though it is already late and stated for 2007
Arstechnica article here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ailleur

Thats what CSI will fix, though it is already late and stated for 2007
Arstechnica article here

---

They cancelled that dude :rolleyes: they needed the extra numbers on Conroe...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

They cancelled that dude :rolleyes: they needed the extra numbers on Conroe...

---

I thought that CSI was just delayed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

I thought that CSI was just delayed?

---

I am just going by what I hear
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30710

Everyone is all going on about how FX60 is much more expensive than Conroe. For all you know... the price can still decrease...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shadowing

Everyone is all going on about how FX60 is much more expensive than Conroe. For all you know... the price can still decrease...

---

drop by 600 dollars? :stick: conroe is going to be better then most of amd for now. it will switch back and forth, but for now, amd fanboys need to realize they arent on top anymore. 07 will be a different story, and quite possibly different results. LET IT GO. i swear, reading posts by that fxx chris guy makes me want to stab myself in the eye.

The truth is Conroe will spank until AM2 is revised in 2007.

Any price comparisation between todays A64 and tomorrows CD is just stupid. And yeah, we've seen the prices for both upcoming AM2 and CD, but remember that AM2 will show up first which makes them not comparable, besides any of the manufacturers can change the prices whenever they want. It's very possible that AMD will/must slash the prices in Q3, but telling us that now would be just plain suicide.