363x8=2.903Ghz ambiant air
http://fugger.netfirms.com/pifaster.JPG
http://fugger.netfirms.com/175.jpg
Printable View
363x8=2.903Ghz ambiant air
http://fugger.netfirms.com/pifaster.JPG
http://fugger.netfirms.com/175.jpg
hahaha nice record :)
Hahaha, nice record there man.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but AMD is still faster than that:
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL256.../136368934.jpg
But Intel's already on top.
http://www.thelab.gr/images/Hipro5/D..._28.91_png.png
Amazing for the speed though,.
Doh, I should have checked here more instead of relying on hexus database.
conroe can eat anything clock per clock
now days its not about intel vs amd or conroe vs am2
its all about Conroe vs Yonah vs Dothan vs Merom
Wise wordsQuote:
Originally Posted by PkG.1337
was reading threw the amd thread to see what everyones plans were for AM2 and all...Everyone there's so uptight...anyone mentions anything about intel and boom they try and cut your balls off and frame them.
Heh, slick edits there Fugger. 2.9 GHz sounds great. Looks like its gonna be more of a Conroe vs. Conroe thing at this rate. :D
Here is Cal930's just 30.00s by Yonah@3.6G:)
So Conroe is faster about 10% @ same clock than Yonah concerning to Hexus PiFast,
though each multiplier and FSB is not different at all;)
<img src="http://cal930.sakura.ne.jp/cgi-bin/c-board/file/hexus_pifastjust30.png">
can we get some 3d scores fugger? or is there still a problem with the pci-x slot
33s on air pifast is very good going (assuming it is still air).
Ignoring the FSB / memory speed timings for the moment ( which may or may not be trivial ) my FX-55 on air at 3Ghz would just squeeze into 39s, so 3Ghz on air is say
FX-55 = 39, Yonah = 36s , Conroe = 33s
so Conroe is 20% faster than AMD FX clock for clock in a single threaded benchmarking application such as this. Pifast is good indication of 3dmark performance in my view, more so than Super_pi and this with freecableguys early 3dmark benches seems to indicate I think that the "Conroe is just for benches, AMD is for games" comments possibly to be premature.
Regards
Andy
ok how do i get my hands on one of these conroe chips
You wait.......Quote:
Originally Posted by b0bd0le
good things come to those who wait...:D :D :D
I didnt know I had a PCI-X slot...
No problems with 3D
Yes this is on air.
is it possible to get a clean answer..?
Fugger/FCG:
What mobo are you using?
I am sure he isnt avoiding it! He prolly just cant say:)Quote:
Originally Posted by dpa
Clean enough for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
It is the only board that supports Conroe at the moment
(There was that Asrock agp+ddr1 junk but I don't count it)
as long as the calculation fits in his huge cache.....Quote:
Originally Posted by PkG.1337
Preslers cache is just as big and yet its IPC isn't even close, clearly a large cache is not all thats responsible to Conroes performance.
Only if SuperPi is the only application on your computer, it is trueQuote:
Originally Posted by PkG.1337
A 2.6Ghz Conroe vs 4Ghz FX57? Hardly a fair comparison is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
Although to be honest, if its just barely slower than a 4Ghz FX57 at 2.6Ghz - then I'm totally sold.
EDIT: Oops, just realised thats a 2.9Ghz overclocked Conroe.
Well, AMD isn't coming up with a new arch for a good time yet, so that is fully 'compareisable'. And fastest proc from AMD this year will be, what, a AMD FX62 - Dual Core 2,8Ghz?Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
So, it's a reasonable comparison ;)
Do you got anything else we can compare with :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salvador
You could compare it against an AM2 if AM2 wasn't just S939 with DDR2 ;)
A fanboy on another forum I frequent basically said "Conroe isn't all that, one of those Tyan servers with 100 million CPUs eats it alive at SuperPI".Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor_Sniper
Errr yeah, ok. When people resort to that sort of logic in arguments you know Conroe is the killer CPU. :)
SuperPI isn't SMP is it?
(btw, Fugger, check your PMs)
Updated first post with cpuid and pi.
wow, killer FSB =)
Nice jobs Fugger and FCG. Show us some more benchies now. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Why not use the highest multi with that FSB FCG? Maybe a vmod is in order?:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
That is not true on the XS AMD forum. We know AM2 = Teh SuKc!Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulGG
Many fellow XS AMD people are looking forward to Conroe.... Myself included.
Yeah, Most of them stand buy there selected brands and try to make the most of it though. Because they have faith in them (As most intel users have in the past) But they've had the performance crown so long they feel as if they can't be beaten...So to those who I was addressing. I'm not a fan of either it's about 50/50 with me I own and X2 sys and two PD's on the way for 24/7 workstations
Two Conroes with high FSB :woot: . Conroe so far look good.
I dunno about you, but that looks bad to me, in order to raise FSB he has to lower mulitplier, that looks to me like its not a FSB issue, but a chip issue, so that would be bad if they can only top off at less than 3G, seems like Conroe aint a very good overclocker after all...:(
I didn't looked at it that way, i was refering to Yonah's FSB wall (or it's mobo related). You have point of concern there, on the other hand Fugger has no probs 8x 363 so he didn't lower his MP. We'll just have to wait for more results :).
up that voltage! lets see what these chips can really do
Be patient....more voltage and cooling will come with time.
Just think of it this way: when they can, they will.
I keep on seeing this... If it was true then why is the performance of the celeron mobile version so good at SP1, with 'only' 1MB L2 cache?Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
I don't think that it is worthwhile to expect large leap in the frequency from the ES of revision A0. Revision B0 was already tested on one of the Russian sites. Unfortunately the matherboard which was used in the test has no freq changing options in the BIOS.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownTown
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=89133
oh, don't get me wrong, I understand these are ES chips, i'm just saying that they do not seem capable of speeds that many here hope they will be, as of now all we have to go on is rev. A0 chips, so until B0 revisions are tested in overclocking we cannot assume anything other than what we have so far.
Having said that though, the 2.13 4MB chips that these guys have would seem to me to be indicitive that early revisions were not going very high since the 4MB chips are supposed to be higher clocked to begin with, this leads be to beleive that future revisions will very likely overclock better, but as previously stated, so far this has not been proven.
Waiting is the hardest part. Can we have any details of what the temps of Conroe are running at please?
@Fugger
check your pms plz
lookin good fugger, can't wait to see what you can do with fully supported hardware :D
I would like to hear the BAD side of Conroe at this point???
FCG and Fuggar ???
poor voltage options ??
poor OCing ???
cold bug ???
Granted these are not final production chips and mobos but what are the down sides at this point Intel and mobo manufactures need to improve upon??
*subscribed*
/me patiently waits to see Conroe under an uber cascade :)
Nice results Fugger, that's just an insane processor all around!
"Poor voltage options" _ Isn't that more of a board problem than anything? I'd be surprised if an Intel branded motherboard will let you change the voltage anywhere near the sort of levels required for really mad overclocking (though I could be wrong)Quote:
Originally Posted by iboomalot
"poor OC'ing" - they look like they overclock ok :)
"cold bug" - no IMC, so not applicable.
Wow, nice results. Thanks a lot Fugger, can't wait to see more!!
~25C :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
Nice and warm over there :)
Nice result's. To bad those EE are here in Q4 :( unlocked MP would be nice on this chips.
can wait to see it go higher. Good luck further OC-ing
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04...ng-busted.html
i love this :)
me 2. funny and gives me a good laugh so late, to see such much bs at one time. (even though i've read it several times) there are so many things he writes that is so far from reality as possible, that i haven't a chance to list them all. :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
Seriously, that is funny as always. How can anyone take that crap seriously when there is so much evidence here and other places, such as: http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/03...enchmark_fear/Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
where Conroe is showing huge advantanges over anything else in real life applications, and even gaming!
In the above link the guys are bit-tech were able to run the EXACT benchmark that they run in their labs (they brought it on a USB stick) so they could compare against their in-house tweaked FX-60 system. Conroe spanked it, as you can see. I'm looking forward to the next couple months!
well i am not an intel hater
the results of conroe just seem too good, i cannot believe them untili they launch the product and i see some real game benches and irl benches
Please keep this thread on topic... This blog is going to lead to other things that I am sure FUGGER doesnt want in his thread. This is not the thread for these posts. Thanks!
Hehe, I suggest you look at the very thread that you are posting in.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
Cheers!
I am at a ~50% overclock now with stock volts on a motherboard that has no OC options in bios and you guys say its not a good overclocker?
(Yes I have 2D stable CPUID + screen over 3Ghz)
If these results seem too good then its only gonna get worse as we get faster.
i only see nice superpi results :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by iterations
and fugger your results are nice, they dont seem too good
i meant the numbers from other reviewsites
can you run some other stuff than superpi or pifast??
what about 3D mark? 05 or 06 offcourse, not 01
Now that is what I like to hear! I'm really impressed with what you have been able to do so far. Keep up the good work!Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Hi!Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Can conroe will hit example (10*400) 4ghz with better motherboard?
/10x multipler with bigger conroe of course, I think E6600/
No coldbug or fsb limit later:confused:
Sigh... then may I suggest the other threads right here on the front page of this forum such as:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=97593
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=97395
and
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=97248
Cheers!
1)the first one is a cpu score, i mean 3D mark dude
2)ok they are good in AM3
3) this i funny i have 13015 with single core opteron at 2936mhz and X1900XTX at 720/846 on a not tweaked system
We are limiting the release of Conroe data to prevent excessive traffic flooding the site and bringing it down. You can expect maybe one new result per day until release.
Game benches would require loading of games we might not currently own. I will see what I can do. NFSMW and Oblivion I do have.
Any way to run a real FPS test on Oblivion?
Possibly Fugger: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=97555Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
that would be awesome :banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
so youre on 3.2ghz with stock voltage? and on air?Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
400x8..
AMD has Operon 144 (1,8GHz stock) that do 2,7GHz too with boxed cooling. 3D stable with some extra voltage, but some cpu's will do it on stock voltage.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Dunno if the CPU u have is the lowest available. It's obvius that a 1,8GHz Conroe will hit higher % than the example u are showing. So yea, good clocker :toast:
Are there allready quad core design or plans released by Intel?
Kentsfield, Q1 07 or late late 06Quote:
Originally Posted by wittekakker
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=3559
very nice. The link Gothrek showed was not so fine for Intel, and maybe full of crap, I don't know, still to early for me to say this... but why is it that Intel put so much L2 cache (wich is certainly not cheap) on the Conroe when it's allready 10~30% faster then a green cpu. They could easely make their cpu's cheaper when they only take half of it.
damn I never was so excited in reading about new pentiums ^^
I really grudge everybody owning a conroe these days and really hope to get one on my own in some time.
for the moment I'm spending my time beeing speechless about thoose pi times - this is really amazing.
*subscribed*
thanks for every information you gave and will give us FUGGER (and all other conroe owners).
Martket is so coldblood that it will only compare things appearing in same period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
AM2 is just coming out with coroe.
So what is a fair comparation?
Say " Intel, do not bring the Coroe out now, we are not ready yet"?
Thanks for the Oblivion benchies FUGGER! ..now hurry up. :D :banana:
Do you think Apple went with Intel now because of architecture such as Conroe? Maybe Apple had a look see into Intel's future roadmap. Just a thought. ;)
Yonah vs Turion is a slaughter. No brainer to go with Yonah and the upgrade path of Merom.
You missed the point of his post entirely. The start post mentioned something about records and Gautam was simply setting the record straight ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Durzel
That's Moore's Law in action, my friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by wittekakker
In the 65nm generation, the dual core Conroe chips use less silicon (area) than the single core 90nm Pentiums. Because of their huge lead in process technology, Intel has alot of transistor real estate to take advantage of and for this particular microarcitechture, it was a best use of the space they have, while still maintaining a good price margin on the chip. Increasing the cache size and improving prefetchers take alot of pressure off the front side bus. We are seeing the result of it in the benchmarks.
3DMark01 score from a Conroe at a measily at 2.66Ghz:
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/160/fcg503201kq.jpg
cant see your pic FCG...
EDIT: Now i can... JESUS CHRIST!!!! Is that still with the x1900 at 738 or whatever you did the insane aquamark with???
god damn i cant wait for these to be retail....
Getting closer, over 1K short.
I wouldn't bet on that, Conroe die size maybe more analagous to the first steppings of the Northwood core then Prescott, the die size has shrunk but Intel has used that extra transsitor real estate to put some nice stuff onto Conroe.Quote:
Originally Posted by iterations
We've seen the pictures It's a reasonable die size but not what I would call exactly small either.
Thanks for sharing what you can Fugger and FCG!:toast: :banana:
cant see your pic FCGQuote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Pic works fine here? :confused:
nice CH, would be nice if you guys added what memory was used on those tests.
How can I vew the world record scores and compare them to what Fugger has produced?
now it works :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Durzel
Well, Futuremark seems to be down this morning, but www.futuremark.com will get you there sometime. Go to ORB (tab across the top). Search and compare whatever you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by RAGING DRAGON
Nice benchmarks guys. :toast:
FCG, is that 380fsb benchable? What tweaks were needed to get there?
:woot: What card clocks? CF i gues. So FCC and Fuger you guys figure out some Vcore mods yet? I see 1.295 Vcore on this cpuz.Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
if i look at his sig i would say 7900 in sli
Actual CPU voltage is 1.15 IIRC, and i don't think they have access to it. As soon as they get some better boards in... wait and see the clocks ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by railer
No the D975XBX and the D955XBK can change voltages. Up to 1.65 if i remember correctly.
jesus people, stop quoting FCGs pic!!! this thread page is long as hell, and thats definately not helping.
So what was the video on that nucking futs 50k FCG?
i editted my post :)
X1900XTX Crossfire.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_knowitall15
Sorry if this has been answered before but what temps are u getting guys and with what cooling and ambient temp?
edit: i found my answer. :)
any game benches?
or too dissapointing to show them?
(just kidding :))
Why would they be disappointing? 3DMark taxes the system as much as most games would so there's no reason to believe the results wouldn't follow roughly what we've seen with 3DMark so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
3D mark doesnt show much imo
i want oblivion benches :)