Page 24 of 40 FirstFirst ... 142122232425262734 ... LastLast
Results 576 to 600 of 986

Thread: Conroe 2.4Ghz on 965G mobo, brief test...

  1. #576
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    /Land/Spain
    Posts
    250
    Good question

  2. #577
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    424
    Ah...God almighty...can you guy's smell that??? Yes it's the return of Intel. Like I said in another thread ; I have much love and respect for AMD. It's all I used for the past three-four years after both Northwood lines. But damn, Intel sure can create a damn good cpu when they put some effort in.

    Welcome back Intel.
    YUP

  3. #578
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,851
    Is it possible to do the pin mod on Conroe to achieve higher fsb and higher clock? May already been disscused.
    Intel FTW!

    Beanna

  4. #579
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    853
    Quote Originally Posted by LOE
    yeah it was about time for intel to do something about it...

    but it's probably better to hold any comments until chips are in stores

    it's a long time, and things may change
    it looks like awesome chip, so leave AMD out of this, time will tell who will be owned
    No better words were spoken in this thread apart from Victor, so very true.
    Signature? are you kidding? with new stuff coming out every day, why bother ?

  5. #580
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    582
    I dont understand people who are anti-Intel, anti-Conroe or whatever for the sake of it.

    If Conroe is the fastest thing around when its released, which it certainly looks like it will be, then I don't care whether its Intel, AMD or Von Dutch manufacturing it.

    FWIW I have an Intel P4 at the moment, was considering an AMD X2/FX, and now probably waiting for Conroe. I have no allegiances either way, allegiances to chip manufacturers is just cutting your own nose off to spite your face.

  6. #581
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    4,916
    3dmark 2001 please ?

    Regards

    Andy

  7. #582
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18
    Hey, forums are back

  8. #583
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    132
    Damn people can complain ! Oh well..Intel guyz will be sitting with a faster cheaper system in the end of the day so whine all you like.


    Im glad to see the Forums are back online!

    Victor ppl wont believe ur running your conroe without a fan on that heatsink. Heck what more do they want ? Do they want to stand next to you to see the results lol Dont worrie I believe ya, you have no reason to lie.

    If it wasnt for some of your hardware being under NDA we would have seen pictures of his rig. But people just dont understand it

    ORCBEAST

  9. #584
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,851
    How is it going with the bios issues? Vic's bios is bugging and FCG and FUGGER doesn't have a bios which supports Conroe? (yet) I hope they get everything up 'n running!
    Intel FTW!

    Beanna

  10. #585
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    17
    Apparently the weakness of the Intel platform is it's FSB (or whatever the Hypertransport counterpart is), and it'll constrain the performance of the otherwise impressive Conroe chip.

  11. #586
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18
    Because of this thread, i'm already setting aside my $500-$600 for that mid-year upgrade.. previously, it was supposed to be a s939 one (prices would drop when AM2 arrives)..

    But after reading this thread since it started.. an E6600 with some good generic DDR2 + a good OCing mobo would be the best "play/hobby" rig that money could buy come Q3 2K6..


  12. #587
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    35

    Regarding D975XBX rev 302 support for Conroe

    Hope this is the right spot for this info. It seemed relevant to the current discussion as it involves info regarding mobo support for Conroe. I have a D975XBX rev 302 mobo, and the following is a condensed version of an e-mail exchange I had with Intel support.

    My support inquiry:

    Product: Intel(R) Desktop Board D975XBX
    Product_id: 2205
    Bios_version: BX97510J.86A.0807.2006.0314.1158
    AA_Number: AAD27094-302
    Processor_manufacturer: Intel(R)
    Issue: I just purchased this top of the line board (my first Intel manufactured board), and now find that it will not support Conroe. This board was obsolete before I purchased it! This is completely unacceptable. Can I exchange this board for a rev AAD27094-304 that will support Conroe?

    Intel's response:

    Thank you for contacting Intel® Technical Support.

    Unfortunately, Intel does not exchange for different product. A return or exchange like this could only be done through your point of purchase, depending on their own policies and warranty procedures. As the customer of your point of purchase, they owe you return or exchange based on your purchase agreement/return policy; however, this is not something Intel will be able to take care of for you or assist in mediating with. Our warranty is an exchange of a damaged part for a good part of the same type; it would not provide any upgrade or difference in features on the part.

    I draw three conclusions from this exchange:

    1. The 304 rev appears to be the 'official' mobo to support Conroe per this reference to 'difference in features on the part'.
    2. This is a sideways admission that the 302 rev boards will not support Conroe.
    3. Owners of the 302 rev have no recourse but to buy a new mobo.

    Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. This may not be a difinitive take on the issue, but I would not take it as a positive for current D975XBX owners either.

  13. #588
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by jermaink
    Apparently the weakness of the Intel platform is it's FSB (or whatever the Hypertransport counterpart is), and it'll constrain the performance of the otherwise impressive Conroe chip.

    Yes you have to remember that P4 is a 200FSB QUAD Pumped = 800FSB

    Conroe runs 266 Quad pumped = 1066FSB

    Now taking that into account. The P4 were never far off AMD if we are talking about SPEED even with there techonology and with there onboard mem controller

    Intel will soon go that way and then u have to tell yourself how bloody fast that will be.

    ORCBEAST

  14. #589
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18
    @Slurr: Imho, they shouldn't be held liable..

    Because in the first place. Conroe will only be available by July at least.
    And you're buying the mobo now.

    What's top-of-the-line now will certainly not be so come July.
    Last edited by PMAer; 04-06-2006 at 10:24 AM.

  15. #590
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    35

    D975XBX and Conroe support

    I purchased (past tense) this mobo in march following the IDF benchmarks that were completed on the D975XBX. My point is that the lack of definitive information regarding mobos that support Conroe is not good, and it appears that current owners of this board are out of luck.

  16. #591
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18
    I see.. well, that's really what happens for prototype stuff..

    Heck, even VW, FCG or Fugger have trouble making the Conroe run on any current motherboard.

  17. #592
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by jermaink
    Apparently the weakness of the Intel platform is it's FSB (or whatever the Hypertransport counterpart is), and it'll constrain the performance of the otherwise impressive Conroe chip.
    Not a weakness on the desktop market. Conroe's two cores communicates over the shared L2 cache and direct L1->L1 data cache transfers, which is probably a magnitude faster than AMD's implementation for dual cores.

  18. #593
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by accord99
    Not a weakness on the desktop market. Conroe's two cores communicates over the shared L2 cache and direct L1->L1 data cache transfers, which is probably a magnitude faster than AMD's implementation for dual cores.
    The fsb is the weak link in Conroe as it is the same in Netburst architecture, which cannot handle the full bandwidth of dual-channel DDR2 SDRAM.
    [i5 2500K, ASrock extreme3 gen3, Corsair Vengeance LP 8GB 1600MHz, Palit GTX570 Sonic Platinum, CM HAF932, Antec Truepower New 650w]

  19. #594
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    DE
    Posts
    147
    Conroe uses Memory Disambiguation (part of the Smart Memory Access) and a better prefetch, branch prediction, L1/L2 Cache management and deeper buffers.

    The FSB1066 is not the bottleneck.

  20. #595
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,314
    the fsb will not be an issue for conroe in terms of bandwidth cause simply conroe is more of an amd like arc, so it does not need a whole lot of bandwidth at all. merom, on the 666 bus will most likely be just as fast.

  21. #596
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by jermaink
    Apparently the weakness of the Intel platform is it's FSB (or whatever the Hypertransport counterpart is), and it'll constrain the performance of the otherwise impressive Conroe chip.
    LOL, I'd like to know in what way is the Conroe constrained?? It has faster scores across the board at all levels than any A64/X2/FX/P4/PD/P4EE/etc.. Even with A64's clocked 500Mhz faster (& P4's a 5Ghz) its putting up similar scores.

    Yet, it seems to run cooler & more efficiently than any of its competition. And all of this on a PRE-PRE-PRE-Production motherboard, with an ES chip, unsupported BIOS, etc.. only 512mb of ram @ DDR2 533 (not 667, 800, etc..)

    Wait until a motherboard comes out than can actual overclock one of these, and they're hitting 3+Ghz at 1333FSB+!
    Wolfdale E8400 @ 3.9Ghz + Asus P5K-E + GTX 260 + 2x2Gb Geil + 1x X25-M 80Gb G2 + 2x WD 640Gb Black

  22. #597
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisf6969
    LOL, I'd like to know in what way is the Conroe constrained?? It has faster scores across the board at all levels than any A64/X2/FX/P4/PD/P4EE/etc.. Even with A64's clocked 500Mhz faster (& P4's a 5Ghz) its putting up similar scores.

    Yet, it seems to run cooler & more efficiently than any of its competition. And all of this on a PRE-PRE-PRE-Production motherboard, with an ES chip, unsupported BIOS, etc.. only 512mb of ram @ DDR2 533 (not 667, 800, etc..)

    Wait until a motherboard comes out than can actual overclock one of these, and they're hitting 3+Ghz at 1333FSB+!

    well said...

  23. #598
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,801
    The "OC to 4+" is simply smoke and mirrors. The main focus of Conroe is better performance per watt (something like that but you get the idea). Therefore, if a 2.44 Conroe could only OC to 2.80 (for the sake of argument) at a substantial boost to performance then what difference does it make if it reaches 4+ GHz or not?

    What we as enthusiasts should be concerned with is not how much it can over clock BUT, the percentage gain vs the percentage over clocked. If we OC correctly by %10 does the performance gained only 10%, 20% or was it only 5%? This is what we must know as it would provide potentially valuable data as to the true benefits of having this CPU (with the right PSU, ram, VC, MB, etc) when increasing it's clock.

    For example:
    2.44GHz OC successfully by a max on air by 15% therefore, 2.806 or 2.81GHZ now the question is how much performance is gained by a 15% over clock? Let say (for the sake of argument) that 3dmark05 at stock did produced a score of 10500 Marks and Super PI reported 22 second 1 meg test, again all at stock settings. (with all things being equal with 1 gig of ram, 9x5 MB, etc, etc).

    Now @ 2.81GHz will the 3dMark05 increase to 12075 Marks or better? Will Super PI decrease it’s 1MB time? These are the questions we need to ask. Remember, we are no longer dealing with P4 where every bit of performance gain in OC counted. And, it wasn't considered to worry about having the same % in performance as the same % OC. We should expect much better out of Conroe and these are the avenues that must be explored to understand Conroe's true potential.

    Also, don't forget it still remains to be seen if the final production of Conroe will be locked or unlocked. If it's possible to believe that Intel will allow these beast to remain unlocked as final production CPU then we can quantify with certainty and with accuracy the potentional gains when OC the CPU.

    If the CPU is locked...this will not provide the same level of data only because a locked CPU will generate constraints when trying to OC it.
    Last edited by Eastcoasthandle; 04-06-2006 at 01:21 PM.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  24. #599
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    17,468
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
    What we as enthusiasts should be concerned with is not how much it can over clock BUT, the percentage gain vs the percentage over clocked.
    nah mate

    what you want is highest MHz in your class..................FX57 CPUs are reach 4Ghz benchable (well kingpins one only) and that's what counts......you don't want a San Diego 3700+ that does 3.8GHz with much higher percentage OC but lower overall MHz level....you want the FX @4GHz
    Team.AU
    Got tube?
    GIGABYTE Australia
    Need a GIGABYTE bios or support?



  25. #600
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisf6969
    LOL, I'd like to know in what way is the Conroe constrained?? It has faster scores across the board at all levels than any A64/X2/FX/P4/PD/P4EE/etc.. Even with A64's clocked 500Mhz faster (& P4's a 5Ghz) its putting up similar scores.

    Yet, it seems to run cooler & more efficiently than any of its competition. And all of this on a PRE-PRE-PRE-Production motherboard, with an ES chip, unsupported BIOS, etc.. only 512mb of ram @ DDR2 533 (not 667, 800, etc..)

    Wait until a motherboard comes out than can actual overclock one of these, and they're hitting 3+Ghz at 1333FSB+!
    If Conroe wasn't FSB limited, why would Intel bump it up to 1333MHz on the XE? If Conroe wasn't FSB limited, why would Intel be working on the new CSI bus?

    All your arguement proves is that Conroe rocks so damn much that it is able to outperform the competition even with a cripled, outdated bus. Just imagine what it could do with an integrated mem controller and low latency, higher bandwidth bus.

Page 24 of 40 FirstFirst ... 142122232425262734 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •