CONROE performance a LIE???

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: nyker96
No it's not a lie, I gurantee it. RIght now right here.

Ill back up his gurantee.

 

[n19htmare]

"The conclusion is: clock for clock, Athlon 64 will beat Conroe in real application environments that require a working set of larger than 4MB, or in other words, larger than Conroe's 4MB cache."

Thats his conclusion. A clueless fellow who is desperate.

The core duo is already just as fast if not faster compared to the athlon. and it doen't have 4mb cache.

Conroe is a major leap from the core duo....

This guy is desperate and can't accept the fact that AMD is about to be outperformed.

 

[dmens]

Hilarious stuff. I like how sharikou continuously denigrates intel engineers and calls them incompetent. So appraently if i took the AMD offer instead of the intel offer, my engineering skillz would have multiplied hundred-fold or something. LOL!

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Until the full reviews by multiple sites are done using RETAIL chips, I reserve final judgement. I am not a fanboy, and not in denial, since there is nothing to deny.

You're not in denail, you're just ignorant because even with all the data points available you still refuse to link everything together, or you're incapable of doing so. HAHA, retail chips. Like the B0 steps that the XS benchers already have samples of? Way to defend ignorance with pretend-cautious paranoia.

---

You are in denial... of access to our forums for two weeks to give you some time to consider improving your forum courtesy.

AnandTech Moderator

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: irev210
haha, what an idiot.

Conroe will beat AMD in desktop performance for 2006/2007.


There IS NO QUESTION.


Fanboys, put your helmets down.


Here is the reality, clock for clock, intel is faster.

Clock for clock, conroe scales MUCH better.


For gaming, etc. Conroe owns fx-60/62


Conroe extreme edition (2.93ghz/1066fsb/HT) are overclocking to 4ghz on air.



Just look at 3Dmark01/05/06 for right now.


Amazing how some people can post so much crap, and be so ignorant. It is like the intel fanboys that were talking trash on AMD athlon 64 a year ago.

and how did you arrive at this conclusion? do you have any proof? Please, don't post if all you have is fanboism and no proof.

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: irev210
haha, what an idiot.

Conroe will beat AMD in desktop performance for 2006/2007.


There IS NO QUESTION.


Fanboys, put your helmets down.


Here is the reality, clock for clock, intel is faster.

Clock for clock, conroe scales MUCH better.


For gaming, etc. Conroe owns fx-60/62


Conroe extreme edition (2.93ghz/1066fsb/HT) are overclocking to 4ghz on air.



Just look at 3Dmark01/05/06 for right now.


Amazing how some people can post so much crap, and be so ignorant. It is like the intel fanboys that were talking trash on AMD athlon 64 a year ago.

and how did you arrive at this conclusion? do you have any proof? Please, don't post if all you have is fanboism and no proof.

While his grammar is of a questionable nature The current benchmarks suggest that what he says is true. That is his proof. Anand says a 2.66Ghz Conroe is faster than a 2.8Ghz X2 in all scenarios. That is enough information to make an educated hypothesis which states that Intel will be faster than AMD this year, or at least until AMD comes up with a response.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: n19htmare

Originally posted by: Mr Vain

Originally posted by: Henny

Originally posted by: Mr Vain
:disgust:
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/conroe-performance-claim-being-busted.html

Has anyone read this?

Does anyone believe this?

I wanted to get a CONROE chip but now I'm not sure!

Not a rehash from this idiot again!!

:|No need for personal insults!

Mr. Vain, I dont think that was in insult towards you but to the person in that link you provided. this topic has been discussed a million times, I know you didnt know. But every person agrees that whats on Sharikou's page is PURE BLOGNE!, He's possibly the biggest amd fanboy ever.
the results could be in front of him, and he would still find a way to deny its authenticity.

Pay not attention.

His logic is something like.....

Because my civic gets 45MPG as opposed to your Corvette z06, my civic is faster.

the point is there is no logic in his comments.

HEY! With glass pipes and stickers, anything is possible! :|

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

While his grammar is of a questionable nature The current benchmarks suggest that what he says is true. That is his proof. Anand says a 2.66Ghz Conroe is faster than a 2.8Ghz X2 in all scenarios. That is enough information to make an educated hypothesis which states that Intel will be faster than AMD this year, or at least until AMD comes up with a response.

Well.. the problem is .. the Conroe setup was by Intel and it was blackboxed..
if you search Google, many/many sites have questioned Anand's article, emailed/asked Anand and Intel, and have not gotten an answer from either.

A better educated guess would be to derive a conclusion from something that existed : since Intel has gone back to P3 architecture, clock for clock it should pretty much match up with AMD. The advantage of 65nm process would allow higher clock speed / lower power usage.

 

[irev210]

While his grammar is of a questionable nature The current benchmarks suggest that what he says is true. That is his proof. Anand says a 2.66Ghz Conroe is faster than a 2.8Ghz X2 in all scenarios. That is enough information to make an educated hypothesis which states that Intel will be faster than AMD this year, or at least until AMD comes up with a response.

Anything and everything I am saying has nothing to do with what anand said about conroe a long time ago. That article was worthless. I dont understand why you guys are debating an article that is just a grain of rice in a big pot.

The CPU doesnt shine until it is overclocked anyway.

 

[sonoran]

Originally posted by: Gary Key
for the first time in a few years it will be a hard decision on deciding what CPU will provide the best performance.

No - it won't.

* Not speaking for Intel Corp *

 

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: dguy6789

While his grammar is of a questionable nature The current benchmarks suggest that what he says is true. That is his proof. Anand says a 2.66Ghz Conroe is faster than a 2.8Ghz X2 in all scenarios. That is enough information to make an educated hypothesis which states that Intel will be faster than AMD this year, or at least until AMD comes up with a response.

Well.. the problem is .. the Conroe setup was by Intel and it was blackboxed..
if you search Google, many/many sites have questioned Anand's article, emailed/asked Anand and Intel, and have not gotten an answer from either.

A better educated guess would be to derive a conclusion from something that existed : since Intel has gone back to P3 architecture, clock for clock it should pretty much match up with AMD. The advantage of 65nm process would allow higher clock speed / lower power usage.

Its not exactly P3 architecture. Well intel had to have something in that black box and whatever it was I want one of them ;-)

 

[Absolute0]

Irev is right.

Sharikous is so fulla sh1t that anybody that knows anything about next generation processors read his blog months ago and saw it debunked months ago. It's been reposted continuously and it's always a pain in the ass because it draws out all the AMD fanboys who don't welcome Conroe into their hearts.

Conroe will overclock to 3-4 Ghz on aircooling and will consistently outperform AMD by a sizeable margin at the same clock speeds. If you are so closed-minded as to not be able to believe this, and dismiss the multitude of benchmarks as "worthless synthetics" then you will just have to wait until July to get proven wrong. Eveybody else has already figured it out.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

wait and see

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Wait & See? Why?
FACT: Core Duo is already faster/equivalent to K8, clock-for-clock.
FACT: Core 2 Duo [Conroe] builds on the current Core architecture and improves it. In layman terms, I'm pretty sure the '2' oughta mean something.

Even if Conroe doesn't wipe the floor with AM2, we can atleast be sure it's going to be like the X1900XT/7900GTX situation.
Party A will use Benchmark Set A to claim Prouduct A is faster, Party B will use Benchmark Set B to claim Product B is faster. There may be no conclusive winner, and you really can't wrong with either product.

However, I'll still bet my money that there WILL be a conclusive winner this time (like K8 was last time), and it will be Intel.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: robertk2012

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: dguy6789

While his grammar is of a questionable nature The current benchmarks suggest that what he says is true. That is his proof. Anand says a 2.66Ghz Conroe is faster than a 2.8Ghz X2 in all scenarios. That is enough information to make an educated hypothesis which states that Intel will be faster than AMD this year, or at least until AMD comes up with a response.

Well.. the problem is .. the Conroe setup was by Intel and it was blackboxed..
if you search Google, many/many sites have questioned Anand's article, emailed/asked Anand and Intel, and have not gotten an answer from either.

A better educated guess would be to derive a conclusion from something that existed : since Intel has gone back to P3 architecture, clock for clock it should pretty much match up with AMD. The advantage of 65nm process would allow higher clock speed / lower power usage.

Its not exactly P3 architecture. Well intel had to have something in that black box and whatever it was I want one of them ;-)

they now focus on getting more performance/clock rather than just getting more clock.

Lol. Agreed. I'd like to have one of those in the black box too.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: theprodigalrebel
Wait & See? Why?
FACT: Core Duo is already faster/equivalent to K8, clock-for-clock.
FACT: Core 2 Duo [Conroe] builds on the current Core architecture and improves it. In layman terms, I'm pretty sure the '2' oughta mean something.

Even if Conroe doesn't wipe the floor with AM2, we can atleast be sure it's going to be like the X1900XT/7900GTX situation.
Party A will use Benchmark Set A to claim Prouduct A is faster, Party B will use Benchmark Set B to claim Product B is faster. There may be no conclusive winner, and you really can't wrong with either product.

However, I'll still bet my money that there WILL be a conclusive winner this time (like K8 was last time), and it will be Intel.

"2" may be 64bit support?
I'm bidding on no conclusive winner.
situations like 7800 vs x800, or A64 vs P4 don't happen very often. Most of the time it ends up a tie, which one is better depends on the application.

 

[irev210]

im still confused how people can say that it is up in the air which one is faster.

There are 100's of benchmarks already by guys like you and me to confirm this.

Search around on the net for a while. You will find them everywhere.

 

[beggerking]

well, find me one that isn't a split.

 

[imported_UncivilizedAMD]

Originally posted by: beggerking
well, find me one that isn't a split.

xtremesystems.org forums intel section

Read all the conroe benchmarks and you'll see pure conroe dominance clock for clock and even under lower clockspeed.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: UncivilizedAMD

Originally posted by: beggerking
well, find me one that isn't a split.

xtremesystems.org forums intel section

Read all the conroe benchmarks and you'll see pure conroe dominance clock for clock and even under lower clockspeed.

a review please. .

intel section....-_- right.. like I'm going to find unbiased opinion there...

 

[pkme2]

Well all the truth will finally rise to the surface soon. We will see what happens so no matter what is said now and will not change the future. Truth will win out. Let us not make statements that will make us look silly later. Give Intel the benefit of the doubt. I'm a AMD user, but Intel is still a good line.

 

[F1shF4t]

Once again people are trying to proove and disproove, darn it its like intel or amd are gonna give u something if u gonna defend them.

Also its not hard to believe that a BRAND NEW cpu will be quicker than the one which is 3+ old. Seriously if its quick upgrade to it, and if u dont like it dont, stop trying to convince everyone around how good/bad it is when its not even out.

The fact thats it quicker does not make YOUR cpu slow, there is just something better avalable. And from my opinion its great to have something new and quick out, cause it will cause lots of competition and lower prices for all of us buyers, which is great.
I mean its about time amd got kicked a bit, i'm sure a lot of peple are ennoyed of the high prices for X2 dual core. Like look at how cheap preslers are and tell me why is it bad??? If x2's become dirt cheap for socket 939, i'll be very happy, dually for my second comp .

 

[BrownTown]

nto that i'm an admin or anything, but if i were i would probably be at the point where i would automatically lock any post that brings up this blog. There have litterally been 5-10 topics of the EXACT SAME thing posted here. I am tired of trying to explain reality and will therefore be content to let those who wish live in their dream world for now. Even when Conroe is released they will still probably keep on believeing, hear not evil, see no evil, speak no evil...

 

[pcoffman]

Originally posted by: beggerking
"2" may be 64bit support?

Not really (good guess, tho' ). Core 2 shall have 64-bit support, but Core 2 also succeeds the P4, which already has 64-bit. The 2 indicates a new family of processors, built around ideas going back to the Pentium M / Core Duo / Core Solo family. 80% of the new microarchitecture was redone.

 

[imported_UncivilizedAMD]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: UncivilizedAMD

Originally posted by: beggerking
well, find me one that isn't a split.

xtremesystems.org forums intel section

Read all the conroe benchmarks and you'll see pure conroe dominance clock for clock and even under lower clockspeed.

a review please. .

intel section....-_- right.. like I'm going to find unbiased opinion there...

It's from third party reviewers who also have reviewed AMD systems in the past. It's just posted under the Intel section because its related to Intel. If you posted your superior dominance over AMD in an AMD section, it'll be called bashing. Evidence is posted with screen shots and hardware setup. Numbers don't lie.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: pkme2
Well all the truth will finally rise to the surface soon. We will see what happens so no matter what is said now and will not change the future. Truth will win out. Let us not make statements that will make us look silly later. Give Intel the benefit of the doubt. I'm a AMD user, but Intel is still a good line.

Agreed. Core Duo has an awesome preformance vs power ratio that shouldn't be overlooked.