Intel Conroe E6700 vs AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 (AM2)

[ExtremeGamer09]

I read that the conroe still beats the new FX-62 (AM2) what you guys think?

 

[Firsttime]

There are hundreds of threads on this, general opinion seems to be Conroe kills the FX-62.

 

[alpha88]

The Conroe (4meg cache) is (I'll say 10%) faster than the K8 (1meg cache) at any given clock speed.

The 6700 runs at 2.66ghz and the FX-62 at 2.8.

By my math the 6700 will be slightly faster, and much much cheaper. However, I don't think it's fair to say that the Conroe 'kills' the FX-62.

 

[pkme2]

What temp range for Conroe?

 

[EffeX]

Of course its faster! 6700 is a bigger number than 62 duh!

 

[imported_fx]

Originally posted by: pkme2
What temp range for Conroe?

I would like to know about that too. I hope Intel are fixing the heating issues.

 

[Kaieye]

Shesshs, Core hasn't even been released yet. Have you heard of "Guerrilla Marketing "??

Don't be a sap!

 

[imported_smilingcrow]

There have been too many independent benchmarks of Conroe at this point to dismiss them. If you over-clock an E6300 by 25% it should match an FX-62. That?s an entry level $183 Intel chip matching a $1,000 top of the range AMD part. Of course, AMD will decimate their prices within the two months before Conroe is released. But, Intel has a TDP of 65W up to 2.67 or possibly 2.93 GHz, whereas the FX-62 has a TDP of 125W. AMD are basically dead in the water until they release their 65nm parts in December/January, at the earliest. Even if they bring out an FX-64 in the meantime, it?s about as relevant as Intel?s Core 2 Duo EE chips, which will kill it anyway. Who really buys $1000 CPUs!

 

[Brahmzy]

Not me - the most I'd ever pay for a CPU is $300-$400.