PDA

View Full Version : AMD vs Intel. First Benchmarks @ Tom's Hardware!!!

Tire{CLR}
5th Jun 2006, 01:19 PM
I have always been an AMD fan but this may sway me to Intel's side. (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/first_benchmarks_conroe_vs_fx-62/)



Again, we must emphasize that our testing situation was not optimal, because the Intel system had been preconfigured and didn't represent the final version. Even so, we were able to determine that not even AMD's top-of-the-line Athlon FX-62 CPU running at 3.0 GHz could clearly best the pre-release model of the Core 2 Duo (2.66 GHz Conroe) processor we tested. This comparison didn't even use the top-of-the-line Conroe processor, which Intel plans to introduce soon.
But how fast and powerful will Intel's new processor technology prove to be in practice? This is something we can only answer with some certainty after we've had a chance to test it ourselves in our own labs. In the meantime, it looks like AMD's going to have to get to work in order to keep up with Intel!

Until we can test this new Intel processor in our own labs, unhindered, we can't drawn any sure conclusions about system performance and benchmark results.
imlittlev
5th Jun 2006, 01:24 PM
theres an fx62 ?
Tire{CLR}
5th Jun 2006, 01:31 PM
Uh-huh. Socket F, aka AM2.
darth_nevus
5th Jun 2006, 01:31 PM
oh yes. AMD's solution is weak, yet intriguing all in the same moment, and by the time they catch up proc power , the 4x4 will be amazing.
imlittlev
5th Jun 2006, 01:59 PM
it doesnt really matter for us who cant afford top-of-the-line, unless it lowers prices of affordable CPUs
Tire{CLR}
5th Jun 2006, 02:03 PM
Battle between AMD and Intel forces drop in CPU prices (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/06/02/drop_in_average_processor_pricing/)

:)
Kronos[X]
5th Jun 2006, 03:08 PM
It also forces them to advance their technology.
imlittlev
5th Jun 2006, 03:22 PM
cheap prices FTW!!!
omfg karl marx
5th Jun 2006, 08:14 PM
oh yes. AMD's solution is weak, yet intriguing all in the same moment, and by the time they catch up proc power , the 4x4 will be amazing.

I don't think it was meant to be a strong showing. They needed to get DDR2 memory in the workings so that they don't have an inherent disadvantage when DDR2-800 comes out.
Azarael
5th Jun 2006, 10:23 PM
DDR2 800 is out already http://www.canadacomputers.com/index.php?do=ShowProduct&cmd=pd&pid=008713&cid=RAM.475
I think you mean DDR2 1066.

I'm sure that the Conroe is a perfectly good platform, but I'll be a bit suspicious until I read a hands on review from a site like Tom's or hardocp. The benchmarks that are being sited in the reviews do seem a little suspect without some further confirmation. I don't think the CPU battle is going to be won or lost any time soon though.
omfg karl marx
6th Jun 2006, 12:06 AM
DDR2 800 is out already http://www.canadacomputers.com/index.php?do=ShowProduct&cmd=pd&pid=008713&cid=RAM.475
I think you mean DDR2 1066.

I'm sure that the Conroe is a perfectly good platform, but I'll be a bit suspicious until I read a hands on review from a site like Tom's or hardocp. The benchmarks that are being sited in the reviews do seem a little suspect without some further confirmation. I don't think the CPU battle is going to be won or lost any time soon though.

Huh. Didn't know they had that out yet. There was talk about how much the 800 stuff would help in the benchmarks when AM2 was just announced.
juneau
6th Jun 2006, 10:28 AM
oh yes. AMD's solution is weak, yet intriguing all in the same moment, and by the time they catch up proc power , the 4x4 will be amazing.

I don't think it was meant to be a strong showing. They needed to get DDR2 memory in the workings so that they don't have an inherent disadvantage when DDR2-800 comes out.

Eaxctly. This is why Conroe and AM2 shouldn't be compared.