PDA

View Full Version : Intel's Conroe Previewed and Benchmarked


RobertoOrtiz
03-08-2006, 02:12 PM
Quote:
"Intel (http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713#) is very excited about their new Core architecture, especially with Conroe on the desktop. It's not really news to anyone that Intel hasn't had the desktop performance crown for years now; their Pentium 4 (http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713#) and Pentium (http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713#) D processors run hotter and offer competitive or lower performance than their AMD competitors. With Conroe, Intel hopes to change all of that."

>>LINK<< (http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713)

-R

mummey
03-08-2006, 02:15 PM
Ars Technica's take on the 'Benchmark'. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060307-6334.html)

Start of the article:
Ok, before you click the link I'm about to show you, I encourage you to go to one of those foodie speciality shops in your local upscale mall and buy the very largest grain of exotic salt you can find. Only when you have that grain sitting in the chair next to you are allowed to check out Anand's Intel-provided Conroe benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713). Now, go ahead and start working on that salt...



more in link:

>>Link<< (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060307-6334.html)

KidderD
03-08-2006, 02:55 PM
That is salty indeed.... (read quote above)

So, are they comparing a intel processor that hasn't come out yet, and will only be out in six months from now, to a AMD X2 processor, that has been out for how long? On that same topic, will it really take the Intel giant 6 months to get this out the door?

Cronholio
03-08-2006, 05:46 PM
That AMD processor is the current top of the line and they even went so far as to overclock it. What did you want them to do? Use the Intel time machine to travel into the future and get AMDs newest latest for their benchmark?

Is it really so unthinkable that Intel may actually have something in their pipeline that's faster, cooler, cheaper than what AMD currently or will soon bring to the table? We are talking about the company who pretty much owns the desktop market here.

Para
03-08-2006, 06:34 PM
Is it really so unthinkable that Intel may actually have something in their pipeline that's faster, cooler, cheaper than what AMD currently or will soon bring to the table? We are talking about the company who pretty much owns the desktop market here.

I'd like to refer to this as Apple marketing: The benchmark results they show are real but the way they got those numbers can't be considered "fair" towards the participant. Besides since this chip is 6 months away so a lot can happen especially if AMD hasn't been just sitting on their collective asses and have also been developing new technology.

DestyNova
03-08-2006, 08:45 PM
I'd like to refer to this as Apple marketing: The benchmark results they show are real but the way they got those numbers can't be considered "fair" towards the participant. Besides since this chip is 6 months away so a lot can happen especially if AMD hasn't been just sitting on their collective asses and have also been developing new technology.

The Athlon 64 FX-60 is released 6 months ago? I thought that it was 2 months ago.

Beamtracer
03-08-2006, 09:04 PM
Intel is behind AMD, and they know it.

It seems these new Intel processors don't resolve the main problems Intel is having with dual-core processors. For some reason, Intel has been unable to make its dual cores as a single unit. Intel's 2 processor cores are separated pieces of silicon, lacking the integrating circuitry.

I've never seen any explanation as to why Intel is having so much difficulty solving this. It must be difficult to engineer, but AMD has achieved it. Intel seems to be trying add tweaks and enhancements in other areas, without solving the fundamentals of efficient dual core processing.

Para
03-09-2006, 07:30 AM
The Athlon 64 FX-60 is released 6 months ago? I thought that it was 2 months ago.

I'm talking about the release of the Intel's chip which is the what this topic is about, not the AMD processor.

KidderD
03-09-2006, 01:24 PM
That AMD processor is the current top of the line and they even went so far as to overclock it. What did you want them to do? Use the Intel time machine to travel into the future and get AMDs newest latest for their benchmark?

Is it really so unthinkable that Intel may actually have something in their pipeline that's faster, cooler, cheaper than what AMD currently or will soon bring to the table? We are talking about the company who pretty much owns the desktop market here.

Yeah a time machine, good one. Why is it taking them six months to get this out, as others have said, AMD will have a new one out as well, or will AMD announce a new one in six months, then only get that one out a year from now. Is that the current trend?

In any case, I'm not a fan of many of Intel's business practices, so that was a slag, so I'll just call it one. Oh, well back to my Opteron, man I gotta dual this thing.

mummey
03-09-2006, 01:26 PM
I'd like to refer to this as Apple marketing: The benchmark results they show are real but the way they got those numbers can't be considered "fair" towards the participant. Besides since this chip is 6 months away so a lot can happen especially if AMD hasn't been just sitting on their collective asses and have also been developing new technology.

That's unfair to Apple. ;)

AMD and Intel BOTH have been doing "selective benchmarking" since before the first pentium.

Cronholio
03-09-2006, 02:28 PM
Intel is behind AMD, and they know it.

It seems these new Intel processors don't resolve the main problems Intel is having with dual-core processors. For some reason, Intel has been unable to make its dual cores as a single unit. Intel's 2 processor cores are separated pieces of silicon, lacking the integrating circuitry.

I've never seen any explanation as to why Intel is having so much difficulty solving this. It must be difficult to engineer, but AMD has achieved it. Intel seems to be trying add tweaks and enhancements in other areas, without solving the fundamentals of efficient dual core processing.

The Conroe has two cores on a single piece of silicon. The only thing they aren't doing is providing an integrated memory controller and there is a reason for this. It's not that they can't do it; they won't do it because it creates restrictions on the type of system memory the chips can address and they don't want another rambus like disaster on their hands. Either way it doesn't matter. Despite the fact that they don't have an integrated memory controller they can still obviously get more than competitive performance out of their chips with a large shared cache, and they are likely to be cheaper and consume less power than AMD's offerings if AMD stays it course. Sounds like an efficient design to me.

Tlock
03-09-2006, 08:36 PM
Ok ok.. so this has turned into my AMD is better and Intel sucks. So here is my 2 cents. First of all Intel only keeps AMD alive to ensure the don't have a monoploy on the PC CPU market. Most will say he is crazy and doesn't know what he is talking about. My simple proof test.

All windows/linux and now Macs take advantage of specific technologies such as MMX, SSE, SSE2, and SSE3. So now the question is who invented these, well simply put INTEL. Intel licenses this stuff out to AMD, so while AMD focuses on things like making licensed technology run better they rely on Intel to provide ground breaking methods. Intel will be the first to 65nm but AMD will probably make it run faster.

So although ppl get into AMD vs Intel garbage. These are 2 companies like/rely on each others existance. Now is that each processor has evolved in different ways, each has it's specific advantages. So use the best CPU for your specific needs (applications).

Spin99
03-11-2006, 12:33 PM
Note: Any comments on a processor to come out in 6 months is mere speculation!!!
I personally have always been told that AMD technology is better??

Any case:

- MacIntelToshes started making sense after all?
- I don't think Intel is solving the integrated memory controller with Conroe either..
- Intel is expected to trounce AMD in six months (what?) but nobody knows
what is going to happen to the AMD platform by then? AMD2 or something?

And then the million-dollar question??
- Would you build a socket 939 system now or
would you wait and see what the hype is all about?

Anyone? :D

cpan
03-11-2006, 12:42 PM
about those comparisions between the Intel Conroe and the Intel overclocked AMD FX60, there are some speculations that it's a total bullshit, made to convinge people wait 6 months for the Conroe and not to buy AMD CPU's.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1321151&postcount=126


Also there are some serious rhumors that AMD is comming with a new CPU (K8L) with twice the number of FP Units, wich will blow out the competition :)

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890

Para
03-11-2006, 03:32 PM
what is going to happen to the AMD platform by then? AMD2 or something?

And then the million-dollar question??
- Would you build a socket 939 system now or
would you wait and see what the hype is all about?

Anyone? :D

You're actually quite close there. Next socket in AMD:s pipeline is called AM2 and it should be out...umm, can't remember when exactly but apparently fairly soon. At the moment I'd wait before doing any decisions.

MAK
03-11-2006, 05:49 PM
about those comparisions between the Intel Conroe and the Intel overclocked AMD FX60, there are some speculations that it's a total bullshit, made to convinge people wait 6 months for the Conroe and not to buy AMD CPU's.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1321151&postcount=126


Also there are some serious rhumors that AMD is comming with a new CPU (K8L) with twice the number of FP Units, wich will blow out the competition :)

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890

Conroe Preview UPDATED (http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716)

Spin99
03-11-2006, 07:35 PM
Thanks Para :D

Actually I see no reason for not getting socket 939 now.
Besides prices on top of the range processors might drop when AM2 comes out?
Umm except for budget lol.

Also I'm not convinced about Conroe at all.. yet.
Is it dual core? is it 64-bit?
Intel hasn't delivered to it's promises for quite some time now.
Sorry to say that.

Also on that review thing that benches Conroe against the FX60:

- FX chips run better on nForce4 boards?? 60 is not the fastest gaming processor FX57 is :D
- Intel used a cheap outdated ATI board for the "overclocked" AMD machine
- Intel seems to be learning from Apple how to to do marketing using benchmarks lol
- The salt has already been mentioned in previous posts

also

- I't so salty I'm not having any thanks :D

CGTalk Moderation
03-11-2006, 07:35 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.