AT Ocing Review of Intel's 65nm line...impressive!!

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
Fanboism makes baby jesus cry.

Seriously. Why are we arguing about this when we don't have the most important thing of all? A FRICKIN' BENCHMARK! Goddamn. This isn't the video forum.

Check Tom's benchmarks. There the exact same thing as the prescott cores in terms of performance.

You've seen dual core P-Ds running at 4.25 Ghz, unthrottled? I mean we can correlate kinda, but using 1.6/1, which is the norm, I'd say, then a 2.65Ghz or so X2 is equal to that. Alot of people (my self included) can hit that pretty easily with AMD's technology. Which is why I say its no big deal.

You asked for benchmarks, then you say something totally different (comparing an X2 oced to a PD oced???????????????????)

 

[Leper Messiah]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
Fanboism makes baby jesus cry.

Seriously. Why are we arguing about this when we don't have the most important thing of all? A FRICKIN' BENCHMARK! Goddamn. This isn't the video forum.

Check Tom's benchmarks. There the exact same thing as the prescott cores in terms of performance.

You've seen dual core P-Ds running at 4.25 Ghz, unthrottled? I mean we can correlate kinda, but using 1.6/1, which is the norm, I'd say, then a 2.65Ghz or so X2 is equal to that. Alot of people (my self included) can hit that pretty easily with AMD's technology. Which is why I say its no big deal.

You asked for benchmarks, then you say something totally different (comparing an X2 oced to a PD oced???????????????????)

Okay. What I'm trying to do is see if this thing is actually worth it. If it consistently outperforms AMD's X2s, I will consider getting one, depending on price. Now, the thrust of Duvie's Statement, which is what we're discussing in this thread, is that they are good OC'ers, and they may outperform AMDs. Is that correct?

Now, I'd say its fair to say that X2's are pretty much Guarenteed 2400Mhz and 2600+ is pretty damn easy if you know what you're doing. Its a simple comparison, a OC'd P-D to a OC'd X2. Using the rough correlative data that is generally held as true, we can state that AMD's perform roughly 1.6 to 1 over Intel, per clock. What I'm saying is that the dual cores hit 4.25 GHz, which would approx. equal to a 2.65Ghz X2. Since this target is easy to achieve, I think that the Intel product is not really worth it right now. Granted, in 6 months, they could improve it to 5Ghz, and it would be awesome, and I'd get one if I could get a cheapie that would do that. Or it could just stay the same, and we'd all (the ones with X2s) would recieve little to no benefit in replacing our X2s with one.

 

[Hacp]

Well, I don't think that they will outperform AMD, but if they have a cheapo 2.8GHZ model for around 220-250 bucks, it might be a good processor to consider if you can't afford the extra 75-100 bucks for the X2.

The processors that intrest me most are the normal P4s. Thats because if their heat problems are solved, then regular users who don't demand extreme performance, but still want to do multi-threaded applications will benefit from less heat/power consumption.

 

[Markfw]

very simple. The day you can buy one, check the price, and the reviews. Decide then.... I have a motherboard if they will work on socket 775 ! I'd dump this P-D in a heartbeat if the new ones would workd, and were cool, and cost effective.

 

[AkumaX]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
very simple. The day you can buy one, check the price, and the reviews. Decide then.... I have a motherboard if they will work on socket 775 ! I'd dump this P-D in a heartbeat if the new ones would workd, and were cool, and cost effective.

bah, i think i remember reading somewhere that they're gonna require i975xe or something

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
Fanboism makes baby jesus cry.

Seriously. Why are we arguing about this when we don't have the most important thing of all? A FRICKIN' BENCHMARK! Goddamn. This isn't the video forum.

Check Tom's benchmarks. There the exact same thing as the prescott cores in terms of performance.

You've seen dual core P-Ds running at 4.25 Ghz, unthrottled? I mean we can correlate kinda, but using 1.6/1, which is the norm, I'd say, then a 2.65Ghz or so X2 is equal to that. Alot of people (my self included) can hit that pretty easily with AMD's technology. Which is why I say its no big deal.

You asked for benchmarks, then you say something totally different (comparing an X2 oced to a PD oced???????????????????)

Okay. What I'm trying to do is see if this thing is actually worth it. If it consistently outperforms AMD's X2s, I will consider getting one, depending on price. Now, the thrust of Duvie's Statement, which is what we're discussing in this thread, is that they are good OC'ers, and they may outperform AMDs. Is that correct?

Now, I'd say its fair to say that X2's are pretty much Guarenteed 2400Mhz and 2600+ is pretty damn easy if you know what you're doing. Its a simple comparison, a OC'd P-D to a OC'd X2. Using the rough correlative data that is generally held as true, we can state that AMD's perform roughly 1.6 to 1 over Intel, per clock. What I'm saying is that the dual cores hit 4.25 GHz, which would approx. equal to a 2.65Ghz X2. Since this target is easy to achieve, I think that the Intel product is not really worth it right now. Granted, in 6 months, they could improve it to 5Ghz, and it would be awesome, and I'd get one if I could get a cheapie that would do that. Or it could just stay the same, and we'd all (the ones with X2s) would recieve little to no benefit in replacing our X2s with one.

:thumbsup:

You pretty much summed it up. looks definitey better for INtel coming up , but AMD might also refine their process and maybe 2.7-2.8ghz may be more common soon enough. I dont really see AMD having thermal issues (using reasonable stock cooling) until possible after 2.8ghz anyways.

 

[Sentential]

At this point I am more interested to see the heat values of the newer cores. The TDP was supposedly dropped significantally with these cores and I hope the temps do as well. Hopefully down to the levels of an A64

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
very simple. The day you can buy one, check the price, and the reviews. Decide then.... I have a motherboard if they will work on socket 775 ! I'd dump this P-D in a heartbeat if the new ones would workd, and were cool, and cost effective.

Well they seem to be getting tested on 955 chipset boards. In this case all they should require is a bios update for 945/955 based boards, because they are just die shrunk prescotts that use less power, rather than the usual increase in power.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

Fukcing AT, what lousy deal do they have with Intel that they dont dare writing about benchmarks!?