• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hardocp Intel Core 2 Review up

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: coldpower27
This is funny, actually go to HotHardware, it seems Quake 4 is still CPU bottlenecked with 7900 GTX SLI at 16x12 4XAA/8XAF. That is damn incredible.
Click to expand...
I was waiting for this. 😉 Yah I couldn't comment on Q4 cause I haven't played it, but I figured that's about the only game that'd benefit from dual-core CPUs now. I stand corrected.

 
Originally posted by: lopri
Originally posted by: coldpower27
This is funny, actually go to HotHardware, it seems Quake 4 is still CPU bottlenecked with 7900 GTX SLI at 16x12 4XAA/8XAF. That is damn incredible.
Click to expand...
I was waiting for this. 😉 Yah I couldn't comment on Q4 cause I haven't played it, but I figured that's about the only game that'd benefit from dual-core CPUs now. I stand corrected.
Click to expand...

But this is agood thing, considering how slow CPU cycles are, it shows Core Architecture is way ahead of all current GPU technology. We can always use the extra headroom. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: wilki24
Firing Squad w/ Crossfire

Using two video cards, there is a noticable difference. Though, it seems outside, Oblivion is still GPU bound even with XFire.
Click to expand...



read the rest of it...It seems to show get to 2000res and we are gpu dependent all over....


Also to OP and techreport....I think it is clear from what I have read around at the differing websites with early C2D many boards need some bios upgrades caus they have temp reporting issues...i dont trust that 70c...

If we are at 70c at 3.4ghz regard;ess of vcore then iNtel would have not solved a damn thing with heat..it also doesn't make sense using the power consumption numbers and figuring what smithfield and preslers did...
 
"We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today." HardOCP

Couldn't agree more. However, Conroe still thrashes the A64s in video/audio encoding/rendering and overclockability.
 
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
"We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today." HardOCP

Couldn't agree more. However, Conroe still thrashes the A64s in video/audio encoding/rendering and overclockability.
Click to expand...

That is the reason I am getting one.....The fact I actual do those things helps...

 
Overclockability ? I will wait till Duvie does his... The other guy only got 3.2. on a 6800 extreme no less.
 
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
"We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today." HardOCP

Couldn't agree more. However, Conroe still thrashes the A64s in video/audio encoding/rendering and overclockability.
Click to expand...


So Conroe exceeds X2 by a small margin in gaming and a larger margin in most everything else?

What would be the best CPU for a new build?
 
Originally posted by: coldpower27
But this is agood thing, considering how slow CPU cycles are, it shows Core Architecture is way ahead of all current GPU technology. We can always use the extra headroom. 🙂
Click to expand...
Of course it's a good thing. I just had too big an expectation. Especially after seeing Anand's gaming benches where a 2.6GHz Conroe trashes an FX-62 by like 20%.


 
Originally posted by: lopri
Originally posted by: coldpower27
But this is agood thing, considering how slow CPU cycles are, it shows Core Architecture is way ahead of all current GPU technology. We can always use the extra headroom. 🙂
Click to expand...
Of course it's a good thing. I just had too big an expectation. Especially after seeing Anand's gaming benches where a 2.6GHz Conroe trashes an FX-62 by like 20%.
Click to expand...


You have to take things into perspective here, I think they ran X1900 XT Crossfire for one at 1280x1024 HQ F.E.A.R, but considering the FPS number no AA or AF.
 
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
i know.

still conroe looks quite future-proof to me.
Click to expand...



nothing is future proof, but the conroe boards are suppose to be able to support future kentsfield chips...
 
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
"We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today." HardOCP

Couldn't agree more. However, Conroe still thrashes the A64s in video/audio encoding/rendering and overclockability.
Click to expand...


So Conroe exceeds X2 by a small margin in gaming and a larger margin in most everything else?

What would be the best CPU for a new build?
Click to expand...

if you already have DDR400 sitting around, a s939 X2 after price drops - although there's a chance they may remain higher priced than AM2s...how much so we would have to wait and see.

Otherwise, because AM2 and Core 2 both require DDR2, you'd might as well go Core 2 I'd say, unless AM2 price cuts are too hard to beat, which seems doubtful. If overclocking (I'll wait for more reviews concerning the issue to make a firm recommendation), I'd think the advantage would most definitely land Core 2 and thus make the choice even easier (going with a sub $200 Core 2 and overclocking the heck out of it)

Although Core 2 may be in such great demand that prices never really hit MSRP for the longest time, I dunno, it would be best just to wait and see if possible.
 
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
i know.

still conroe looks quite future-proof to me.
Click to expand...



nothing is future proof, but the conroe boards are suppose to be able to support future kentsfield chips...
Click to expand...

but conroe may be good for a couple of next gen gpu upgrades.
 
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
i know.

still conroe looks quite future-proof to me.
Click to expand...



nothing is future proof, but the conroe boards are suppose to be able to support future kentsfield chips...
Click to expand...

but conroe may be good for a couple of next gen gpu upgrades.
Click to expand...


Oh I see what you are saying....definitely not cpu limited...has room to grow into it...
 
Originally posted by: dmens
OMG, what a joke!!! Here's my reading of that "review":

"We *could* remove the GPU bottleneck but deliberately chose not to by running max graphic load tests on an inadequate card, hence turning this supposed CPU review into a meaningless frame-rate contest where the differing hardware were non-factors. Also, we're going to slap the "real world test" label onto our non-tests, then call all the other benchmarks on the web bogus because they actually tested CPU power as opposed to the GPU. Also, we will present the results of this non-test in an obnoxious and biased manner."

You can run the same crappy "test suite" on a nehalem or gesher in 200x/201x and come up with almost the exact same results due to the absurd bottleneck (feel free to QFT). I guess everyone should just buy a priced down AM2 and use it for the rest of their lives! LOL!

This review is worse than garbage.
Click to expand...

hard to read a review when you also have to be able to comprehend the review..lol
 
Originally posted by: wilki24
Does anyone else get the impression that the author(s) of these articles are using a lot of "Conroe comes out ahead, BUT the difference isn't that much..." type statements? i.e. a lot more than are necassary, since it's plainly obvious in most of the places they're used?

For example:

Now let?s take apply this data to what would happen if we were encoding an entire music CD of average length to your iPod or other MP3 player. You would likely only see a 20 to 25 second advantage to using Intel?s new Core 2.
Click to expand...

Ok, put that way, it doesn't sound like much. But when you do the math, it's a 21% increase in performance.

I dunno, it just seems like a conscious effort to downplay the performance differences. I mean, hardware people get excited about a 5% performance increase from memory timings... yet a cpu that uses less power, generates less heat and is at an equal price point, all while giving a 21% boost in performace is downplayed?

What's with that?
Click to expand...

does anybody get thew idea your a AMD fanboy...lol
 
Why all the whining and crying in this thread? The hardocp article that was linked pointed out the fact that things are GPU limited and if you own a great system now, don't rush out and upgrade if you are expecting games to perform a lot better. It was a real world article. On the other hand, did you read the article? If so , you would have noticed that they linked their other article where they tested things other than games. In it they said that if you are grabbing a new system, Conroe should be AT THE TOP of your list! Seems cool to me. And I agree with them. If i was gonna build a new system now, I'd grab conroe for sure. Is the gaming performance in stuff that I play enough to make me build a new system? Not yet.
 
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
So Conroe exceeds X2 by a small margin in gaming and a larger margin in most everything else?
What would be the best CPU for a new build?
Click to expand...
Due to Conroe's expected limited availability and high prices while ramping, ($1,359 at newegg), I would expect you will continue to get the best performance per dollar from an AM2 or 939 system or even a dirt cheap Pentium D805 system.

With AMD's coming price cuts, I would expect the low end X2's to give you the best bang for the buck by far.

 
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
So Conroe exceeds X2 by a small margin in gaming and a larger margin in most everything else?

What would be the best CPU for a new build?
Click to expand...
1. If you don't rip DVDs and playing games at the same time, the cheapest way of gaming is to pick up a single-core A64 for $50 from F/S forum.
2. If you want to go with a super-budget, all-round CPU then it's Pentium D 805. (~$100)
3. If you don't mind spending a bit more and concerned about heat/power, it's A64 X2 3800+. (~$170)
4. If you're are a moderate-to-heavy multitasker and want your rig to last longer, then E6600 fits the bill. (~$350)
5. If you're serious about OC'ing and want to have the top of the line system, I'd say it's E6700 due to its x10 multiplier. (~$550)

Of course the total cost of ownership will be different per individuals and what they already have.
 
Conroe is like an awesomely fine girl at the beach, but she won't give you the time of day until you take her to a fancy restaurant and provide her with 2 diamond encrusted $1200 video cards from the future from 2008. So you will have dated this girl for 1-1.5 years and still spent boatloads of money on her top of the line SLI diamonds before she even puts out for you. LOL.
And by that time you will have realized that this beach girl (Conroe) isn't even hot anymore compared to the new 65 and 45 nm quad vixens that are checking you out. So now you dump her and give your "from the future" diamond sli cards to the sexy quad chicks instead. And now you finally achieve the Utopia that had been promised to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top