Intel can do no wrong! Check out the new AT review on Q6600 GO stepping.

[adairusmc]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: SteelSix

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
This makes me feel a lot better about being "stuck" with my B3 (that I got on the July 4th Fry's deal). I've been hovering over the "buy" button on G0's for a while but I'm glad I didn't do it.

Mine does 3 GHz @ 1.288/1.248 (idle/load cpu-z reported), I suppose I should learn to be content.

Viper GTS

Agreed. I'm at 3.06Ghz w/my B3 and am happy. After a week of hunting for G0's, I said screw it and just ordered...

How come you gave up? I only had to wait a week.

Maybe like me, he wanted a processor NOW and not a week from now. Having a B3 is not a bad thing, by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Serradifalco
Link

Title and link tell the story.

I wonder if AT's review didn't show a minimal performance and heat benefit over B3, and Intel gets meh review, would you have been as nearly miffed? Really dude, it's a stepping, not a leap in manufacturing process or architecture. Plain and simple, it has slightly lower power consumption, and may or may not o/c better than a B3. YMMV. What's not to like? It's not bad news is it?

at least it isn't hotter, takes more power, overclocks worse and is slower. :laugh:

Prescott *cough*

 

[Serradifalco]

Ok now that the flames have subsided...let me explain further. I was just pointing to the fact that Intel has become the new "darling" of all computer enthusiasts, therefore it can do no wrong. Look at the bashing Nvidia recieved at the hands of AT. Link. I know it was more of a price-to-performance issue AT had with Nvidia. Nonetheless, the beating was merciless.

Thanks for the explanation. Your title was "borderline" provacative. We do want something that is not the "same old" but will not tolerate controversy that invites flaming. The regulars here are quite mature and it rarely becomes like Video debates.

CPU Moderator apoppin

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: vijay333
Actually just upgraded from an X2 4600+ system to a B3 last week...quite glad to see there were no significant improvements in the G0.

I wouldn't say that. There were numerous bug-fixes in the G0 stepping. If nothing else, I would prefer to get a G0 for "correctness". The lower power and extra OC headroom are just bonuses.

 

[rickon66]

I guess the OP is trying to indicate that there is pro INTEL bias in the review. The processors ran as the were supposed to, got a pretty nice overclock using the rather crappy intel HS/fan and then the review was supposed to be negative? My first thought when I read the first post-"What is your point?

 

[Keysplayr]

Well, Intel is the new "darling" for just reasons. Just like A64's were the "then darling" for just reasons. Nothing wrong with that. The thing is, it's all relative. If the A64 did not overtake the P4 in performance, power consumption, heat, etc., then the P4 would have been the "darling". Or if C2D didn't deliver over X2's, likewise the X2's would still be the "sweetheart butter biscuit honey pie" <-- I wish I hadn't typed that.. ANYWAY............. OP. Just so you know. We all know that AMD has great CPU's, so no worries. However, AT's G0 review is just fine as it is. A positive conclusion for a positive situation. Albeit small positive.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: rickon66
I guess the OP is trying to indicate that there is pro INTEL bias in the review. The processors ran as the were supposed to, got a pretty nice overclock using the rather crappy intel HS/fan and then the review was supposed to be negative? My first thought when I read the first post-"What is your point?

I'm thinking the review actually didn't say enough nice things about the G0 cores. People are reporting an average of a 200mhz higher overclock, but the article just said there was a 100mhz boost.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: Serradifalco
Ok now that the flames have subsided...let me explain further. I was just pointing to the fact that Intel has become the new "darling" of all computer enthusiasts, therefore it can do no wrong. Look at the bashing Nvidia recieved at the hands of AT. Link. I know it was more of a price-to-performance issue AT had with Nvidia. Nonetheless, the beating was merciless.

CPU Moderator apoppin[/b]

Intel is the new "darling" because it currently has the best performing processors out, overclock well and have good power consumption characteristics, it's well deserved.

 

[JackPack]

"Do no wrong"?

I don't understand, are you not satisfied with $266? Maybe you think the improvements in G0 aren't enough?

What is it exactly that you're looking for, given the competition has nothing to offer?

 

[toadeater]

Originally posted by: JackPack
"Do no wrong"?

I don't understand, are you not satisfied with $266? Maybe you think the improvements in G0 aren't enough?

What is it exactly that you're looking for, given the competition has nothing to offer?

The only reason this happened is because of the competition! Barcelona may not beat Intel initially, but it is enough to keep Intel on its toes.

 

[Pugnate]

I have to admit, I found the review headline too exciting for the actual conclusions of the review. So yes, I was a bit surprised too.

"Intel Core 2 Q6600 G0 Stepping: Cheap Quad Core Just Got Better"

That raised my expectations a touch, though looking at the headline again, I can't say it is misleading either. It seems fine to me, and maybe it was just my own excitement that lead me to expect more.

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: rickon66
I guess the OP is trying to indicate that there is pro INTEL bias in the review. The processors ran as the were supposed to, got a pretty nice overclock using the rather crappy intel HS/fan and then the review was supposed to be negative? My first thought when I read the first post-"What is your point?

I'm thinking the review actually didn't say enough nice things about the G0 cores. People are reporting an average of a 200mhz higher overclock, but the article just said there was a 100mhz boost.

Anand only used the stock heatsink, though. I imagine that with higher end heatsinks the gap between the two steppings would widen and resemble something more like the 200-400Mhz spread that seems to be common in the Quad Overclock thread. Even if the G0 uses 10% less power, that's still a lot of heat to dissipate when you overclock it into the 3+ Ghz range.