Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 compared directly to an Opteron 165 @ 3GHz

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Duvie
So I guess you guys got that from synthetic benches so far...

While I dont disagree it may be a huge lead in the end the fact you (and trust me I want to add a comment hear) have commented after synthetic benches really states volumes where this forum has gone.....

I though I was going to read something really comprehensive...You haven't even waited until all the test were done...


disclaimer...I am going to buy the exact model so dont label me as a fanboy....just tired of some of you ppl...

You really are a rude piece of work kiddo.

If this forum has become so distasteful to you, I recommend you go find yourself another one. It's one thing to disagree with someone, but it's quite another to constantly berate and insult other users ESPECIALLY when they are only trying to provide desired information. Just go away and never return.

ALOHA.

Compgeek, nice work so far, and thank you.

i really dont take advice from you!!! I tend to spend more time elsewhere but I will be sure to stay around more to please you!!!


And by the way i AM DEAD RIGHT...the comments made at the beginning of this thread was for 5-6 synthetic marks....Until real test were done that type of intel fanboy "AMD takes a beatdown" only is flamebait....

I've said my piece. Whether you are right or wrong on the technical side of things has little to do with how you present yourself. What I said was not intended to be spiteful, as was your comment to stay around more just to please me. It was to try and make you think, "Why the hell am I still hanging around here if it annoys me so much."

Compgeek: Keep em coming

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: compgeek89
MPG to XViD bench up. 3m 39s cut at the sam clockspeed aint bad.

That is very impressive, but the Opty seems to holding its own though. In all the 3dmark tests except for 2001, its right with the Conroe. But here is where folks need to pay attention

Source Stress Test:
1600x1200, 4xAA 16xAF, Everything Maximum
Opteron 165 @ 3GHz: 134.15fps
Conroe @ 3GHz: 138.41fps
Conroe @ Max Clocks:

Conroe in reality, for high end gaming is not going to change much and I think that the AM2 in high end will probably steal a couple because of the bandwidth. It added exactly 4.26 fps more. CPUs just don't have the same type of impact in a system like they use to.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: compgeek89
MPG to XViD bench up. 3m 39s cut at the sam clockspeed aint bad.

That is very impressive, but the Opty seems to holding its own though. In all the 3dmark tests except for 2001, its right with the Conroe. But here is where folks need to pay attention

Source Stress Test:
1600x1200, 4xAA 16xAF, Everything Maximum
Opteron 165 @ 3GHz: 134.15fps
Conroe @ 3GHz: 138.41fps
Conroe @ Max Clocks:

Conroe in reality, for high end gaming is not going to change much and I think that the AM2 in high end will probably steal a couple because of the bandwidth. It added exactly 4.26 fps more. CPUs just don't have the same type of impact in a system like they use to.

yeah but remember that opty is really a fx-64. a proceesor not even out yet. so its bound to be imited by the gpu.

 

[Hyperlite]

29 sec superpi for the 165 @ 3ghz? shoot, my 2ghz core duo can do a 28sec run...

that aside, this is very exciting. Things are really heating up for the first time in a while.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: classy

That is very impressive, but the Opty seems to holding its own though. In all the 3dmark tests except for 2001, its right with the Conroe. But here is where folks need to pay attention

Source Stress Test:
1600x1200, 4xAA 16xAF, Everything Maximum
Opteron 165 @ 3GHz: 134.15fps
Conroe @ 3GHz: 138.41fps
Conroe @ Max Clocks:

Conroe in reality, for high end gaming is not going to change much and I think that the AM2 in high end will probably steal a couple because of the bandwidth. It added exactly 4.26 fps more. CPUs just don't have the same type of impact in a system like they use to.

Yeah, it should be pretty obvious by now that vid cards will still be the #1 deciding factor in game performance well into the future. What's intresting to me about benchmarks like the Source streess test listed above is that the CPU must be woefully under-utilized in high-res situations. The true strength of a processor running high-res games won't be in the total frames/second but in what it can do with spare processing power on other apps running in the background. Either that, or someone's going to find a way to utilize all that spare processing power to speed up or enhance games somehow.

 

[nyker96]

I think most of the people here are right on target. Gaming probably conroe won't make a dent with its high CPU muscle but it will definitely make a big difference else where. Looking at a 20% or more improvement fpr same clock is most impressive. And if their heat signature is smaller then there's very little AMD can do to tip the scale, AM2 or not. They need a new architecture to combat conroe not just some interium improvements. AMD64 has been around for many years, served its purpose of domination on Netburst, time for a change. But I think AMD already understand the urgency for this move, question is how long does it take before they can put it all together ... [to be continued]

 

[lopri]

FEAR Stress Test:
1024x768, 4xAA 16xAF, all max: Opteron 165 @ 3GHz:
Min 60 | Avg 142 | Max 370
1600x1200, 4xAA 16xAF, all max: Opteron 165 @ 3GHz:
Min 25 | Avg 43 | Max 172

The F.E.A.R. Opteron bench @1600 has got to be misconducted. (@1024 result seems fine, though)

1024 Max Everything including Soft Shadow
1600 Max Everything including Soft Shadow

7900 GTX SLI

 

[lopri]

I mean, you just don't get less than 1/3 of FPS by going from 1024 to 1600 unless something elsee is wrong. The fact this error happened on Opteron rig (which should have mature drivers et al.) draws a little concern on the validity on the picture.

Still I believe in Conroe's superiority over A64 architecture. I agree to Anand's evaluation (approx. 20% clock for clock) on raw CPU power.

Edit: I just noticed my post counts went 4-digits since I joined AT about 4 years ago.

 

[compgeek89]

Umm... i think you are not setting somehing correctly lopri, there is NO way you get virtually the same FPS @ 1024 and 1600 :roll:

 

[lopri]

Frame buffer could make a little bit of difference. (256MB vs 512MB) I've noticed both F.E.A.R. and Call of Duty 2 use 400MB+ of framebuffer on GTX. (via RivaTuna monitoring) But of course with less on-board memory the game/drivers will automatically reduce the ammount of texture data loading, balancing out the performance somewhat. Either way, your 1600x1200 result seems a bit too low. I will check out some reviews. My tests were done on same rig/settings and only thing that I've changed is the resolution.

Edit: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2769&p=7

It's most likely SLI wasn't enabled when you were testing @1600, or a card throttled thanks to the idiotic Forceware. Your score is more like that of a single-card's.

 

[compgeek89]

Well, i can definitely see that, it seems x1800 XT 512 Xfire can beat my 7900 GTs in FEAR when there should be no way..

 

[lopri]

Most plausible and priceless data among your testing, at least for me, looks to be the PCMark05. It's exactly what I've expected and Opteron rig's score is spot-on. We can also see that A64 still has advantages on memory access thanks to the on-die memory conroller (which itself is far from enough to be competitive to Conroe in overall performance)

I didn't mean to nit-pick your contribute to the community. I greatly appreciate your time and effort, and thanks to your PCMark05 data, I can compare the twos side by side in near-complete package. It's the most valuable data (PCMark05) that I've seen comparing A64 vs Conroe so far on the net.

 

[Markfw]

Well, this may seem like a nit, but I would like to see an AM2@3.0 ghz. Then the memory could be exactly the same, and tested on an a good motherboard, the same price as the bad axe mobo you have. And have the Opteron be the 2.4 ghz one, OC;ed to 3 ghz. And then some tests other than synthetics done.

 

[lopri]

I'd venture to guess an AM2 rig will perform worse than a Socket 939 rig.

 

[Xcobra]

meh, i wanna see amd's 65nm process, i think comparing 90nm vs 65nm is bogus... but again, conroe seems to be a hell of a cpu...

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: Xcobra
meh, i wanna see amd's 65nm process, i think comparing 90nm vs 65nm is bogus... but again, conroe seems to be a hell of a cpu...

... today vs today

not future vs today

conroe is today

 

[kknd1967]

very nice list. Please keep it updated.
Conroe looks to be a perfect choice for gaming and media processing

Originally posted by: compgeek89
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=185555

very precise comparison

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Xcobra
meh, i wanna see amd's 65nm process, i think comparing 90nm vs 65nm is bogus... but again, conroe seems to be a hell of a cpu...

... today vs today

not future vs today

conroe is today

Not quite yet...give it a day...and then maybe 30-60 days for us to own one besides a handfull of engineering samples being review "TODAY"...

 

[Hard Ball]

Originally posted by: Hyperlite
29 sec superpi for the 165 @ 3ghz? shoot, my 2ghz core duo can do a 28sec run...

that aside, this is very exciting. Things are really heating up for the first time in a while.

SuperPI is a cache bound benchmark; and it's not a surprise at all that Core Duos would do better on such a small dataset, where memory bandwidth or latency does not matter at all. Heck, my T60 with T2300 Duo can run in 36sec, significantly faster than a 2.0GHz A64. But that really means squat in real world applications.

The two most worthless benchmarks out are probably SuperPI and linPack FLOPS.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Hard Ball

Originally posted by: Hyperlite
29 sec superpi for the 165 @ 3ghz? shoot, my 2ghz core duo can do a 28sec run...

that aside, this is very exciting. Things are really heating up for the first time in a while.

SuperPI is a cache bound benchmark; and it's not a surprise at all that Core Duos would do better on such a small dataset, where memory bandwidth or latency does not matter at all. Heck, my T60 with T2300 Duo can run in 36sec, significantly faster than a 2.0GHz A64. But that really means squat in real world applications.

The two most worthless benchmarks out are probably SuperPI and linPack FLOPS.

QFT...

Sold your dual dual opteron setup yet???

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Xcobra
meh, i wanna see amd's 65nm process, i think comparing 90nm vs 65nm is bogus... but again, conroe seems to be a hell of a cpu...

... today vs today

not future vs today

conroe is today

conroe is today........?........you know where I can pick one up

 

[Hard Ball]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Hard Ball

Originally posted by: Hyperlite
29 sec superpi for the 165 @ 3ghz? shoot, my 2ghz core duo can do a 28sec run...

that aside, this is very exciting. Things are really heating up for the first time in a while.

SuperPI is a cache bound benchmark; and it's not a surprise at all that Core Duos would do better on such a small dataset, where memory bandwidth or latency does not matter at all. Heck, my T60 with T2300 Duo can run in 36sec, significantly faster than a 2.0GHz A64. But that really means squat in real world applications.

The two most worthless benchmarks out are probably SuperPI and linPack FLOPS.

QFT...

Sold your dual dual opteron setup yet???

Yeah, it is officially gone; a poster from arstechnica picked it up from my house on Saturday; so I will do with laptop in the near future .

 

[HopJokey]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Xcobra
meh, i wanna see amd's 65nm process, i think comparing 90nm vs 65nm is bogus... but again, conroe seems to be a hell of a cpu...

... today vs today

not future vs today

conroe is today

conroe is today........?........you know where I can pick one up

eBay? (maybe GBuy on the 28th )

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Xcobra
meh, i wanna see amd's 65nm process, i think comparing 90nm vs 65nm is bogus... but again, conroe seems to be a hell of a cpu...

... today vs today

not future vs today

conroe is today

Not quite yet...give it a day...and then maybe 30-60 days for us to own one besides a handfull of engineering samples being review "TODAY"...

Yup. The day I see it on newegg for purchase, you can call it today. ES chips don;t count, or rumor, etc....

So Conroe is NOT today.

 

[theteamaqua]

have u tried phase change cooling?? coolaler in xs did 4Ghz under 1.35vcore using "cooler express"(not sure what brand it is)

but i am looking forward to OC a lot with Vapochill LS, say 4.5Ghz maximum?? with E6700

EDIT: but they say X6800 can do 4 GHz on air, who knows, it might be true