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

[Makaveli]

Which version of super PI are u using.

cause I know there is one version that doesn't use SS3.

My 146 Opteron at 2.8ghz does it in 29secs also. So is it possible your not using the ss3 version of Super PI. cause I saw a 2 second difference from the non ss3 version.

The only other difference I could see would be I have a single core cpu and u dual core, but I don't know if that would make a difference in this app. actually one other difference your memory speed u might be at 500mhz but very high timings. i'm at 2-3-2-10 at 200mhz.

lol forgot the point of the post, u should be getting a faster PI time than myself with a 200mhz clock speed advantage, unless what I mentioned above changes the result.

 

[Bobthelost]

*throws tantrum over lack of updates*

 

[compgeek89]

alright, FEAR benches up.

its really unbelievable. FPS min and avg doubled @ 1600x1200

 

[the Chase]

mmmmm.....that is unbelievable. What drivers are you using now and what where you using before?

 

[compgeek89]

still 84.56, i figured out the problem, by some freak accident SLI rendiering was not enabled for FEAR... its really wierd, I enabled it, and now that I have rebooted it says its predefined and I dont have the choice of on/off... whatever, i finally got it all working.

 

[the Chase]

Good deal- A lot of peeps looking forward to this...me included. The Fear results are going to be hard for me to handle....It seems your testing correctly but....Twice the fps at 1600x1200 with 4AA etc....Well....awesome if thats the case!

 

[compgeek89]

I know man, I almost fell off of my chair, but the 1024x768 results look perfectly believable, and all i did was switch to 1600x1200 and run it again.

 

[the Chase]

Are you sure SLI was enabled for the AMD system the first time?- http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2769&p=7 the stock 7900GT got 35 fps in their 1600 4AA test, and you have a pretty good OC going there to hit your 43 fps average for the AMD system?

 

[compgeek89]

That IS interesting, are they setting everything @ maximum?

 

[compgeek89]

Crap, they even beat my conroe score, i must think that they are lowering a setting somewhere.

 

[the Chase]

Yeah I think some sites turned off soft-shadows while testing so who knows. Keep the benchies coming!! The rest of the games should give a good idea also. Thanks again!

 

[compgeek89]

sure thing

 

[Howard]

Jeez, look at those 16x12 FEAR benches. Never thought the CPU would be a bottleneck there, but it is, and how the Conroe looks! rool;

 

[compgeek89]

maybe FEAR likes DDR2 bandwidth, anyone have an AM2 comparison?

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

hm, source known to be very cpu hungry only gains like 5fps and fear gains 100%?

 

[compgeek89]

i know... got me beat, i reran both.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

k, but thats what we here for: surprises

 

[Makaveli]

I have noticed this to bling bling, I think the gains we are seeing in fear have to be coming from the extra cache. but I guess we won't know until we see some testing of fear with the 4mb vs 2mb conroe's.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Makaveli
I have noticed this to bling bling, I think the gains we are seeing in fear have to be coming from the extra cache. but I guess we won't know until we see some testing of fear with the 4mb vs 2mb conroe's.

You guys aren't forgetting that Core 2 Duo chips aren't just Yonahs with more cache right? Don't give so much credit to the cache, yet. Sure, it will help in certain apps and circumstances, but not with everything. It would indeed be nice if we could see what a 2MB Conroe is like, albeit at slower clocks. But then there is always o/cing.

 

[Makaveli]

yes I agree with what your saying, but were talking about a specific game, and games in general have shown the biggest improvements when u increase cache.

 

[n7]

I am shocked by the improvement C2D gives in FEAR @ 16x12.

I'm also wondering htf it's even possible.

XbitLabs did a review of various CPU, all the way from Celerons to FX-57, & they got like 40 fps on every single CPU @ 16x12 with settings maxed, since the game is so GPU limited...

So htf is C2D magically removing the GPU limited-ness

 

[classy]

Fear is pretty gpu limited. I find it almost impossible to believe that Conroe goes from only a 20fps lead at 1024x768 to a 43 fps lead at 1600x1200. It goes from being 14% faster at lower resolution to 100% faster at a higher resolution. Ain't no bleeping way. That's bs.

 

[compgeek89]

i dont know how it can be BS guys.

 

[Markbnj]

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...

Duvie, at some point the old "synthetic benchmark" thing starts to sound a little, well, delusional . That as an ass-whoopin'.

Interesting how the SuperPI scores flattened out on the 32m, though.

 

[13Gigatons]

The only thing that matters is:

1. Cost
2. Performance
3. Date I can actually buy it

The x2 is the AMD's first generation I'm eager to see their second generation. I would say that begins at 65 nm.