Let's say Conroe and AM2 came out today

[TekDemon]

Originally posted by: plus
All things being equal, I'd choose AMD of course. If there were no AMD we'd be paying $1000 for a 700mhz cpu.

Seriously, don't you have to give AMD credit for consistantly outperforming INTC with 1/10 the R&D budget?

Go back and look at what INTC spent it's money on... most of the time it was on platforms designed more to lock out the competition than to benefit the customer. AMD says they're customer oriented, and I believe them.

Am I an AMD fanboy? You bet I am...

Plus

lol if it wasn't for AMD we'd actually have IA-64 systems instead of being bonded to x86 for another decade. That's quite the "innovation" there.

Yes, prices would probably be higher than they are now, but then again there'd always be other companies taking up the slack on the low end for price pressure (Cyrix, Transmeta, etc.).

And intel would have to keep pushing the performance envelope, if only to get people to buy newer intel processors. If they just stayed at 700Mhz nobody would upgrade, and they'd go bankrupt anyways. They'd always have to release new procs significantly faster than their previous ones.

So really, I don't buy your argument. Procs would just be more money, but then again they might have been really better procs (IA-64 is technically way superior to x86-64)

 

[rancherlee]

Originally posted by: allies

Originally posted by: rancherlee
Well K7 took us from 500mhz all the way to 2.2gig (offically) , Intel took the P4 from 1.4 to 3.6+ gig. I'm sure K8 has some life in it yet and i think the Socket M2 is probibly going to be the replacement for socket 754, Not Socket 939 (As in M2 will be for the "value" processors.)

Amost positive this isn't the case. When Socket 754 was king for AMD, S939 came out and took the place of top dog, S754 being "value". When AM2 comes out, which has support for DDR2, will take the "high end" spot, demoting S939 to value and putting an end to S754.

what I ment by this is AMD probibly has another socket setup in the works that will be out in less than a year and the AM2 will be a "short lived" topdog socket. I personally don't think AMD has a "K9" ready to go in the near future, probibly 12+ months at this point or we would have "heard" about it by now, how long did it take for "hammer" to hit the streets after it was anounced. I really don't Think Conroe is gunna be a 3rd quarter chip either, there MIGHT be a select few computers out there with it by Christmas.

 

[hooflung]

I wouldn't buy either because I am quite happy with my X2 3800+ and 2gig of OCZ DDR400

 

[Caelum]

i'd grab an AM2 - why?

with ddr2 ram latencies decreasing as we go on, that difference would affect amd more than intel, due to the integrated mem controller

ok... so equal performance and overclocking? hey, its equal now(hypothetically)! no one said anything about the future

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: rancherlee

Originally posted by: allies

Originally posted by: rancherlee
Well K7 took us from 500mhz all the way to 2.2gig (offically) , Intel took the P4 from 1.4 to 3.6+ gig. I'm sure K8 has some life in it yet and i think the Socket M2 is probibly going to be the replacement for socket 754, Not Socket 939 (As in M2 will be for the "value" processors.)

Amost positive this isn't the case. When Socket 754 was king for AMD, S939 came out and took the place of top dog, S754 being "value". When AM2 comes out, which has support for DDR2, will take the "high end" spot, demoting S939 to value and putting an end to S754.

what I ment by this is AMD probibly has another socket setup in the works that will be out in less than a year and the AM2 will be a "short lived" topdog socket. I personally don't think AMD has a "K9" ready to go in the near future, probibly 12+ months at this point or we would have "heard" about it by now, how long did it take for "hammer" to hit the streets after it was anounced. I really don't Think Conroe is gunna be a 3rd quarter chip either, there MIGHT be a select few computers out there with it by Christmas.

Ah... gotchya. I agree with you on what you're saying.

 

[Maximilian]

Intel, it has the physically stronger CPU as it has no pins, AMD's still use those damn things.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: plus
The reports I read said Conroe will be available from 1.8 to 2.8ghz. So, the review Anand did was on the max speed part.

Remember, the Conroe is based on the old P3... it doesn't have 64 bit support... did you ever see a P3 that could clock to 2.8ghz?

Plus

Conroe will be available at 1.86GHZ - 2.66GHZ on the mainstream line.

Just how Athlon 64x2 is available at 2.0GHZ - 2.4GHZ on it's mainstream line.

There will be an Extreme Edition available at 3GHZ or higher with 1333FSB.
And like alot of AMD fanboys your misinformed Intel's Core Micro-architecture will have EM64T. It's a given.

 

[Geomagick]

Conroe for me based on the benchies so far. I can't see AMD making up that much ground by just going to DDR2.

Still I have been wrong in the past.

Anyway I'll be sticking with my 4400+ till at least Q1 2007 anyway, unless I win a lottery or something like that.

 

[deepinya]

This is the GAYEST thread.

While we are talking about impossible things: Lets say you were hot enough to bang a super model but just enough of a nerd to choose any processor you wanted. Which would you pick?

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: deepinya
This is the GAYEST thread.

While we are talking about impossible things: Lets say you were hot enough to bang a super model but just enough of a nerd to choose any processor you wanted. Which would you pick?

Whichever offers more stability and bang for the buck. Most likely the processor.

 

[Munky]

If they both cost $300, then performance should be similar. If Intel has a big lead like the preview benches say, then the AMD cpu will most likely be cheaper, and then you have to do the whole bang/buck equation. Whoever has the most bang for buck dets my money. OTOH, with my Opty 165, I dont plan to upgrade until AMD releases the cpu that comes after the AM2, which would likely be a year from now.

 

[Marmion]

Originally posted by: munky
If they both cost $300, then performance should be similar. If Intel has a big lead like the preview benches say, then the AMD cpu will most likely be cheaper, and then you have to do the whole bang/buck equation. Whoever has the most bang for buck dets my money. OTOH, with my Opty 165, I dont plan to upgrade until AMD releases the cpu that comes after the AM2, which would likely be a year from now.

So, a $530 intel chip, is beating a theoretical $1k AMD chip. Suddenly the almost 100% more expensive chip is going to cost less than the intel chip?!
All the more power to the consumers

 

[Henny]

Conroe, it's a no brainer.

 

[LumbergTech]

i will buy the one that gives me the most performance for my dollar..no matter what company it is....i will not jump on the intel bandwagon if they think they can price gouge with the hype from this upcoming cpu

 

[pedramrezai]

The way most of the people are thinking is just the way Intel has planned. I am a AMD fan but I can realize competition is good for customers. I was shocked by Core performance but using a handicapped AMD system really annoyed me. First, reviewers have already proven RD580 or solutions with dual 16x can deliver up to 10-15% more performance when paired with high-end, bandwith hungry vga cards. Second, we have been hearing of dual core optimizations in display drivers for some time but were unable to see something significant until we saw Conroe performance; I am quite suspicious over some hefty optimizations in intel-cooked display driver. Time will reveal. Third, this might be the beginning of a new SSEx game with unfair optimizations for a new technoogy.
I am surprized how people are trashing the current as well as future AMD64 technology.But remember that Core is not out yet and all these might be some optimizations that has granted it this performance level. Moreover, the current AMD64 technology is almost 3 years old and the new AM2 will update its specs. AMD did not like DDR2 high latency; What they are looking for is its higher frequency that can be paired with the new AM2 FSB.For Athlon 64 and Sempron a 333mhz FSB that paires with DDR2 666 and for the Fx parts a 400 mhz FSB pairing with DDR2 800. If DDR1 could reach these frequencies you could now see the real potential of AMD64. This kind of bandwith will give Core a hard time. Also remember that AMD is increasing cache (L2 and maybe L3). Shared cache is also something that will be seen in the future products and will bring huge performance gains. Based on the preliminary data of 200/266 async single channel bandwith of 3500mb/s a memory bandwith of >10k is expected in the final product and if Intel was going to compare its future platform, it was not fare to compare it with an infrastructure of >2 years old. I am sure the new AM2 will regain AMD reputation once again. But we all must remember that this competition between major players is good for the end users.

 

[imported_Husky55]

Conroe. Hopefully Intel chipset will be better than the NF4 Active Arrmor and chiset upgrades.

 

[lukx]

Originally posted by: plus
The reports I read said Conroe will be available from 1.8 to 2.8ghz. So, the review Anand did was on the max speed part.

Remember, the Conroe is based on the old P3... it doesn't have 64 bit support... did you ever see a P3 that could clock to 2.8ghz?

Plus

?? Conroe isn't 64 bit?

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: plus
The reports I read said Conroe will be available from 1.8 to 2.8ghz. So, the review Anand did was on the max speed part.

Remember, the Conroe is based on the old P3... it doesn't have 64 bit support... did you ever see a P3 that could clock to 2.8ghz?

Plus

Wow can anyone be more clueless?? I would try understand if you are a guy who knows absolutely nothing about computers and wonders what the shiny grey button that normal computer user would know as "Power" button is. Probably you are.

Yes, Conroe HAS 64-bit support.

The reports are MAINSTREAM Conroe will be available from 1.86GHz to 2.66GHz, and there will be a Extreme Edition, which is sampled at 3.33GHz couple of months ago, so you can estimate the clock speeds of the actual EE version.

Conroe is NOT based on the old P3. I would assume you think Athlon64s are based on AMD K5's??

 

[xenolith]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000

Originally posted by: plus
The reports I read said Conroe will be available from 1.8 to 2.8ghz. So, the review Anand did was on the max speed part.

Remember, the Conroe is based on the old P3... it doesn't have 64 bit support... did you ever see a P3 that could clock to 2.8ghz?

Plus

Wow can anyone be more clueless?? I would try understand if you are a guy who knows absolutely nothing about computers and wonders what the shiny grey button that normal computer user would know as "Power" button is. Probably you are.

Yes, Conroe HAS 64-bit support.

The reports are MAINSTREAM Conroe will be available from 1.86GHz to 2.66GHz, and there will be a Extreme Edition, which is sampled at 3.33GHz couple of months ago, so you can estimate the clock speeds of the actual EE version.

Conroe is NOT based on the old P3. I would assume you think Athlon64s are based on AMD K5's??

I don't think anybody could be that uninformed IntelUser. I had to put my decoder hat on to figure out what plus *might* have meant.

That is, that the Conroe is more of an heir to the old P-3 than it is an hier to the P-4 or P-D, thankfully. I still don't know where he was going with the clock speeds or "it doesn't have 64 bit support" though. I think i need a new decoder hat.

I say, who cares what Intel has done with its last few products? All I care about is... does the next gen chips kick butt? The Conroe clearly looks like it does. And in a few months, the ball will be in AMD's side of the court, and I am sure they will not sit by quietly. I can't wait to see how they respond.

This type of competition is always good for us... the customer.

EDIT: found this article

 

[TheRyuu]

Originally posted by: Enigmatic
I would probably go for AMD in fear of Intel's ever-changing chipsets so if I ever did decide to upgrade the processor I wouldn't have to change the motherboard.

Me too. Considering there are rumors of K8L still using the AM2 platform.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: munky
If they both cost $300, then performance should be similar. If Intel has a big lead like the preview benches say, then the AMD cpu will most likely be cheaper, and then you have to do the whole bang/buck equation. Whoever has the most bang for buck dets my money. OTOH, with my Opty 165, I dont plan to upgrade until AMD releases the cpu that comes after the AM2, which would likely be a year from now.

Uh oh. I don't THINK we're related.... :beer:

For me, SFF with Conroe. But I am very happy with what I have, so I won't be upgrading for some time....

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000

Originally posted by: plus
The reports I read said Conroe will be available from 1.8 to 2.8ghz. So, the review Anand did was on the max speed part.

Remember, the Conroe is based on the old P3... it doesn't have 64 bit support... did you ever see a P3 that could clock to 2.8ghz?

Plus

Wow can anyone be more clueless?? I would try understand if you are a guy who knows absolutely nothing about computers and wonders what the shiny grey button that normal computer user would know as "Power" button is. Probably you are.

Yes, Conroe HAS 64-bit support.

The reports are MAINSTREAM Conroe will be available from 1.86GHz to 2.66GHz, and there will be a Extreme Edition, which is sampled at 3.33GHz couple of months ago, so you can estimate the clock speeds of the actual EE version.

Conroe is NOT based on the old P3. I would assume you think Athlon64s are based on AMD K5's??

He must have Conroe and Yonah/Core mixed up. Yonah doesn't have it. but Conroe definitely does.

 

[Absolute0]

I think the Conroe is going to hit more than 2.9 Ghz overclocked

 

[stevty2889]

If the EE is supposed to run on 333mhz FSB, then motherboards that support the EE should get the 2.4ghz chip to at least 3ghz (333x9).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: pedramrezai
The way most of the people are thinking is just the way Intel has planned. I am a AMD fan but I can realize competition is good for customers. I was shocked by Core performance but using a handicapped AMD system really annoyed me. First, reviewers have already proven RD580 or solutions with dual 16x can deliver up to 10-15% more performance when paired with high-end, bandwith hungry vga cards. Second, we have been hearing of dual core optimizations in display drivers for some time but were unable to see something significant until we saw Conroe performance; I am quite suspicious over some hefty optimizations in intel-cooked display driver. Time will reveal. Third, this might be the beginning of a new SSEx game with unfair optimizations for a new technoogy.
I am surprized how people are trashing the current as well as future AMD64 technology.But remember that Core is not out yet and all these might be some optimizations that has granted it this performance level. Moreover, the current AMD64 technology is almost 3 years old and the new AM2 will update its specs. AMD did not like DDR2 high latency; What they are looking for is its higher frequency that can be paired with the new AM2 FSB.For Athlon 64 and Sempron a 333mhz FSB that paires with DDR2 666 and for the Fx parts a 400 mhz FSB pairing with DDR2 800. If DDR1 could reach these frequencies you could now see the real potential of AMD64. This kind of bandwith will give Core a hard time. Also remember that AMD is increasing cache (L2 and maybe L3). Shared cache is also something that will be seen in the future products and will bring huge performance gains. Based on the preliminary data of 200/266 async single channel bandwith of 3500mb/s a memory bandwith of >10k is expected in the final product and if Intel was going to compare its future platform, it was not fare to compare it with an infrastructure of >2 years old. I am sure the new AM2 will regain AMD reputation once again. But we all must remember that this competition between major players is good for the end users.

If you think all the fluff about conroe is from optimizations, maybe you should go and take a look at Xtreme Systems web site. Victor Wang has a 2.4 Conroe and benching it the best he can. Even on buggy mobo's with incorrect bios's, his chip is owning everything. Link.