I wonder what the attitude of the forum will be when Conroe is released? I know a majority of the users on this forum are AMD fanatics, but I'm sure by the end of this month, they'll be screaming another tune.
When Conroe Is Released?
- Thread starter jlbenedict
- Start date
Many will jump ship if they OC well.
So far the results are looking good.
Don't misinterpret us liking the best value to leaning to a company...
Many of us like AMD now because its the best solution, that wont be the case soon.
So far the results are looking good.
Don't misinterpret us liking the best value to leaning to a company...
Many of us like AMD now because its the best solution, that wont be the case soon.
Zenoth
Diamond Member
- Jan 29, 2005
- 5,202
- 216
- 106
My first "good" CPU was an Intel 2.4C a few years ago. I really liked it, and it was extremely stable (and fast, back then). I was able to over-clock it at around 2.8-2.9 Ghz stable on air. It was a lot of fun playing games with it.
But my personality makes it so I like to change, I like to try out new things in life. Not always stick at the same place, or use the same thing for the same purposes. So, I eventually tried AMD. My first one was a ClawHammer, 3500+, S939. I never really liked it. It refused to over-clock stable above 300 Mhz past its stock frequencies, and it ran hot summer like winter. And I paid a lot back then when I bought it.
And, just last year (November), a superb opportunity jumped at me, offering me the possibility to get myself a shiny X2 4400+ at 50% rebate (a good friend of mine, mouhahaha). Brand new, to. Since then, I realized the potential of AMD. And I absolutely love my X2.
Now, I feel that I still like to change and still like to try new things out. I've never been a "one-sided" person. I'm open minded and if I make mistakes I just deal with em' until I can forget about it via a new change. Intel's Conroe seems interesting indeed. Time will tell I guess. I might be interested to buy one of the models depending on their prices. Or not. That'll also depend on how well my X2 performs in future games (UT 2007, Crysis, Stalker, and so many others).
Right now I'm not saying the AMD is the best, nor that Intel is the worst. Both of them have had, and will have opportunities as well to attract more consumers. It's Intel's turn now, with their Conroe, after the superb (IMO) AMD's X2 series (not even mentioning the over-priced FX series).
Each their turns I guess. And it's a good thing, in my opinion. It shows what one can do at one point, and what another can at a different point in time. It allows for more and/or faster new technology developments though competition as well.
If this "round" Intel does well on its own, and not just against AMD, then I believe that's cool !
But my personality makes it so I like to change, I like to try out new things in life. Not always stick at the same place, or use the same thing for the same purposes. So, I eventually tried AMD. My first one was a ClawHammer, 3500+, S939. I never really liked it. It refused to over-clock stable above 300 Mhz past its stock frequencies, and it ran hot summer like winter. And I paid a lot back then when I bought it.
And, just last year (November), a superb opportunity jumped at me, offering me the possibility to get myself a shiny X2 4400+ at 50% rebate (a good friend of mine, mouhahaha). Brand new, to. Since then, I realized the potential of AMD. And I absolutely love my X2.
Now, I feel that I still like to change and still like to try new things out. I've never been a "one-sided" person. I'm open minded and if I make mistakes I just deal with em' until I can forget about it via a new change. Intel's Conroe seems interesting indeed. Time will tell I guess. I might be interested to buy one of the models depending on their prices. Or not. That'll also depend on how well my X2 performs in future games (UT 2007, Crysis, Stalker, and so many others).
Right now I'm not saying the AMD is the best, nor that Intel is the worst. Both of them have had, and will have opportunities as well to attract more consumers. It's Intel's turn now, with their Conroe, after the superb (IMO) AMD's X2 series (not even mentioning the over-priced FX series).
Each their turns I guess. And it's a good thing, in my opinion. It shows what one can do at one point, and what another can at a different point in time. It allows for more and/or faster new technology developments though competition as well.
If this "round" Intel does well on its own, and not just against AMD, then I believe that's cool !
I've owned AMD since my Pentium MMX and I'm almost done saving for my Conroe 
In fact, why don't you buy my Opty
In fact, why don't you buy my Opty
I agree with you. It seems the forums are populated with either Conroe threads or Windows Vista threads..
000000000000. I predict many Intel users will be very disapointed and find themselves at odd w/ the Intel's misrepresentation of facts and figures and dishonet corp. They will realize that AMD system gives better price/performance ratio and better path to future upgrade, reasonably priced.
Then you will ask yourself: is it time to go AMD and stop the fanboysm. Certainly.
Then you will ask yourself: is it time to go AMD and stop the fanboysm. Certainly.
AMD has not been a competitive alternative long enough for me to become a fanatic -i.e. my Intel based mobo with CPU upgrades has not warranted replacement over the last few years. Soon I will be ready for a system upgrade and it seems that Conroe will likely fit into that plan. Maybe next time, AMD...
Oh, I have owned AMD and Cyrix CPU's before and they were good low cost alternatives at the time
Oh, I have owned AMD and Cyrix CPU's before and they were good low cost alternatives at the time
i honestly dont give a crp about who makes it. performance is all i care. right now conroe is the best (well when conroe launches). i am a little worry about AMD however since many users will stop buying AMD's AM2 as its a little weaker now. Price/performance ratio really determines a lot of things. I hope they wont go out of business or downsize b/c of this. After all. K8L looks interesting and prolly can smoke kentsfield.
OcHungry, both companies are excepetional chipmakers, you can't go wrong with either of them. Yes, AMD was, until the end of this month, leading the performance race, but then Conroe will be released. Then K8L will be released, and that'll be faster. It's all in the name of competition, it helps drive down prices and increase technology at a quick rate so nobody loses. I'd rather that these two companies be at each others throats then one to have a monpoly on the market and command premium prices and create mediocre products. For now, Intel wins the Media Creation race and AMD the Gaming Race, and I'd rather not have one company dominate. Just look at the great deals we're getting now, like the Pentium D 805 and Athlon 3800+.
I agree for the most part nightmare, but since the Athlon-64 we havent seen any real innovation or significant performance gains for a long time, just very small clockspeed bumps periodically...
Im very happy conroe is coming along to push things forward again.
I mean seriously, we have had a clockspeed change from 3.2-3.8ghz over the span of 2 years for intel... and AMD hasnt done much better. The only big change is for dual core and thats not even of benefit to most users.
Conroe is the 1st tangible increase in performance in a long time, and youre completely right, im more than happy about the impending price-war so we all win as consumers.
Im very happy conroe is coming along to push things forward again.
I mean seriously, we have had a clockspeed change from 3.2-3.8ghz over the span of 2 years for intel... and AMD hasnt done much better. The only big change is for dual core and thats not even of benefit to most users.
Conroe is the 1st tangible increase in performance in a long time, and youre completely right, im more than happy about the impending price-war so we all win as consumers.
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,128
- 16,032
- 136
Except on those, it was after they were released, and available for sale, and people had them and were OC'ing them,and there were 20 reviews by every site out there. With Conroe We still have no product, no price other than a promise, and no reviews not somewhat stiffled by NDA's, and only a handful of ES chip OC's to look at.
This is the biggest vaporware hype I have ever seen. In a month or two, I could understand.....
What would you rather talk about in a CPU forum then if not about future CPUs?
I've been an avid Athlon fan but I do prefer the stability of Intel's chipsets so I will likely migrate to an Intel platform once Conroe proves itself to have higher performance.
I've been an avid Athlon fan but I do prefer the stability of Intel's chipsets so I will likely migrate to an Intel platform once Conroe proves itself to have higher performance.
AnonymouseUser
Diamond Member
- May 14, 2003
- 9,943
- 107
- 106
intel's 65nm CPUs is overclocker's disney world. At 1.4v my 920D performs like 965XE @ 3.73GHz and thats only with Bigtyphoon (getting tower 120 soon ). Temps is like 40c idle, and maximum temp is 54c during pi 32m. The only difference is that 965XE has hyper threading .... There r some really good oc results from xs. If ur goona buy conroe and NOT oc, forget it. Stick with ur Amd X2s...
Avalon
Diamond Member
- Jul 16, 2001
- 7,571
- 178
- 106
But chips are available for pre-order at close to promised prices, and quite a few over at XS and the like have all gotten to do extensive work on these chips. Plus, there are many previews from big review sites all over the net. Sure, they are previews, but I don't expect the chip to perform any worse when on production silicon. The only thing I'm worried about is availability, which is going to be a big unknown.
n7
Elite Member
- Jan 4, 2004
- 21,281
- 4
- 81
You apparently don't know much.
The majority of people here buy whatever is best bang for buck, which for the last few years has been AMD in most cases.
It may actually stay that way for the lower high end, but for the higher end, it looks like C2D will dominate.
Well, I'd call myself an independent 3rd party here, since I'm not personally for either side, however I'd have to say that I'm going to go for a Conroe when they come out, an E6700.
The reason I'm not one-sided is because I've had an AMD Duron 756MHz that I bought in a Compaq back in 2000, and also a Pentium 4 3.0GHz that I bought in a Toshiba in early 2005. I have to say, between 756MHz and 3GHz, the difference is noticable, but not nearly what should've been expected. Many would guess I'd get a 4x increase in processing speed, but that didn't exactly happen. It doesn't even seem as if I get double. The P4 is on a 533MHz bus and it's got 1MB cache, both of which are likely better than the AMD from 2000 is set up with. However, the performance increase really isn't enormous. For AMD to be about half the speed of my P4 (in noticable performance, haven't done benchmarks), with a much older processor, at a fourth of the clock speed, that's quite good.
However, the reason I'm going for a Conroe is because I'm building a system of my own (finally), and I want a great processor. I first had my eye on a Pentium D 940, which was at a nice price ($225), and of course, drooled over the the 950's, 955's, and 965's (didn't want to spend that much), and didn't even let the FX-60/62's come into my mind, since I knew it was far from possible with my budget, and I'd likely start crying. However... The Intel Core 2 Duo/Conroe comes into the picture, and it's $500 E6700 model is competing closely (and sometimes beating) the FX-62? WHOA! $1200 vs. $500, a lower power consumption, and actual possibility of getting something the same if not better than what I was only dreaming of, within (a somewhat stretched, though possible) budget.
So, while AMD may be a great company, Intel looks like they're getting their act together, and to be able to get a processor that beats anything currently on the market is exciting as ever.
The reason I'm not one-sided is because I've had an AMD Duron 756MHz that I bought in a Compaq back in 2000, and also a Pentium 4 3.0GHz that I bought in a Toshiba in early 2005. I have to say, between 756MHz and 3GHz, the difference is noticable, but not nearly what should've been expected. Many would guess I'd get a 4x increase in processing speed, but that didn't exactly happen. It doesn't even seem as if I get double. The P4 is on a 533MHz bus and it's got 1MB cache, both of which are likely better than the AMD from 2000 is set up with. However, the performance increase really isn't enormous. For AMD to be about half the speed of my P4 (in noticable performance, haven't done benchmarks), with a much older processor, at a fourth of the clock speed, that's quite good.
However, the reason I'm going for a Conroe is because I'm building a system of my own (finally), and I want a great processor. I first had my eye on a Pentium D 940, which was at a nice price ($225), and of course, drooled over the the 950's, 955's, and 965's (didn't want to spend that much), and didn't even let the FX-60/62's come into my mind, since I knew it was far from possible with my budget, and I'd likely start crying. However... The Intel Core 2 Duo/Conroe comes into the picture, and it's $500 E6700 model is competing closely (and sometimes beating) the FX-62? WHOA! $1200 vs. $500, a lower power consumption, and actual possibility of getting something the same if not better than what I was only dreaming of, within (a somewhat stretched, though possible) budget.
So, while AMD may be a great company, Intel looks like they're getting their act together, and to be able to get a processor that beats anything currently on the market is exciting as ever.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter