Slashdot Mirror
Intel's Conroe Resurfaces, Benchmarks Strong
MojoKid writes "Intel has been occasionally leaking performance results of their upcoming
Core 2 Duo processor for the desktop, code named Conroe. At this years IDF
select members of the press
were allowed to get hands-on access to test systems for benchmarking.
Now, coincident with this week's Computex show in Taiwan, Intel has seen fit to
show us just what their soon to be released CPU can do, yet again. Select press
members got together with Intel in New York city for another round of
testing with Conroe. HotHardware has
a performance showcase posted with scores from a Core 2 Duo E6700 machine
and a 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo Extreme Edition X6800. The results, compared
against the backdrop of an overclocked 2.8GHz Athlon 64 FX-60 system, look very
impressive indeed for Intel."
You have a point about the Intel thing, there. Just like the response time on a monitor -- if the benchmarks come from the manufacturer, how valid can they truly be? Where are the stips?
Point is -- Core 2 Extreme has great specs but the map and the landscape are wholly different. Time will tell.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
I couldn't disagree with your more. Actually if you read the article and looked at the test system specs and setup, the rigs were all configured very fairly and with identical drivers where possible. They even gave AMD an edge at 2.8GHz overclock for the FX-60 and didn't put the Conroe systems up against an AM2 DDR2 system, which is widely known to be on hardly faster and significantly less mature/stable currently than the nForce 4 SLI chipset on the socket 939 system that was used.
These numbers, like all others I've seen, scale accordingly and I'd say AMD is in for a bit of a beating this year. Not that I care either way, I'd actually rather see AMD keep their edge over ChipZilla but in the end we're all benfitting from Intel's new Core 2 Duo series. They're going to raise the bar, which is nothing but goodness.
The same usual nonsense you're always talking (every single one of your posts I've seen was FUD or trolls).
...
I'll fix your post for ya:
AMD FX-62 sales volume: a few units (most people don't wanna spend 1500$ on a CPU)
Intel Core 2 Duo sales volume: lots starting next month (significantly faster than FX62 and at a FRACTION of the price)
Not only that but how hard is it to go in the bios and make and AMD64 processor perform sub-optimally? Sure it's DDR400 but CL4-4-4-10, and you need the ECC scrubing turned on, disable the cache and
And then it would be obvious that those AMD boxes were performing slower than in every other similar benchmark we've seen. And the results would differ from other 3rd party benchmarks we've seen before... Somehow, even if they have a better product (finally), then they *must* be blatantly cheating (by setting ridiculously slow settings that would make this PC slow as molasses) to appear faster? Right. It just *can't* be faster, AMD fanboys can't possibly admit "defeat"... (every other benchmark that had similar results must have been rigged too, and when we all have fast Core 2 Duo CPUs in our PCs and they perform that fast.... well, they've still must have cheated somehow! impossible!) Wait for the next benchmarks if you don't believe it. In a month's time there should be tons of them, and they'll somehow all concur (of course you'll say Intel paid them all for their reviews or something)
If Intel really wanted a benchmark they should ask AMD for engineering samples of next year's cores and they could pit them together.
Bzzt! Wrong again! More like next MONTH's cores. And if you take AM2 cores and put it against the Core 2 Duo (and at the clock speeds you can expect them to be), they'd still lose.
AMD fanboys will never admin Intel for once has the superior product (after years of netburst junk). Denial, FUD, conspiracy theories, anything will do to discredit it.
You keep buying 1500$ FX62's while I buy faster Core 2 Duos for 300$.
Soon this clown will show up spouting all his anti-Intel pro-AMD rhetoric.
He makes the worst of the Mac, Linux or Microsoft fanboi's look a touch out of the ordinary.
Both the Woodcrest and Conroe have shown time and time again in INDEPENDENT testing, to be quite a bit faster than any of AMD's options. I've been testing a Dell 2950 with Woodcrest and it simply smokes the HP DL385 dual core setups time and time again in both SQL 2005 (mixed size transactions) and anything else I throw at it, most of the time by 30-40% real world numbers. Other testers have seen much the same.
Intel just pulled a Microsoft. Microsoft was caught napping by Netscape. Intel was caught napping by AMD. It won't happen again.
I was at a talk a few months back by the chief architect on the NetBurst team, who has since left Intel. He had some quite interesting things to say. One was that the P3 and 4 were great fun to work on, because they were the last chips anyone was allowed to design where performance was the only constraint. Now, power usage is far more important, and it will continue to be so for quite some time (i.e. until we start using some as-yet-uninvented form of magic to make our chips). The other thing he said was that he expected the P4 to top out at about 5GHz. Management told everyone 10GHz, because they thought the engineers were being too cautious. Even he was surprised when it failed to even make 4GHz.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
A lot of wishful thinking presented as fact.
1) "which are comming (sic) in July/August of 2006" Woodcrest launches June 26. But you already knew that.
2) "no one wants their current products" In which alternate universe?
3) "Intel is selling many parts at a loss" Dicounts don't imply loss.
4) "Conroe...has bad yields" Source: AMD message board?
5) "Conroe...will not make up a significant portion of Intel's shipped CPUs until the end of this year." Just plain false.
6) "Conroe based chips will be 20% of production;" You just made up that 20%, didn't you?
Well, Anandtechs tests of a 4 core Woodcrest server against a Sun Niagara and 4 core Opteron sure seems to suggest otherwise: http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2772
Granted you may be after 8-way or higher, but that is an interesting enough test. The Woodcrest makes an extremely good showing there.