Overclock.net banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Remonster

http://neoseeker.com/news/story/5345/

The thing I don't understand is why is the top of the line CPU only 2.67GHz? Can anyone confirm the fact that they can run 9-12 operations per clock? Although seriously, to remain competitive they would have to do ATLEAST 10 if not 12 ops/cycle since AMDs can do 9 and they go up to 2.8GHz.....

Anyways, its nice to see the whole family moving up to 1066MHz FSB which makes even more sense since all of the new Merom (dual core mobile chips with 2x2MB cache) run at a 667MHz FSB which is the highest of any Intel Mobile chip save for the Pentium 4 Ms which are 800MHz but which are also horribly slow....

Of other interesting note is the these new 1066FSB CPUs means that the "normal" speed of memory to run at a 1:1 ratio with a stock Conroe would be DDR2 533 which is another area where Conroe doesn't seem as high and mighty as we all though, AMDs entire socket AM2 family runs off of a 1333MHz FSB with a 333 HT speed which means their 1:1 memory will be DDR2 667.

One last thing, the link above also mentions a Pentium D 960 3.6GHz Presler will also be released soon (April also?) and the whole Intel lineup will get major price cuts.

CPU speed means nothing when comparing a totally different architecture to another. I don't remember for sure offhand, but I believe the Conroe execute 12 instructions per clock cycle. Btw, this is not coinciding with the information I got this morning that said that the Conroe will be released in the fall.

http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/...will-fall.html
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Hyrox

That's assuming AMD doesn't come out with something to compete with/beat the Conroe.

AMD is milking the end of their current architecture and Intel is just beginning a new one. AMD won't take the lead back after Conroe until they design a new core. The new AMD socket is just a modification of an old architecture, but will be based on socket 939 design.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by pauldovi

I have seen report that the "Extreme Edition" Conroe will go up to 4.0Ghz... I guess we will see.

Imagine how this beast will OC.... I bet you can get the 2.67Ghz up to 4.0Ghz on the new archy.

Not gonna happen, not with a shorter bus length. 4 ghz proved hard even for the old architecture with the longer bus length and is the whole reasoning they're scrapping the design. They simply couldn't hit higher speeds, so you have to work on efficiency (ops/cycle) instead.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by ptrogen

i knew amd was all hype, i have never bought into amd's "low temp, high oc" crap, if amd's are so great and so cheap how come its not the tech industry choice?
pentium=stable.reliable.

Some of the largest companies in the world switched over to AMD servers and workstations. Also, there are some that are simply unwilling to change, regardless of facts.....such as yourself.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Remonster

Well I guess its gonna be interesting to say the least, I mean it is gonna be 65nm which would allow for high clocks but then it does have a very short bus length and I believe they reduced the number of stages in the pipeline.....? so that would also reduce clock speeds and another factor to remember is that these are the first chips on this architecture, the first Pentium 4s were in the 1GHz range and now look where they have gone, 3.8GHz and we are OCing them to 4GHz+ every day
so I imagine after a few years once this architecture really gets developed and sees some revisions and new steppings then Conroe will truly be the behemoth that Intel wants it to be, though I don't think I can wait any longer, I may have to grab one ASAP because my P4 530 is REALLY showing its age, and once I get a G71.....its all gonna be over for this CPU lol.

EDIT/// Hmm.... I reread the article and read the one at The Inq and it seems as if maybe neoseeker misread The Inq's article OR maybe you are mistaken sccr
either way did you guys see those prices? The top of the line model is supposed to be under $550! That is awesome, seems like they are really taking advantage of the 65nm fab process, I mean IF AMD were to keep its prices as they are, that puts the 2.67GHz 2x2MB cache Conroe directly into the price point of the 2x512kb cache AMD X2 4600+ Manchester and under the price of the 2x1MB AMD X2 4800+ (this is from my memory of the last time I saw their prices but that sounds about right, right?) and if Intel's Conroe is clocked higher than either of those CPUs AND does 12 ops/cycle, AMD better pull something out from where the sun don't shine fast!


No, I see where the error was. You read about the Intel processor being released in April and thought it was a Conroe core chip, but it's not. Conroe should hit in the fall.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by dpg

I have to say that AMD got a long way to catch up with intel \\/


The AMD market capitalization was around US$13 billion at the end of 2005 & Intel is about $150.5 billion (December 2005).

Still Intel is the best seller in the whole world


Just wait till the quad cores to come, then intel will rule


Your credibility hit the toilet when your figures suggest a 500% revenue growth for the fiscal year of 2004-2005 for Intel. The over 200% you're stating for AMD is also rediculous. Would you like to reveal your source?
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by dpg

"Wikipedia ALL THE WAY", Hey man no need to get angry @ me. I'm just saying that intel is my choice...


Hey man Market Capitalization refers simply to the value of a company, that is intels $150.5 billion & AMD US$13 billion....

& the Revenue is defined as the amount of money that a company actually receives during a specific period(Intels $34.2 billion USD in 2005 Against AMD $5.85 billion Revenue in 2005)

Angry? lol I think you read too much into it. I thought you were stating that as revenue and I just knew there was no possibility to have that much market growth among such large companies. I personally don't have a favorite and look at specific chips when I buy. I could careless who makes them, I just want the best for my cash. For now, it's AMD. When Conroe comes out, it should be Intel again unless things don't go as planned or it's overpriced.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by ICYUNVME

As far as whos the better Intel or AMD who really cares man. To each his own. I think that Intel is finally starting to get thier ducks in a row but they went way off the beaten path with netburst. Now they are starting to see the error in thier ways and correcting it. Will this next crop of chips make up for it? Not even close. Are they attempting to get headed down the right path to that end? Yes. I also agree that until AMD and Intel make the same chip with the same core and architecture then there is no way in hell anyone on the face of this planet can put any type of comparison together of the two. I am impartial to either chip company I just want a good chip for a decent price. Now the way I see it is this whole shake up at Intel with the new logo and new architectures for thier chips is representative of the fact that AMD was getting way to much market share with thier chips. You can deny it all you want but even I admit that AMD just has better architecture and instruction sets with thier chips IMHO. This is not to say Intel are crap they just went a different direction than AMD and now are realizing the short commings of it and are moving on. I can't wait to see what this does in the next 3 to 5 years for chips from both companies. See the direction Intel is taking now is gonna ratchet up the competition between the two companies meaning better cheaper chips for what ever your choice is. This is just the way I see things so pls dispence with flamming it pls lol.

It wasn't so much that they say the error of their ways as it was the simple fact that they couldn't push the processor speeds any higher because the technology isn't there yet. Instead of struggling to find ways to go above 4 ghz, they're redesigning them to be more efficient in order to be competitive. Luckily for Intel, they have the manpower and money to move quickly on new projects.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
15,625 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Ropey

I personally believe that with this (Conroe) architecture Intel moves to parity with AMD. Intel has not dealt with the legacy memory controller issue and still is relying on the memory controller (which handles data communication between the CPU and RAM) being situated in the Northbridge. Until Intel moves this controller onto the processor die they will not be able to surpass AMD to any great degree.

AMD's next architecture (.65nm) will show the Intel deficiency to an even greater degree. Intel’s new Conroe architecture vs AMD’s new architecture (when released) will show this view out in my opinion.

R

You're in for a surprise then. Conroe will be faster than anything else on the market for a little while.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top