Why All the Fuss about Conroe?

Status
Not open for further replies.
i actually find so many things wrong with the statements in these threads. for starters i wouldn't put a price on the conroe yet as i have yet to see something that is actually released at the prices mentioned beforehand. case: the xbox 360 was supposed to be released at a retail price of about $499 Australian, it was actually released at something over $700.
As for the benchmarks, Intel claimed to be 20% better than the AMD at the same clockspeeds, but the difference was more of a 30%-40% performance increase.

that statement doesn't make sense, i did fail my mathematics class last year (calculus mind you) but i counted roughly the same performance increase as Intel did. the final thing is.......stop comparing a next generation processor to the current technology. we also do not yet know if there will be any drawbacks to the conroe chips. case: NDS with the northwood chips where a vcore of above 1.7v would kill them. let this issue rest until the chips hit the shelves. then and only then pass judgement.
 
I guess nobody has seen this yet:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=97395

2.72GHz conroe, on stock cooling and stock voltage, beats an FX-57 on phase change cooling overclocked to 3.6GHz. That should end all discussion. Please don't bring AM2 into this, all the benchmarks of it so far have been very poor, some no better than socket 939. Yes, you may say "give them a chance to revise the core", yeah, well there is no core revision that will make up for such an utter lack of performance.
 
the AM2 benchmarks people have seen are very early ones. AMD has just got it working so far. now they're trying to iron out bugs and improve on it.

also, AM2 is not all AMD will have to offer. look for "reverse Hyperthreading"

anyway, maybe conroe will end up on top of AMD, maybe AMD will pull something great out to beat coroe. we don't know yet what is going to happen.

I mean, for a while, ATI was very on top of the market with their 9000 series graphics cards. but then, Nvidia surprised ATI with their 6800's. they rushed out the X800's, and Nvidia ended up on top.
 
Why 'wait to pass judgement' for something thats all but set in stone?

And yea, like 003 said, don't even mention AM2. The performance increase from it is so pathetic. Like I mentioned before, I'm inclined to agree with the notion that AMD moved to DDR2 to make it look better when comparing with an Intel system that already has DDR2. Someone who thinks that AM2 has any chance against Conroe is too far an AMD fanboy. The move to DDR2 doesn't seem to have had any effect at all on the processors' performance. THAT my friends, is why we can compare the performance from Conroe processors to current AMD processors. If you don't believe that DDR2 doesn't make a difference, then you don't know the K8 architecture. A64s aren't starved for memory bandwidth as it is, so increasing it isn't going to do anything.

And apokalipse, that AM2 benchmarks are HARDLY 'very early.' Anandtech just did one a few weeks ago and the processors are due to come out this month. Benchmarks a month and a half before release are hardly 'very early benchmarks.'

Move over Athlon 64, there's a new winner on the block.
 
Green Radience said:
And apokalipse, that AM2 benchmarks are HARDLY 'very early.' Anandtech just did one a few weeks ago and the processors are due to come out this month. Benchmarks a month and a half before release are hardly 'very early benchmarks.'

And how do you know the AM2 benchmarks weren't run on first version AM2 chips, before the proper revisions were made. AMD might have something up their sleeve, and decided to keep it under wraps! I'm not saying the Conroe isn't going to whip some AMD a$$, I'm just saying don't throw AMD away just yet as worthy competitiors! Its been said a 1000 times before, we cannot, and must not, make any judgements before the chips are released!
 
Green Radience said:
Benchmarks a month and a half before release are hardly 'very early benchmarks.'
I don't think 1.5 months is something to scoff about in developing computer technology.

however that being said, I don't think anybody here has said that AM2 is what will bring AMD up.

for example, I mentioned "reverse hyperthreading" - an interesting technology for dual core CPU's
 
magouster said:
And how do you know the AM2 benchmarks weren't run on first version AM2 chips, before the proper revisions were made. AMD might have something up their sleeve, and decided to keep it under wraps! I'm not saying the Conroe isn't going to whip some AMD a$$, I'm just saying don't throw AMD away just yet as worthy competitiors! Its been said a 1000 times before, we cannot, and must not, make any judgements before the chips are released!

Because there were benchmarks released 6 months earlier. THOSE were the first batch of AM2 chips. These recent benchmarks are the finalization chips. They're as close as you're going to get to seeing what AM2 can do before AM2 actually comes out (not counting the pre-samples that are given to hardware sites like 2 days before. Those are basically the actual release chips). AM2 IS NOT a competitor to Conroe. Forget about it, give in, give up, whatever. Just stop the fanboyism that makes you say that AMD stands a chance against Conroe.

AMD's K8L architecture might do something for it, but don't expect to see that until end of 2007, a good year and half away, ATLEAST.
 
I'm sorry, but one cannot predict the future.
it may be likely that conroe will win upon release, but then again, you don't actuall know what AMD is doing.

that is the point. I am not trying to glorify AMD against the conroe, I am simply stating that things could change for all we know.

for all we know, Via may surprise us all and storm the CPU market
 
If I can get my hands on FX @ 3.4 performance from a $316 Conroe then I am SOLD. I hope AMD can offer the same from thier own but you never know. Does anyone have a clue when Conroe arrives?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom