Which AMD CPU?

[Orayn]

Really? From what I hear, the 2.6 Conroe is the FX-60-caliber one, and that one's slated to be $500ish.

 

[AnthraX]

Either way, it's still a much better deal.

 

[tehdigit]

please read my post!

 

[Green Radience]

Lol, the 2.66GHz Conroe E6600 was simply benchmarked against the FX-60. In actuality, that 2.66Ghz Conroe processor demolished the 2.8Ghz (Yes, the FX-60 was overclocked) FX-60.

ehh idk if i would go so far as to say it could handle the fx-62

lets remember you cant compare clockspeeds on different chips because amd and intel have different amount of work done per clock

so uhh be carefull in hasty assumptions GR

Yes you can. AMD does it right in front of your eyes. Take, for example, the Athlon 64 3200+. The "3200+" part means that it performs like a 3.2Ghz (3200Mhz) Pentium 4. Similarly, if you know the performance ratio per-clock of the A64 and the Conroe, you can figure out the clockspeeds. Problem is, the Conroes have ALWAYS been better than the Athlon 64s with which they have been compared, so we don't know the clockspeeds at which they're equal. And the people benching Conroes are too busy to fill this simple request.

So, uuh, tehdigit, be careful with what you say. I would've expected you to atleast know the "3200+" thing. Learn simple stuff like that.

 

[AnthraX]

The AMD CPU that you'll benefit most from is the X2 4400+. It has dual cores, with 1MB cache each. You can even bump up the X2 4400+ to the same frequency as the 4000+ making it like having 2 regular 4000+.

If you can possibly wait for Conroe I would. Much better price/performance ratio. However, it isn't going to come out in 2-3 weeks like Green Radience has been saying. It is scheduled for July 06. The only thing coming out in about 3 weeks from Intel is Woodcrest.

 

[Green Radience]

Ah yes, ofcourse. My mistake, the Conroe is only SHIPPING in June, it will be avaliable in July. Thanks for correcting me.

 

[tehdigit]

dont insult my intelegence. ive already talked about how AMD named their cards to compare to intels so people know what to look at.

and yet AGAIN i will say that conroe is better then the AM2
im on your same side on this one but dont ****in insult me by saying that i need to learn simple stuff like that

thats completely insulting. you need to watch how you speak to people on these forums.

you read alot and have learned alot but you need to sit back and look at your attitude. everybody in this forum is friendly with everybody else. i dont see fights break out when you arent posting so just get off everybodys back. state your opinion. back it up. but dont insult other people or im sure a moderator will like to have a talk about it.

 

[AnthraX]

Ah yes, ofcourse. My mistake, the Conroe is only SHIPPING in June, it will be avaliable in July. Thanks for correcting me.

No problem.

Originally posted by Green Radience
Yes you can. AMD does it right in front of your eyes. Take, for example, the Athlon 64 3200+. The "3200+" part means that it performs like a 3.2Ghz (3200Mhz) Pentium 4. Similarly, if you know the performance ratio per-clock of the A64 and the Conroe, you can figure out the clockspeeds. Problem is, the Conroes have ALWAYS been better than the Athlon 64s with which they have been compared, so we don't know the clockspeeds at which they're equal. And the people benching Conroes are too busy to fill this simple request.

That's a bad example though. A64's are single cores. Conroes are dual cores. If they were to compare Conroe to an A64 X2, it would make more sense.

 

[Green Radience]

That's a bad example though. A64's are single cores. Conroes are dual cores. If they were to compare Conroe to an A64 X2, it would make more sense.

Well, I agree to a certain extent. Right, it would be incorrect to compare a Conroe to a single-core A64, agreed. But we're talking about comparing the Conroe and a Dual Core FX-62, so there shouldn't be a problem there?

-------------------------------------

@ tehdigit.

You told me to be careful with my hasty assumptions?

They were hardly hasty assumptions. I fully backed my argument with fact.

If you knew how AMD named their processors, why did you say that you cannot comapre the clockspeeds of two different series of processors. Explain that to me please.

I've also heard you say that you haven't looked into Conroe very much, so you don't know how good it is per-clock. Well, I suggest you look it up.

 

[tehdigit]

it would make more sense but i know what he is saying

and i dont see how conroes have ALWAYS been better if they arent ****ing out yet!?!!?!

and tell me the performance ratio please so i can accurately compare clock speeds.