Which AMD CPU?

[tehdigit]

because you cant compare thier clock speeds bro
you can compare the AMD name to the intel clocks

nothing else

 

[tehdigit]

ps: you havent been comparing the amd equivelent clockspeeds to the intel chips you ahve been stating the actual clock speeds

 

[Green Radience]

They've always been better because there are about 5 or 6 people with Conroes and they have been scaling them. That means that they have overclocked and underclocked them and have compared to A64s at different Conroe speeds. Its like having every single Conroe processor in one.

Thats exactly my point, since the Conroe always turns out better in the comparisons, we don't know the clockspeeds at which the two processors would be equal.

But if someone were to hold a gun to my head and force me to spout a ratio, I'd say that the ratio is;

1 (Conroe) :1.333 (A64).

So a 1Ghz Conroe would be like a 1.333Ghz Athlon 64.

ps: you havent been comparing the amd equivelent clockspeeds to the intel chips you ahve been stating the actual clock speeds

Thats how the real world works, buddy. You're not going to get the clockspeeds handed to you everytime, you have to figure it out. Please don't make me answer any more ridiculous questions.

 

[tehdigit]

that ratio isnt to bad.

and again i want to emphasize that i am on your side about the conroe owning and im not picking a fight

just watch how you talk to people. i only post on here so i CAN learn new things. forums would be pointless to me if i was a juggarnaut computer tech

 

[kaname]

Will somebody please lock this? You guys have gotten WAY off topic.

paulliewis - Get an X2, any games in the future that can utiliize both cores would help performance. It'll also help with other everyday tasks you may want to use your computer for.

 

[tehdigit]

more specifically an AMD x2 4400 if you can afford it

if not go for an AMD x2 3800

 

[Green Radience]

that ratio isnt to bad.

You're right, it doesn't look that bad at first sight.

Until you remember that CPUs don't operate at the 1Ghz range anymore. Let me rephrase that ratio;

A 2.0Ghz Conroe : A 2.666Ghz Athlon 64.

That would put the 2.13Ghz Conroe in the domain of the 2.8Ghz FX-62.

The fact is only made worse when you consider that the FX-62 costs 4 times the price of the Conroe.

 

[tehdigit]

by saying the ration isnt bad i wasnt stating that AMD is still close

im not computer illiterate
you are speaking to a resonably intelegent human being with a decent knowledge about computers in general

 

[Green Radience]

I know what you meant. But it actually is quite bad. Not as bad as the P4-A64 ratio, but a 2.13Ghz Conroe performing like the Top-Of-The-Line AMD FX-62? Thats bad. Look at it this way; To compete with the 2.66Ghz Conroe, AMD not only has to get a Athlon 64 clocked at 3.55Ghz, but they'd have to cut the price of such a top-of-the-line processor in half to compete with the $530 pricetag of the 2.66Ghz Conroe. To make matters worse, AMD plans to take the Athlon 64s as high as 3.6Ghz, but Intel has a 3.0Ghz+ Conroe Extreme Edition in the works.

As for your second comment, I find that somewhat hard to believe considering your 239 posts and one month on this forum. Just so you know, I hardly have 500 posts, and I've been here a lot longer than my "Joined:" lets on.

 

[tehdigit]

so you will base my computer knowledge on my ammount of forum posts?

that was an idiotic statement
you should probably take it back and reconsider your life