Build Candidate 1: Need some advice - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-22-2006, 07:37 PM   #11 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 44
Default

I'm pretty certain conroes will be out within the next 1-2 months. I'm also pretty certain that the G80 series will be coming in the august area, and then vista comes out in january.

And the cheapest conroe, ($210, 2.2ghz, which is no where near $600 like you thought, or the dual cored amd processors that someone else suggested) raped the **** out of an fx-53. I wouldn't worry about how "good" they are, that's for sure.
__________________

melonabusar2 is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 07:54 PM   #12 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 67
Send a message via AIM to zdude255
Default

Well I've looked into the PSU and read several reviews on the one I picked. They were all very positive about the PSU overall and so I'll probably get it unless something better comes out soon. It's probably a lesson not to judge a company completely on their past products.

It looks like I'll get an Intel whenever they come out, but I may end up waiting even longer when AMD comes with their countermeasure. (they always do)
__________________

zdude255 is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 08:00 PM   #13 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by zdude255
preorder date? shipping date? clock speed? ops per cycle? benchmarks? 64-bit? 64-bit compatibillity?

All I've heard so far is that it's faster and better, but I have no means of verifying this. How much faster than the current AMDs? Is there a noticable performance increase in certain apps?
No preorder date. Shipping date - 06/06/06. At release clockspeeds; 1.86, 2.13, 2.40 and 2.67GHz. At release pricing; $209, $244, $316 and $530, respectively. No one cares about ops per cycle anymore, but rest assured its mich higher than AMD could hope for. Benchmarks; Besides the Anandtech benchmarks from IDF 2006, we have people over at XtremeSystems Forums with Conroes. A 2.8Ghz Conroe does SuperPi 1M in 16 seconds; a 2.8Ghz FX-62 does SuperPi 1M in 31 seconds. 2.13GHz Conroes have overclocked to 3.0GHz on stock cooling and stock voltages. Yes, 64-bit processors with obviously 64-bit compatibility. Basically; for $244, you not only get a Dual Core processor (all Conroe processors at release will be Dual Cores) but you also get a $244 processor that can overclock to roughly twice the performance of a $1300 FX-62.

Instead of complaining about not getting any infomation, you might've googled it or done a search for it on this very forum.

As for your distrust for Intel, its only now that Intel has produced something worthwhile, and they've done it with flying colors. Before Conroe came around, it was a pretty unanimous decision that the Netburst architecture for the Pentium 4s was total crap. That is where most of the Intel prejudices were born. Now, with Conroe, Intel is going to become what AMD is right now (except AMD won't have the bad rep that Intel had). The Core (Conroe) is a far superior architecture to AMD's K8. AMD has plans to release it's K8L architecture, but its not bound to save AMD from Intel, since Intel isn't exactly sitting around either.

As for future K8 Athlon 64 processors; just kiss them goodbye. AMD has plans to release processors as high as 3.6 and 3.8GHz. But even these won't save AMD as even the base Conroe processors already outperform them (when overclocked). Also factor in the price of a 3.8GHz Athlon 64 (this isn't anytime soon) and the price of a comparative Conroe (Conroes will be much cheaper by the time these come out) and its no competition. Conroe comes out the clear winner for quite a while.
Green Radience is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 08:04 PM   #14 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 430
Send a message via AIM to tehdigit
Default

then again AMD's are known to do more work per clock then intels

thus being name 4400 or 3800 which represented what it would be for an intel
__________________
Jordan
#nTi
Nothing to It
@gamesurge.net
Sponsored by Subway, Steel Series, XFire, Xsessive Hosting

<A HREF=http://ubanimator.com><IMG SRC=http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6241/userbar543957wu.gif><A>
<A HREF=http://ubanimator.com><IMG SRC=http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/1992/userbar544009id.gif><A>
tehdigit is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 08:23 PM   #15 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by tehdigit
then again AMD's are known to do more work per clock then intels

thus being name 4400 or 3800 which represented what it would be for an intel
Those are Pentium 4 clockspeed comparisons.

Now, Intel does more per clock than AMD. See? The roles are being reversed, except without AMD having as bad a rep as Intel had with Netburst.
Green Radience is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 09:13 PM   #16 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 237
Default

ive got a similar system i reckon get a single good 7900GTX or something instead of SLI of 7600GT. And i reckon a LANparty motherboard. But otherwise should run sweet as.. I have the same CPU its great
__________________

Tordenskjold is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.