FX-62 vs Conroe

[Running]

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/first_benchmarks_conroe_vs_fx-62/

very nice results, keep in mind they were preconfigured intel's so the performance could be less than what that is. but nonetheless bery nice

 

[Trifid]

Link doesn't work. :\

 

[Nubius]

link worked fine for me.

Pretty interesting to see. Conroe does beat it, in some cases more than others, but it's not as big of a gap that people originally were making it out to be.

I think the superPI times is what really made people think conroe was this godly chip.

 

[Trifid]

OK, it works when I go through a web based proxy on my site.

It does really well on FEAR, 22fps more....

 

[Running]

yea i thought the perf difference would be bigger but it's not that big

 

[003]

Keep in mind, that it is 2.66GHz, and the slowest FX62 was 2.8GHz, AND in all the tests it used slower RAM than the FX62. And it's not even the top of the line conroe, where as the FX62 is AMD's top of the line chip.

 

[Alex81388]

Yup. A brand new technology of intel's looks nicer than the older AMD's. Just like the newer AMD's looked nicer than the old intels... whats the big deal? In a little bit it will flip back again, then back again.

I'll wait until vista comes out and people actually make cores for it at that point really.

 

[Trifid]

Come on, you know that AMD has nothing planned on their road map that will compete with this until K8L, which has quite a wait for it. But that does look hopeful of such a boost in performance that Conroe boast.

 

[ulater6000]

Yeah, I am looking forward to the K8L.

 

[john3]

k, yeah, AMD is very close.......if only they dropped the price by about $700!