Originally posted by Brtnboarder495
God people are stupid, the megahurtz wars are over and have been ever since the Athlon 64 and even a little before then. Trying to guesstimate how the Conroe's will perform compared to AM2 is beyound stupid, just wait until they are released.
The ONLY thing you should be comparing is the priceerformance ratio.
You're calling US stupid? Why don't you try to explain to us how to compare processors then?
Yea, the MegaHertz (MegaHurtz has become a lame cliche now) wars are over, but you still need to compare the freakin processor speeds to measure their performance. First, learn why the megahertz wars ended. It was NOT before the Athlon 64s came in. It was NOT because the Athlon 64s were clocked so much lower than their Pentium 4 counterparts. It was because of the introduction of Dual Cores into the market, and the enormous amount of faith that people invested in them (scaling sideways instead of upwards). Comparing the clockspeeds of Single Core and Dual Core processors didn't work anymore. But times change, and today, with most processors moving to Dual Cores, the wars are back, as bad as ever. You had Dual Cores on the market, and you had to start scaling "upwards" again. Clockspeeds of different architectures are used to compare performance. When comparing 2 Dual Core processors, there is no other way.
And incase you didn't know, the wars are coming back. AMD is pushing to get their processors to MUCH higher clockspeeds. I'm talking 3.4 to 3.6Ghz Athlon 64 processors. I'm not going to tell you to get informed, but don't try to pretend you know everything about computers inside and out. To be the best, you need to put in an exceptional amount of effort, more than your rivals.