http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713
Looks like next year is gonna be all about Intel inside.
Looks like next year is gonna be all about Intel inside.
Intel's Conroe: AMD gets a whoopin'
- Thread starter ZenPirate
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
At least for UT2007 theres no point in immediately declaring intel as the best processor. I doubt any of those games were coded to take advantage of 64 bit and dual core, so theres no way of knowing the true power of either processor. UT2007 will be optimized for 64 bit etc etc so a processor which is superior on current gen games may very well struggle on next gen.
I'm sure AMD will close the performance gap with their next processors. Not to mention being uber cheap compared to Intel. Still though. Quad core? That's impressive.
This is going the same way as graphics cards. No game today can really get the most out of even one graphics card and for some reason nvidia invents Sli and then Quad Sli. Point is, this technology may be incredibly powerful but so what? Ut2007 is being coded for dual core, how long is it actually going to take for mainstream games to be coded for quad core? by that time 8 core will be along and the cycle will be repeated.
Wasn't there an article saying that these quad-core processor really aren't all that great? And infact with todays current standards, a Dual core out-performs a quad-core.
Thats because no single program really uses a quad core to its limits, however it will kick ass when it comes to multitasking atm.
By the time they are commonplace there will be software that uses them, just like with 64bit.
This is Intel on 65nm remember, AMD is still on 90nm.
Remember the boost AMD got from transfering to 90nm first, this time it is the other way around, but I doubt AMD don't have anything to come back at this with, atleast to close down the performance gap.
I'd like to see some completely independant benchmarks though.
By the time they are commonplace there will be software that uses them, just like with 64bit.
This is Intel on 65nm remember, AMD is still on 90nm.
Remember the boost AMD got from transfering to 90nm first, this time it is the other way around, but I doubt AMD don't have anything to come back at this with, atleast to close down the performance gap.
I'd like to see some completely independant benchmarks though.
Pimp. 
There's what I want next. dual processor, quad core, with hyperthreading. 16 theoretical processors.
There's what I want next. dual processor, quad core, with hyperthreading. 16 theoretical processors.
I was looking at going SLI a year ago. I'm glad I didn't do it at the time. It's nice for the epeen, but there's nothing out there that will put it to good use. By the time something comes out, it'll be cheaper too
I thought their dual-core implementation was less than impressive? How can quad-core be better?
AMD has been trumping them since the whole 32-64bit transition. I don't see how making a quad-core chip is going to do the same. Especially when AMD is gonna fire back with their offering soon.
It's like MS and the 360. They thought they were gonna corner the market by getting out the door first. And we all know how well that's turning out.
AMD has been trumping them since the whole 32-64bit transition. I don't see how making a quad-core chip is going to do the same. Especially when AMD is gonna fire back with their offering soon.
It's like MS and the 360. They thought they were gonna corner the market by getting out the door first. And we all know how well that's turning out.
pwnghetti & leetballs said:
Looks sexy, but I'll stick with AMD for now. Quad core is just a hardcore nerd's wet dream as of this moment.
ZenPirate said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/02/21/a_look_at_amds_socket_am2_platform/
i think not
Last edited:
With the initial AM2 chips, AMD are not going to be significantly quicker than they are at the moment.
The only disadvantage I can think of with these chips is that afaik they are still using a front bus and an offboard memory controller, (correct me if I am incorrect)
And even fasterDD42-800 isn't going to change that processer from one that (according to Anandtech) is going to be slower than Intels new offering.TomsHardware said:
The only disadvantage I can think of with these chips is that afaik they are still using a front bus and an offboard memory controller, (correct me if I am incorrect)
Wow, there's so blatantly an option of a photochop of the Intel Cornrows... The Sooooouuuuul Processor. Word.
Cache doesnt change the fact that it can't transfer data as quick as Hypertransport can.
The cache is only in the processer.
It will help, but as prooved by AMD's current gen, even the top of the range chips don't need more than 1mb per core.
The cache is only in the processer.
It will help, but as prooved by AMD's current gen, even the top of the range chips don't need more than 1mb per core.
Intel M! 1.6ghz Power! Superior to 3.0ghz!
(for real)
Or at least I've heard so. not sure if its actually true.
EDIT: btw, who the hell can afford quad SLI?
(for real)
Or at least I've heard so. not sure if its actually true.
EDIT: btw, who the hell can afford quad SLI?
Last edited: