View Full Version : Anandtech + Conroe = Awesome!

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

03-07-06, 04:35 PM
Unbelievable and it can only get better.
You better check it out or you wont believe it:

03-07-06, 04:45 PM
Wow.... amazing performance. If this all holds true then Intel is back in the game BIG TIME!

03-07-06, 04:50 PM
Nice to see that Big Blue might be back in the saddle.

03-07-06, 05:03 PM
Finally, Intel is doing things right now.:)

03-07-06, 05:03 PM
So? its current gen vs. next gen, i really dont think that this is a big deal... AMD chips will always be in my comps so this means nothing to me

03-07-06, 05:07 PM
Do you really think that
1) AM2 with DDR2 will change things greatly?
2) AMD will come out with a completely new efficient architecture in 6 months?

And it was not even the top Conroe model...

03-07-06, 05:22 PM
Impressive improvement from the P4 line, anyone know what Conroe based line will be called?

03-07-06, 05:24 PM
Still AM2 is there to compete but no website hinted on noticable performance gains with new AM2 socket.

Interesting enough is that with those early results now the roles have changed, AMDs older socket is faster than Intels new design in applications and quite opposite happened in games.

03-07-06, 05:28 PM
Nice to see that Big Blue might be back in the saddle.

Big Blue is a term used for IBM, not Intel...

03-07-06, 05:48 PM
Do you really think that
1) AM2 with DDR2 will change things greatly?
Not in the slightest.

2) AMD will come out with a completely new efficient architecture in 6 months?
I sure hope so... :-\

03-07-06, 05:55 PM
Impressive performance! :eek:

03-07-06, 06:08 PM
Heh, there is more to come :cool:

03-07-06, 07:13 PM
Intel Regains the Performance Crown: Conroe vs FX60 X2
Intel is very excited about their new Core architecture, especially with Conroe on the desktop. It's not really news to anyone that Intel hasn't had the desktop performance crown for years now; their Pentium 4 and Pentium D processors run hotter and offer competitive or lower performance than their AMD competitors. With Conroe, Intel hopes to change all of that.

Intel setup two identical systems: in one corner, an Athlon 64 FX-60 overclocked to 2.8GHz running on a DFI RD480 motherboard. And in the other corner, a Conroe running at 2.66GHz (1067MHz FSB) on an Intel 975X motherboard.

The AMD system used 1GB of DDR400 running at 2-2-2/1T timings, while the Intel system used 1GB of DDR2-667 running at 4-4-4. Both systems had a pair of Radeon X1900 XTs running in CrossFire and as far as we could tell, the drivers and the rest of the system setup was identical. They had a handful of benchmarks preloaded that we ran ourselves, the results of those benchmarks are on the following pages. Tomorrow we'll be able to go into great depth on the architecture of Conroe, but for now enjoy the benchmarks.

As far as we could tell, there was nothing fishy going on with the benchmarks or the install. Both systems were clean and used the latest versions of all of the drivers (the ATI graphics driver was modified to recognize the Conroe CPU but that driver was loaded on both AMD and Intel systems).

Intel told us to expect an average performance advantage of around 20% across all benchmarks, some will obviously be higher and some will be lower. Honestly it doesn't make sense for Intel to rig anything here since we'll be able to test it ourselves in a handful of months. We won't say it's impossible as anything can happen, but we couldn't find anything suspicious about the setups.

Gaming Performance:

Media Encoding Performance:

Final Words
While we're still comparing to Socket-939 and only using RD480, it does seem very unlikely that AMD would be able to make up this much of a deficit with Socket-AM2 and RD580. Especially looking at titles like F.E.A.R. where Conroe's performance advantage averages over 40%, it looks like Intel's confidence has been well placed.
Also keep in mind that we are over six months away from the actual launch of Conroe, performance can go up from where it is today. We also only looked at the 2.66GHz part, the Extreme Edition version of Conroe will most likely be clocked around 3.0GHz which will extend the performance advantage even further.

AMD still does have some time to surprise us with AM2, but from what we've seen today, they are going to have to do a lot of work to close this gap. We saw performance today in the two areas that we were most concerned about with Conroe: gaming and media encoding, and in both Intel greatly exceeded our expectations. Also remember that Conroe should be lower power than the AMD offering we compared it to, although we weren't able to measure power consumption at the wall in our brief time with the systems.

Going into IDF we expected to see a good showing from Conroe, but leaving IDF, well, now we just can't wait to have it.

More from the show as we get it...

I Think this wil be a whole new ball game.

03-07-06, 07:13 PM
There 1000 dollar chip is at 3.33Ghz, this one is 2.66, JUST IMAGINE

03-07-06, 07:16 PM
Wow. That sure shows how CPU limited games are, even with an older game like UT2004...looks like an awesome year of competition is going to be had.

03-07-06, 07:29 PM
I might be intrested in a Intel Processor now.

03-07-06, 07:44 PM
WOW if those framerates are correct that is frikkin AMAZING

186 FPS Average in FEAR at 1280x1024 at Maximum/High settings? Doesn't seem right...

03-07-06, 07:51 PM

03-07-06, 07:51 PM
Whoa :eek: i want Conroe now :drooling: suddenly im not very loyal to AMD :p

03-07-06, 07:52 PM
im still amazed at those scores, they dont seem REAL!
its as though they were benching at 640x480 and low quality-----im speachless. if those numbers are close to what we will see from conroe (room for improvement is likely too) then i dont see any way that AMD is going to match that with AM2. looks like we might have to wait till AMD has its k9 for a battle. oh well it was just a matter of time till intel got its act together.
EDIT: this just sucks cause it put my upgrade plans out the window.

03-07-06, 08:03 PM
I'm with you, those number seem absolutely unreal. Even though they are ran on a pair of x1900's in Crossfire, those numbers seem like they are at least twice what they should be.

Am I missing something here?

03-07-06, 08:06 PM
I haven't read the article yet, but are these fully 64-bit processors?

03-07-06, 08:07 PM
oups . i was so dazzled that i missed them running a pair of 1900s in crossfire.
but still that is amazing perfomance anyway you look at it.

03-07-06, 08:09 PM
Do you really think that
1) AM2 with DDR2 will change things greatly?
2) AMD will come out with a completely new efficient architecture in 6 months?

And it was not even the top Conroe model...

1) AMD will launch AM2 with DDR2 800 in June, rumours it will be up to 20% faster than current Athlons on S939 with DDR1.

2) No AMD will not bring out a completely new efficient architecture in 6 months, they realised K8 is very efficient architecture when they discovered that it can double the performance. AMD will bring out huge improved updated K8L core revision G in beginning of 2007 to destroy the top Conroe model that hold the performance lead by about 1 month, K8L revision G will be double the performance of AM2 revision F and in 2008 AMD will not bring K9 but still use K8L with new revision H that will double the performance of K8L revision G. I think AMD will use new K9 architecture in 2009.

03-07-06, 08:11 PM
yep, full 64 bits.

The gain in fear is HOLY HUGE!!! 40% with a change of CPU, HOLY CRAP!