PDA

View Full Version : Official Conroe benchmarks


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

AthlonXP1800
06-05-06, 05:36 PM
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/06/04/intel_conroe_performance_preview/1.html

Bit Tech carried out tests on Conroe E6700 provided by Intel. After read the benchmarks, I found Conroe somewhat disappointing after all the hype, dont think it worth the switch if you already got Athlon 64 X2 or FX. I will wait for quad core next year. :D

Banko
06-05-06, 06:15 PM
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/06/04/intel_conroe_performance_preview/1.html

Bit Tech carried out tests on Conroe E6700 provided by Intel. After read the benchmarks, I found Conroe somewhat disappointing after all the hype, dont think it worth the switch if you already got Athlon 64 X2 or FX. I will wait for quad core next year. :D
And how can you make that conclusion when they didn't even compare it against an AMD cpu? Fanboy...

CaptNKILL
06-05-06, 06:21 PM
And how can you make that conclusion when they didn't even compare it against an AMD cpu? Fanboy...
:werd:

EDIT: Also, I dont know what the hell he's looking for in a CPU upgrade if a 60% performance increase isnt enough at 1280x1024 in HL2 Lost Coast. That is a rediculously huge performance boost from a CPU upgrade considering the situation. In fact, it almost isnt even believable.

shabby
06-05-06, 06:41 PM
Did you not see the gaming benchmarks and how it clobbers the p4 by twofold?

AthlonXP1800
06-05-06, 06:57 PM
And how can you make that conclusion when they didn't even compare it against an AMD cpu? Fanboy...

If you looked at the Conroe system setup, they used X1900 XT Crossfire and take a look at FEAR benchmarks, Conroe get the same score as my system on 1280x1024 with just a single Geforce 7800 GTX clocked to 500/1300, not exactly impressive!

Banko
06-05-06, 07:03 PM
If you looked at the Conroe system setup, they used X1900 XT Crossfire and take a look at FEAR benchmarks, Conroe get the same score as my system on 1280x1024 with just a single Geforce 7800 GTX clocked to 500/1300, not exactly impressive!
Why don't you run at the lowest res and show a screen of your score? That will test the CPU more then the GPU. The fact is not even the FX-60 is 2x faster then the Pentium XE.

tacos4me
06-05-06, 08:57 PM
These benchmarks make me feel a little better after just purchasing myself a new X2. Conroe's not that impressive, sure it blows away the P4 in the gaming benchmarks, and yes it's a huge improvement over the P4 and NetBurst. But I don't play my games at 640x480 or 1024x768, and I use AA/AF. I want a more in-depth review with a few AMD processors thrown in.

Of course, I would still kill to have one, but I'm a poor student. I'm just interested in the overclocks people will get with these, that's what would sell one for me, becuase as it stands, my X2 isn't getting blown away by a whole lot.

Banko
06-05-06, 10:03 PM
These benchmarks make me feel a little better after just purchasing myself a new X2. Conroe's not that impressive, sure it blows away the P4 in the gaming benchmarks, and yes it's a huge improvement over the P4 and NetBurst. But I don't play my games at 640x480 or 1024x768, and I use AA/AF. I want a more in-depth review with a few AMD processors thrown in.

Of course, I would still kill to have one, but I'm a poor student. I'm just interested in the overclocks people will get with these, that's what would sell one for me, becuase as it stands, my X2 isn't getting blown away by a whole lot.
Well from what has been seen over at xtremesystems.org those 2.66ghz conroes hit 3.7 on AIR cooling.

Richteralan
06-05-06, 10:05 PM
These numbers coincide my expectation of Core 2 Duo.

Previous hypes and "SuperPi" numbers are unrealistic.

a12ctic
06-06-06, 12:17 AM
i said those benchmarks were unrealistic when they came around, but nobody belived me :p

a12ctic
06-06-06, 12:56 AM
wow, the T600@2.6ghz still isnt beating the fx60 at 2.6ghz, conroe isnt even winning clock for clock ROFL

http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/intel_core_duo_t2600_on_the_desktop/lq-quake4.png

yep amd is in SOOO MUCH TROUBLE *sarcasm*

CaptNKILL
06-06-06, 01:04 AM
wow, the T600@2.6ghz still isnt beating the fx60 at 2.6ghz, conroe isnt even winning clock for clock ROFL

http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/intel_core_duo_t2600_on_the_desktop/lq-quake4.png

yep amd is in SOOO MUCH TROUBLE *sarcasm*
:wtf:

The T2600 is a Core Duo, not a Core 2 Duo. Its a completely different chip. In fact, thats a MOBILE chip.

Jeez, if youre going to bash something, at least get the platform right:D. At the very least give us a link to the article :p

EDIT: Actually, you know whats really funny :D

In this FEAR benchmark:
http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/intel_conroe_performance_preview/lq-fear.png

The 965 gets very similar framerates to the Quake 4 benchmark you posted. So if any of those similarities carry over to the core 2, itl be getting a good 110fps more than the FX60 :p

jAkUp
06-06-06, 01:08 AM
Actually it beats an FX60 clocked 200MHz higher!! Me want conroe :drooling: 50FPS faster than an FX60 overclocked to 2.8GHz??!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhhGud47TI&search=AMD%20%20vs%20%20Intel%20(

MUYA
06-06-06, 01:23 AM
Tom's has a FX52 vs conroe@2.66ghz

CaptNKILL
06-06-06, 01:31 AM
Tom's has a FX52 vs conroe@2.66ghz
Yep, heres the article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/first_benchmarks_conroe_vs_fx-62/

Its not all that impressive. They gimped it a bit with the ram and it wasnt done in their own labs. Hard to say what will come of this.

I know I sure as hell dont play my games at 640x480 though. It still irritates me that we bench games this way. I dont care how many thousands of frames per second I can get when nothing is going on, if the CPU choaks and dies as soon as something happens (ie, a real CPU loaded situation) then 15 million fps in Quake 4 at 320x240 while staring at a wall doesnt mean squat :p

Lets see some Oblivion Imperial City scenes or run throughs of Garry's Mod for HL2 with 1200 barrels exploding in 10 seconds.

Thats what CPU gaming tests should be.

|MaguS|
06-06-06, 01:34 AM
Tom's has a FX52 vs conroe@2.66ghz

Toms hardware has such a horrible preview... no PC Specs posted anywhere, just the memory type and states that the FX62 has SLi...

It is interesting to see that on the "low settings" the Conroe setup beats the FX62 all the time, so basically when the game is CPU limited, the Conroe really shines. Im guessin on the "High Settings" the FX60 had better performance due to faster RAM and possibly a better Videocard.

Think were going to have to wait till sites get their own setups going...

jAkUp
06-06-06, 02:56 AM
Wow Conroe is absolutely stomping the FX in FarCry!

MustangSVT
06-06-06, 02:58 AM
This whole Conroe thing seems way overrated, as does the AMD FX-62 thing.

How about some real-life gaming situations? I'm not buying into Tom's review.

This is what I want to see:

Oblivion
FEAR
Battlefield 2
Call of Duty 2
GRAW

1280x1024 4xAA 8xAF, maximum in-game detail
1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF, maximum in-game detail
1920x1200 4xAA 8xAF, maximum in-game detail

With a setup like a 7900GT video card, or a X1900XT, or a 7800GTX SLI setup. Preferrably just a single X1900XT or a single 7900GTX. Then I'd like to see how much faster this Conroe thing is. Don't give me FarCry (don't get me wrong, really good looking game, but it's 2 years old) at 1024x768 "low" and "high" settings, what does "high" mean?

Superfly
06-06-06, 03:34 AM
wow, the T600@2.6ghz still isnt beating the fx60 at 2.6ghz, conroe isnt even winning clock for clock ROFL

http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/intel_core_duo_t2600_on_the_desktop/lq-quake4.png

yep amd is in SOOO MUCH TROUBLE *sarcasm*

the fact that you dont know what chip your even talking about sums you up nicely!!!

ROFL.

Acid Rain
06-06-06, 04:04 AM
Don't give me FarCry (don't get me wrong, really good looking game, but it's 2 years old) at 1024x768 "low" and "high" settings, what does "high" mean?When comparing CPUs, it is imperative that the graphics subsystem bottleneck be removed from the picture.

That is why, when comparing CPUs, the visuals are always notched way back.

Removing the graphics hardware bottleneck uncovers another; the CPU.

msxyz
06-06-06, 04:25 AM
Intel will launch the processor at conservative frequencies. It's not in their interest:

1) to have a product that blows the competition out of the water (and possibly out of the market); keep in mind that there's a long wolrd-wide legal litigation going on between AMD and Intel for unfair businness practices and in some countries (ie japan) Intel is already likely to loose. The last thing it needs now is proof that it operates as a monopoly.

2) Why sell today a 3+ GHz CPU when they can sell you a slower 2.5GHz chip and the next year the 3+ GHz one? You've to keep the fabs busy by creating a constant demand. No to mention that you're going to sell more chip in the second way.

A Conroe at 3+ GHz would be probalby the first Intel chip in 9 years to gain a clear supremacy in every department. The K6 was the first chip by AMD that beated Intel Pentiums in a good range of applications. The Athlon extendend AMD domination in FPU intensive tasks (games, scientific, etc...) and, except for brief perdiods in some areas, Intel never regained the performance crown again.

Now they have a good architecture that scales as well. Intel was caught in the MHz race because it couldn't offer substantial improvements in any other way and because they made some discutible strategic decisions in the late '90s. While the Pentium III Tualatin (0.13u, up to 1.6GHz, prefetch logic and larger caches) showed the way Intel should have pursued, it took them 2 years to resurrect the venerable and still competittive P6 architecture for mobile applications and another 3 to bring them to the desktop area.

Toss3
06-06-06, 05:43 AM
the fact that you dont know what chip your even talking about sums you up nicely!!!

ROFL.
owned:

Lars
06-06-06, 06:20 AM
I think a lot of you guys guys are going to reconsider your positions when you see,

1) how well conroe's will overclock, and

2) benchmarks @ 1600x1200 4x fsaa/16x + resolutions

Granted we're not going to see the same margin of the superpi 1M benches in most games, but it still is one hell of a cpu ;)

Just to inform you, that I do know a little something about conroe performance IRL....http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8988559 ;)

Lars
06-06-06, 06:33 AM
Thanks for the link. What kind of cooling solution is this?

It's using a Mach II GT. However, it's a very early pre-release stepping cpu and it only does about 250 Mhz more on the Mach II than it does on air.

Conroe retail cpu's (E6600's and up) will most likely overclock higher than this on air. Just have a look at xtremesystems, those guys are hitting 3.7+ Ghz on air with B1 steppings.

|MaguS|
06-06-06, 06:48 AM
I will be happy if I can hit 3.5 or so on air. I think when I go conroe I might even move to watercooling... don't think im going to give up my current rig when I upgrade so I always will have something to fall back on (and dual box vangaurds!).