View Single Post
Old 04-09-07, 04:31 PM   #21
Xion X2
Registered User
Xion X2's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.
Posts: 6,701
Default Re: Massive AMD Price Drops on X2 6000+ and X2 5600+

Originally Posted by Heinz68
I don't see any flame war, the only thing I see is price war and that sure benefits any computer user or fanboy.
About "fanboys", I believe we all are cheering for one company or other so by using the word I don't mean to insult anybody.
Just FYI, but the term "fanboy" is derogatory about.. 99.9% of the time. It is typically used to refer to a person who feels insecure or threatened by a certain product and chooses to ignore any and all facts related to it. That doesn't describe me or many others on this forum. My last processor/platform was AMD, and I'm not "cheering" for either Intel or AMD at this point. I could care less who wins; I just want the faster platform.

I believe your statement that Intel outperform the AMD by "significant margin" is little blind fanboyism.
No it's not. There is simply no comparison between the processors. Your charts are not taking into account how much you can overclock the Core2Duos in relation to how little you can overclock an AMD. Clock for clock the Intels are faster, and I have yet to see anyone on this forum with an AMD chip over 3.2gHz while there are several with Core2Duos up around 3.6-3.8gHz. That is a "significant" performance gap and shows itself in benchmarks such as SuperPi and 3dMark.

This post is mainly about the AMD X2 5600+ & X2 6000+ and I did link in my original post to AnandTech review. The X2 6000+ compared wery good to Intel's Core 2 Duo E6600 and was not far behind E6700
.. at stock clocks. If you want to argue that the AMDs are close in gaming performance to the Intels at stock speeds, I'm not going to disagree with you too much, although I still feel that those benches don't tell the entire story. But what you seem to be overlooking--either on purpose because you own it, or perhaps not on purpose because you're not aware of it--is that AMD has been overclocking these latest chips from the factory so that they're already topped out when you receive them. That's why guys haven't been able to get more than a 200-400mhz overclock out of them.

Go ahead. Show me a recent high-end(5000+ and up) AMD processor that has OC'd more than 400mhz. They are based on the same architecture that has been hammered in benchmarks by the Core2Duos since their release. It's just a ploy by AMD to tide people over until they can put a new architecture on the market.

Meanwhile, you're comparing these to most Core2Duo chips that will overclock ~50% or 1200mhz with ease. And once you overclock, you get that "significant margin" that I was talking about.

Just to stop any further arguments:
I did also mention in the origional post that the E6600 would most likely overclock better but I don't think AMD needs to much worry about it, in my wild estimate 99.9% PC user do not overclock. For most people the bottom line is more important.
I think you're simplifying that far too much. Most everyone here who goes with one of these high-end processors overclocks, and I'd be willing to bet that plays out in most other places as well. Those who don't overclock typically don't go with such a high-end processor; they buy something that's more suited for everyday or business use. That is one of the reasons AMD's top of the line processor, the FX series, has had an unlocked multiplier. Most people who buy it are overclockers.

And there's no "most likely" in reference to whether or not an E6600 would overclock better. It would. Every time. I got an ordinary chip, and mine even does 3.6gHz with ease which is a 50% overclock.

i7-2700k @ 5.0 GHz
Nvidia GeForce 570 2.5GB Tri-SLI
Asus P67 WS Revolution (Tri-SLI)
OCZ Vertex SSD x 4 (Raid 5)
G.Skill 8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz
PC Power & Cooling 950W PSU
Xion X2 is offline   Reply With Quote