IDF video <in french>

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
CompGeek

CompGeek

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2005
455
0
18,780
I've seen this posted in AnandTech
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8448533559889677009&q=intel&pl=true
It's in french but the video is pretty much concludent. Conroe has a huge lead as it is shown there.
No need to translate: memory timing 4-4-4-4 and 2-2-2-2. AMD proc. was OCed to 2.8. Intel 2.66 stock. Conroe performs better. End of story.
I know that this may be a faked comparison but lets keep hopes as high as we can shall we? :wink:
 
You damn Intel fanboy :lol: . Joking aside, I would rather test it myself and tell you the results, but since I don't have $250,000 to spend on a prototype, that ain't going to happen soon.
 
I still have the same opinion:

Impressive. My hope are high. I have a feeling real benchmarks by independent sources (such as Tom's Hardware) will yeild different results, but I doubt they'll be too far off.

The race is on!
 
Yup we're in for a real clash.
Why am i so optimistic? Well that's simply because Core Duo is equall clock per clock to X2 and that Conroe will be a desktop optimised Core Duo with higher FSB,higher TDP so more headroom for clock performance.(not to mention features)
This chip simply can't go wrong. I'm not saying that it will with no doubt beat AMD but i'm certain it will be competitive at least even when it comes to price performance. And i believe these chips will have good OC potential.

And as for me being a fanboy,well i can't deny the truth. I like Intel though i also like competition(with Intel a bit on top of course 😀 ).
 
Well, here goes the translation (just the answers, though they "speak" for themselves!), even if I find both le mac and the interview "a bit" idiotic (and the unglyyy guy behind the Intel mac :lol: :lol: :lol: !); anyway:

«Conroe has run the demo of... QUAKE... it's over. Well, Conroe has finished well ahead of AMD... it's not hot...

The AMD was clocked at 2.8...

We've changed the motherboard (?)... so everything was equal, within the possibilities...

We've used... ATi CrossFire [R] 580... (both platforms, I suppose)

We've upgraded the memory (?)... the best we can have...

The BIOS's from last year (!)... every possible patches for the games...

We've worked hard to be able to please everybody... and to avoid any criticisms...

(Dothan?) Conroe 2.6... running on a MADAX (?) motherboard...

The [memory] timings were 4 4 4 4...

While, for AMD, it's an ATi motherboard... it's a DFI ATi RD 580... and the timings are 2 2 2 2... 1T

It's all the best within the possible and the imaginable!

We've really done... nobody will say that... it's not done!

[Conroe] It's the new architecture... it's the best one can make, actually... but we're at the beginnings of this architecture... we'll keep tuning it, improving it...

We've demonstrated that the performances are well above the competitor's...

It's a FX 60, clocked at 2.8...

20% (advantage) in QUAKE... it's the most conservative demo we've found... we haven't displayed HIGH FLY's (?), which shows even better results...

The other results... you might find'em online... and the journalists who are going to measure them at IDF... they're going to turn'em public... we don't want to bragg about it too much...

[Is this the 1st time AMD's machine vs Intel's?) Yes, it's the first and the last...»


Well, there you have it! It's a sort of loose translation, but it's what the mac said (vomited!) 😀


Cheers!
 
I've seen this posted in AnandTech
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8448533559889677009&q=intel&pl=true
It's in french but the video is pretty much concludent. Conroe has a huge lead as it is shown there.
No need to translate: memory timing 4-4-4-4 and 2-2-2-2. AMD proc. was OCed to 2.8. Intel 2.66 stock. Conroe performs better. End of story.
I know that this may be a faked comparison but lets keep hopes as high as we can shall we? :wink:
Click to expand...

Well we all know french dont we?[/sarcasm]
 
They giggle @ the fact that the o/ced fx60 was overheating and lost ~20fps compared to what it had gotten before yet they fail to include ANY current gen prescott in there for comparison.
 
Well, "NetBurst" is really over (but not deep pipelines & high frequencies...); so, the fair comparison will be between Conroe & whatever-AMD-comes-out-with-K8x.

Typically, these tests are unfair for both platforms: Intel's using a NGMA at stock speeds, with DDR2; AMD's using its last & current tech, overclocked and with plain DDR. And all other differences amount to an even greater unfairness.

All things being equal... <- this is the real prob.

AMD is about 10 times smaller than Intel (WTM: it's much smaller.). For practical reasons, Conroe [Core] is THE architecture against which AMD's NGMA (or whatever) will have to play against, with all "fairness" both platforms will allow. This, if we forget about "All things being equal", of course.

Edit: (but not deep pipelines & high frequencies...); This is my opinion & a different matter, altogether. Just to clear things up.


Cheers!
 
teh end user doesn't take consideration to give sympathy votes for AMD cause it is smaller...
IMO, the user classes them by price, which that is what counts, so a $520 Conroe should get paired with an Opteron 175, and not a $1,100 FX CPU>

I mean, tell your average PC Extreme buyer that you can get more performance at stock speeds, more overclocked speeds, less heat, less watts (tho most do not care), and the latest technology for $500 which is half the price of the CPU in the rig you have configured with an FX-62.
 
Right.
But that's beyond the point: I'm addressing the "fairness" in the comparative tests, not what the end user will buy & for what reasons.


Cheers!
 
Heck, even AMD/Intel agree and price chips competitively.
It just seems that AMD is not going to be able to lower prices to a competitive level with Intel, for the next 6 months anyway...
 
teh end user doesn't take consideration to give sympathy votes for AMD cause it is smaller...
IMO, the user classes them by price, which that is what counts, so a $520 Conroe should get paired with an Opteron 175, and not a $1,100 FX CPU>

I mean, tell your average PC Extreme buyer that you can get more performance at stock speeds, more overclocked speeds, less heat, less watts (tho most do not care), and the latest technology for $500 which is half the price of the CPU in the rig you have configured with an FX-62.
Click to expand...
The almighty teh!
 
I'm sure AMD has had time to more than work on die shrinks since the A64's were released what in 2003? I mean they were probably taped out in early 2002....AMD's got researcher's and engineers that've had 4 solid years of creativity at their disposal. They've been aweful quiet lately and are set to make annoucements on next year's plans next week. Maybe they'll suprise us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom