Is Conroe worth it?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

goodman528

Distinguished
Jun 7, 2006
6
0
18,510
I'm going to buy a new PC this summer, after the exams are over (end of June). So, I'm undecided as to whether to wait a month ('till 23 July) for the Core 2 duo from Intel, or buy a CPU at end of June.

I'm looking to buy something that will not go completely obslete in the next 4 years. (btw, what is the best CPU on the market this time 4 years ago? 3 years ago? 2 year ago? last year?)

So, considering future-proof, value for money, and the waiting, what's my best option?

1) Wait for Conroe. (seems such a long wait)
2) Buy AM2. (isn't the same line of CPUs as 939, but more expensive?)
3) Buy 939. (this has been on the market for 2 years, right?)
4) Some other option.
 
If you want the best possible performance for the money, wait for conroe, an extra month isnt that bad, 939 is more or less obsolete and am2 isnt worth the price when compared to conroe's performance.

One more thing, no matter what processor you buy , no matter how expensive it WILL be obsolete in the next 4 years :) so dont worry about that.
 
If you want the best possible performance for the money, wait for conroe, an extra month isnt that bad, 939 is more or less obsolete and am2 isnt worth the price when compared to conroe's performance.

One more thing, no matter what processor you buy , no matter how expensive it WILL be obsolete in the next 4 years :) so dont worry about that.
Click to expand...

Conroe Will be outdated with in a year Compared to AM2sockets K8L, Yes. AM2 isn't going to be worth getting until the K8L Core will be out. So until this time next year Core 2 Duo mgiht me the best thing Out but Be assureed Intel Fanboys the K8L is the next Core to gain the crown :twisted:
 
If you want the best possible performance for the money, wait for conroe, an extra month isnt that bad, 939 is more or less obsolete and am2 isnt worth the price when compared to conroe's performance.

One more thing, no matter what processor you buy , no matter how expensive it WILL be obsolete in the next 4 years :) so dont worry about that.
Click to expand...

Conroe Will be outdated with in a year Compared to AM2sockets K8L, Yes. AM2 isn't going to be worth getting until the K8L Core will be out. So until this time next year Core 2 Duo mgiht me the best thing Out but Be assureed Intel Fanboys the K8L is the next Core to gain the crown :twisted:

I am not an intel fanboy but there is no way you can say k8l will kick conroes ass since k8l is not even in production yet, although more competition can never hurt.
 
I need a bench,even a preview or even some AMD made tests. Right now we have nothing about K8L performance wise.
Also,it's due to Q2-3 2007.
 
A quick look at the TG archive for June of last 4 years shows the best CPU this time...

last year was: AMD X2 4400 [or AMD 4000+]
2004 was: AMD releases 939 pins [AMD 64 3800+; or P4 3.6GHz]
2003 was: AMD Athlon 2400+ [or P4 3.00Ghz]
2002 was: P4 2.53GHz [or AMD Athlon 2200+]
2001 was: P4 1.7GHz [AMD doesn't even come close]
2000 was: P3 ~700MHz

Is a P4 2.53GHz capable of running today's games? Well, the minium system requirement (recommend in brackets) for...

The Elders scrolls 4: Oblivion is: P4 2GHz (P4 3GHz)
Tom Clancy's Advanced Warfighter is: P4 2GHz (P4 3GHz)

These are fairly demanding games. So, I think buying a CPU that will last 4 years is not impossible.

The real question is still of course what will give the best results in the next 2 years?
 
Conroe will be the fastest CPU out at its release, but if you're primarily a gamer, don't expect any amazing framerate improvements unless you plan on playing at 640x480.

If you're waiting until the 23rd anyways, get the Conroe.
 
If you want the best possible performance for the money, wait for conroe, an extra month isnt that bad, 939 is more or less obsolete and am2 isnt worth the price when compared to conroe's performance.

One more thing, no matter what processor you buy , no matter how expensive it WILL be obsolete in the next 4 years :) so dont worry about that.
Click to expand...

Can you please elaborate on your personal definition of obsolete? To say that socket 939 is obsolete is very bold statement. There is currently only one commercially available AMD processor (FX-62) that is superior to the best that s939 has to offer (FX-60). That is quite far from being obsolete, my friend. In fact, a case can be made for s754 processors not being "obsolete" yet. When a CPU can no longer perform the task for which it was originally purchased, then I will concur on its obsolescence. Socket 939 procs are not near that point yet.
 
Conroe will be the fastest CPU out at its release, but if you're primarily a gamer, don't expect any amazing framerate improvements unless you plan on playing at 640x480.
Click to expand...
It isn't the first time you say this.

It's Wrong... Anand's gaming benches (ran at 1024x768) shows the opposite...
 
If you want the best possible performance for the money, wait for conroe, an extra month isnt that bad, 939 is more or less obsolete and am2 isnt worth the price when compared to conroe's performance.

One more thing, no matter what processor you buy , no matter how expensive it WILL be obsolete in the next 4 years :) so dont worry about that.
Click to expand...

Can you please elaborate on your personal definition of obsolete? To say that socket 939 is obsolete is very bold statement. There is currently only one commercially available AMD processor (FX-62) that is superior to the best that s939 has to offer (FX-60). That is quite far from being obsolete, my friend. In fact, a case can be made for s754 processors not being "obsolete" yet. When a CPU can no longer perform the task for which it was originally purchased, then I will concur on its obsolescence. Socket 939 procs are not near that point yet.





Definitions of obsolete on the Web:

old; no longer in use or valid or fashionable; "obsolete words"; "an obsolete locomotive"; "outdated equipment"; "superannuated laws"; "out-of-date ideas"
disused: no longer in use; "obsolete words"




So when I describe s939 as obsolete you can see it means old and out of date and it would make absolutely no sense for a new buyer to buy s939 as the am2 processers provide better performance (though marginal) at similar prices and also provide a upgrade path unlike s939 , hope this gives you an anser.
 
I agree when you say that it doesn't make sense for a new buyer to purchase a socket 939 system and expect it to provide a valid upgrade path for the next several years.

I do not agree when you say that 939s are "old and out of date". Remember, AM2 is a platform change, not a full architecture change. 939s and AM2s are 99% the same. Also, I find it ironic that a couple weeks ago a socket 939 CPU would be hailed as the best performing CPU available but now there are some saying that it's obsolete. What a difference we see in less than a month...
 
Is the 939 obslete? Well, if it isn't at this point in time, it definitely will be this time next year. No new CPUs will come out for this socket, there is no upgrade pass.

Will there be a noticeable difference between a similarly priced AM2 and a conroe? e.g. X2 4200 Vs Conroe 2.66GHz ?

Will there be a noticeable difference between the two in next year's games?

(By noticeable I mean one is below 60fps and the other one is above 60fps. i.e. one lags and the other doesn't.)
 
Is the 939 obslete?
Click to expand...

Conroe looks great. What I don't understand about this discussion is why people haven't declared the Netburst/P4 obslete (slow, hot, bad). There are always justifications on buying AM2/939/940 + Yonah/CoreDuo.

Is anybody going to have a "smash-their-retarded-P4s" day when Conroe comes out? I can't wait until Woodcrest arrives and replaces the the most ill-conceived mainstream CPU designed this decade.
 
I'm going to buy a new PC this summer, after the exams are over (end of June). So, I'm undecided as to whether to wait a month ('till 23 July) for the Core 2 duo from Intel, or buy a CPU at end of June.
Click to expand...
It will be officially released on the 23rd of July, but you won't get your hands on one till mid or late August. The first shipments will be quickly bought up by system integrators (Dell, HP, etc). In Q3, only 15% of desktop processors will be Core 2, the rest will be P4/P4D/P4EE
See here:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=6


Another thing:
Regarding games, CPU progress has slowed down.
OTOHT, gpus are quickly evolving, so the system will first be outdated by the gfx card.
 
If you're building a new system it would seem waiting for a core duo is the best value. Future proofing is a buzz word and is like predicting the weather or telling some one their future. It's not accurate.

As for people expecting miracles from AMD...don't hold your breath. As far as I can tell they don't have a solid solution yet to compete with Intel's microarchitecture. Even though they are working on 65nm proccess. And I'm not impressed with quad core motherboards either.

Buy the best value thing you can within a 1-2 month window. That's the best anyone can do. So in 1-2 months conroe's will be available. So do that. Simple.
 
For future proofing go with either AM2 Athlon 64 or Conroe and forget the S939 Athlon 64 because no new CPUs will be coming out for that socket.

How long will socket AM2 last? Until at least AMD's next generation CPU, the K8L, comes out. It is speculated that K8L will be out between the 2nd half of 2007 and early 2008. I would assume that socket AM2 will survive for at least 1 year after K8L comes out. Let's say early 2009, by then AMD will probably announce a new socket specification.

Conroe is a socket LGA775 CPU. LGA775 has been around for a year. How long will it last? Don't know, Intel hasn't mentioned anything regarding a new socket to the best of my knowledge. Maybe by 2008 they will change sockets. A 3 year shelf life for a socket is pretty long in my opinion.

While an AM2 Athlon 64 basically offers the same performance as a comperable S939 Athlon 64, faster Athlon 64s will only be released for AM2. Since there is no fundamental change to the core of the CPU, it is basically the same old Athlon 64 but now it will only work with DDR2 RAM.
The K8L CPU will be AMD's real response to Intel's Conroe. Will it trump Conroe? Maybe, only time will tell.

Conroe is represents a fundamental shift for Intel, thanks to the development of the Pentium M CPU which is basically like a hybrid Pentium 3 and Pentium 4. Intel has learned the lesson from AMD, that pure speed (GHz) doesn't matter anymore, and Conroe runs significantly cooler than the old Pentium 4s. They should consume around the same amount of power as the Athlon 64s. That is good, but the bad thing is that Conroe is using the 65nm die process, while the AM2 Athlons are still using the 90nm die process. That says a lot about AMD's ablity to refine their 90nm process to reduce power consumption as much as possible.

AMD is transistioning over to the smaller 65nm die process and Intel will be shrinking their Conroes down to the 45nm die process next year. I believe I read a rumor that 65nm Athlon 64 may be released at the end of 2006, but that's just a rumor.

Getting back to Conroe, real benchmarks have started to appear. Both Tomshardware and Anandtech have recently released a preview. The Anandtech preview compares the Conroe Extreme Edition to the Athlon 64 FX-62, the two most powerful CPUs for the moment. I haven't read Tomshardware's preview yet, but I would assume it's also compares the Conroe EE to the FX-62. In Anandtech's review both CPUs are running at stock speeds, Conroe won all the benchmarks (games, video, etc) except for the two memory benchmarks. So if you are looking for better theortical memory bandwidth, then get the AM2 Athlon 64. If you want better real life performance then get the Intel Conroe.

But it is still too early to embrace Conroe. First, it's not out yet. Second, the more previews and actual reviews the better. But so far Conroe looks promising and should give you enough reason to postpone your build to August (when Conroe CPUs are actually available to the public to purchase). By then you will have a much better picture as to which of the two CPUs will be better.

Can't wait? Then just get the AM2 Athlon.
 
I wish people on this forum would stop advising people who want a new computer to "wait until July for Conroe". Sure, Conroe will be kick-ass. But they won't be available to most of us until some time in August (if we're lucky).
Don't plan on buying a Conroe (Core 2 Duo) for a build-it-yourself system in July. They are being RELEASED publicly around July 23. Then Dell gets first dibs and will grab as many as Mikey wants.
Don't believe me? Check out what Anand had to say:

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771

Final Words: Conroe Availability and Pricing
While Intel's Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors will be released at the beginning of Q3 of this year it will take some time for all of Intel's shipments to be Conroe based. The scary statistic is that by the end of this year, only 25% of Intel's Performance Mainstream desktop processor shipments will be based on Conroe. The remaining 75% will still be NetBurst based, meaning they will be Pentium 4, Pentium D and Pentium Extreme Edition.
...

For the Dells of the world, Conroe availability shouldn't be too much of an issue because companies like Dell get first dibs. For years of not going with AMD, all while demanding something more competitive from Intel, you better believe that Dell is going to soak up every last Conroe that it can.
The problem then becomes what happens after Dell and HP have eaten their lunch, unfortunately the concern is that aggressive pricing won't be enough to reduce retail demand for Conroe. What we're worried about happening is a very small supply of Conroes on the retail market in late Q3/early Q4, resulting in much higher street prices than what you see in the table above. In the worst case scenario for Intel, Conroe's limited retail availability could result in a price-to-performance ratio equal to or worse than AMD's Athlon 64 X2.
 
goodman528 said:
Look at those benches goodman528: http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=5

The minimum framerate in FEAR 1.05 @ 1024x768 was 53 fps for the FX62... the Core 2 Duo Extreme X6800 scored 80 fps.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Comparing conroe with X2 4200 (939 socket), conroe gives 125 fps, 4200 gives 86 fps, at 1024x768 high setting, average. Seems to be quite a difference. Shame conroe isn't in the CPU charts.[/quote

At this time unless Intel has worked amiracle that I am not aware of the Conroe/Woodcrest have alimitation on their ablity to move back and forth between 64bit and 32 bit software. Using 32 bit software EM64T is limited to 4gb gross of addressable memory. If and when vista gets here that may be a problem.

CPUs with this technology have a new operating mode, called IA32E, which has two sub-modes:

* Compatibility mode: Allows 64-bit operating systems to run 32-bit and 16-bit software unmodified. The operating system can have 64-bit (in 64-bit mode), 32-bit and 16-bit (both on compatibility mode) programs running at the same time. However, 32-bit programs will run as if they were running on a 32-bit CPU, i.e. will access only up to 4 GB of RAM. The same idea goes to 16-bit program, that will still access only up to 1 MB of RAM.
* 64-bit mode: Allows 64-bit operation systems to use the new 64-bit addressing space provided by this technology.

As you can see above, EM64T technology can only be used by 64-bit operating systems, like the forthcoming Windows 64. 32-bit operating systems, like Windows XP, will continue to run under regular IA32 mode, i.e. using the regular 32-bit addressing space – in order words, can access only up to 4 GB RAM.

In plain English, Windows nowadays cannot take advantage of EM64T technology since it is still a 32-bit operating system.

f you use “heavy” applications and are thinking of moving to 64-bit computing to have more than 4 GB RAM available, keep in mind that you will need new 64-bit version of your software, or they will still access only 4 GB RAM, thus not solving your problem.

Also keep in mind that the external address bus of EM64T-based CPUs isn’t 64-bit wide, so no Intel CPU using this technology can access 16 EB (exabytes) of RAM (2^64), as you may think. The maximum amount of RAM memory a CPU can access under 64-bit mode depends on its implementation. 64-bit Celeron D, Pentium 4 and Xeon CPUs can access up to 64 GB of RAM while 64-bit Xeon DP can access up to 1 TB of RAM. Once again, keep in mind that under 32-bit mode or 64-bit compatibility mode, the CPU accesses only 4 GB of RAM, even if it is a “64-bit CPU”.
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/262
The opteron Class and AM2 are not under these restrictions.
Click to expand...
 
Look at those benches goodman528: http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=5

The minimum framerate in FEAR 1.05 @ 1024x768 was 53 fps for the FX62... the Core 2 Duo Extreme X6800 scored 80 fps.
Click to expand...
Take note that I recommended the Conroe if he's waiting until the 23rd, but realistically from a gaming point of view, if you already have a good CPU, there's no reason to upgrade. By the way, do you enjoy playing games on 1024x768 with no antialiasing or anisotropic filtering? I myself play games on 1680x1050, so upgrading to a Conroe won’t do a whole lot.
 
I can't help but think intel is going to be cheaper by far. That FX-62 is friggen expensive. In a comparison the Conroe EE beat that chip and it's probably gonna be cheaper. Just speculation of price on my part but...

http://www.pccanada.com/viewitem.asp?id=4535

Yowzers! That's a dent in your pocket.

I'm drifting to la la land but I think AMD's are just more expensive all around. But AMD loves to have the fasted stuff... which means about jack to me. It's all about the value.
 
Look at those benches goodman528: http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771&p=5

The minimum framerate in FEAR 1.05 @ 1024x768 was 53 fps for the FX62... the Core 2 Duo Extreme X6800 scored 80 fps.
Click to expand...
Take note that I recommended the Conroe if he's waiting until the 23rd, but realistically from a gaming point of view, if you already have a good CPU, there's no reason to upgrade. By the way, do you enjoy playing games on 1024x768 with no antialiasing or anisotropic filtering? I myself play games on 1680x1050, so upgrading to a Conroe won’t do a whole lot.

Heh I find that todays sloppy programming is taxing CPU's more than ever. It used to be that video cards did wonders. Now everyone is splitting their games into peices where to get a total frame rate that's reasonable you almost need a trinity of capable hardware.

CPU today is being strained by physics which is now getting dumped on future graphics cards and Physics cards [who knows if that will truly pan out]. Graphics cards now pump resolution and shader quality through the roof. But won't help ya a bit with some games if your CPU isn't good enough. Example...any source engine game.

In my opinion the future of gaming (realistic interactions) physics is in a very strange place if you ask me. Nvidia and ATI say their cards can pick up the slack. Ageia says they are the future... WHO knows.

It's safe to say if you have enough money you don't have to think as much 😀 If you're buget gaming nothing is for sure.
 
I need a bench,even a preview or even some AMD made tests. Right now we have nothing about K8L performance wise.
Also,it's due to Q2-3 2007.
Click to expand...


OEMs will get them in Q4 2006, just like 65nm X2s. In this case you CAN make assumptions since it's an overblown K8. Just add about 20-40%.
 
Take note that I recommended the Conroe if he's waiting until the 23rd
Click to expand...
I do knew that, just wanted to show the benches to the guy.

but realistically from a gaming point of view, if you already have a good CPU, there's no reason to upgrade. By the way, do you enjoy playing games on 1024x768 with no antialiasing or anisotropic filtering? I myself play games on 1680x1050, so upgrading to a Conroe won’t do a whole lot.
Click to expand...
Mmm... Did you forgot that this "preview" was a CPU related one? Using the filters would show just a graphics card performance increase/bottleneck. But hey, I'm still sure that Core 2 Duo performance at higher resolutions it's on par with the results in this preview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom