Previewing the Performance of the Intel Conroe 114
pirate rtt writes "bit-tech has spent some time with an Intel Conroe system and has published a preview of its performance as compared to the current Intel flagship chip - the Presler 965. From the article: 'Core 2 Duo is clearly a very capable processor. We found that it was faster than the current 965 processor in most situations on the desktop, and far more proficient at gaming - an area where Intel has traditionally been weak. The added memory bandwidth that will come from having faster RAM enabled on the Core 2 Extreme chips will be an extra bonus for those looking to Conroe as a gaming platform.'"
Are These Reviews Significant? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are reviews like this of any real significance?
And what makes this review different? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wait for v2 (Score:2, Insightful)
Here's a link listing some of the errata known for Athlon processors (counting up to at least 154):
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/whit
Re:And what makes this review different? (Score:3, Insightful)
Only half the issue (Score:3, Insightful)
gaming (Score:5, Insightful)
So, this isn't so much as Intel stealing the crown as re-claiming the thrown.
<shrugs>No big deal .. I just get tired of the Intel bashing crowd. "OMG INTEL IS TEH DEVIL, AMD IS OUR SAVIOR!!"
Re:Conroe vs. FX-62 (Score:5, Insightful)
2) Some of those benchmarks, like Pifast, likely fit inside the Core 2 Duo's massive L2 cache. Intel uses all that expensive cache to compensate for their lack of on-board memory controllers and HyperTransport.
3) Curious how they chose much lower latency memory for the Intel machine than the AMD. I'm not sure that the higher bandwidth of the AMD PC's memory overcomes its higher latency.
4) Why use 1024x768 res for the FarCry benchmark and 1600x1200 with AA and AF cranked up for theother two games? Games are GPU-limited at hires, so if you wanted to spike the results where AMD is superior...
5) Despite all of that, the AMD FX62 still won the Cryptography benchmark.
6) Why are nearly all of these reviews showing up on websites outside of America? Could it be that Intel wants to keep these reviews out of reach of AMD's American lawyers?
It sure looks like Intel's playing dirty (again). Wake me up when we get reviews done outside of Intel-controlled environments.
Re:Wait for v2 (Score:5, Insightful)
Nonsense. For compilers do not work around bugs in general purpose chips. If a chip bug can't be worked around by microcode or bios settings, or (in rare circumstances) the operating system, the chip will be binned. Compatibility is king in the general purpose CPU market. Nobody can sell a CPU that crashes on some programs that used to run perfectly well.
A better competition (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:About Time (Score:5, Insightful)
Technical Prowess of Reviewer? (Score:3, Insightful)
During several of the tests, the author of the article ran single threaded and multithreaded tests. In some of these tests, the performance of both the Conroe and Pressler chips decreased. The author incorrectly states that the multitasking performance of the Conroe chip is lower than the Pressler chips. He is incorrect becuase his own graphs reference multi-threaded performance. These are two entirely different things. While the multi-threaded perfomance of Conroe is slower in some cases, the single threaded performance was faster in most cases. These tasks obviously are not tasks well suited for parallel processing, and as such should be coded to run as a single thread to keep performace high.
While the rest of the benchmark seems solid, his analyis should be brought into question as he doesn't seem to have a solid grasp on his technology vocabulary. That or his editors don't know what they are reading either. If that is the case their reviews should not be showcased.
Re:Conroe vs. FX-62 (Score:4, Insightful)
For which benchmarks do you claim they used special Intel compilers? The only reference in the article is that they used an "Intel HT compiler" for their "HEXUS.in-house MP3 Encoding Benchmark".
Noone's interested in Pifast scores. Conroe beating the FX-62 by almost 60% in Far Cry is much more impressing. And using a 65nm process Intel can sell Conroes with 4MB cache for very competitive prices. If you believe the leaked documents on the web a Conroe E6600 will sell for a little over $300 (in quantities of thousand) and should be on a performance level of the best AMD CPU.
Even if there was a 5% difference, it wouldn't change the big picture.
That's an interesting question indeed. But all other Conroe previews suggest that its gaming performance will be stellar.
The average user doesn't use his CPU for cryptography very much.
Maybe because Intel makes most of its revenue outside the US?
July 23rd is rumored to be the launch date. Until then I'd definitely wait before buying a new CPU. Even if you want to buy an AMD processor, they're will be huge price drops.
Re:About Time (Score:3, Insightful)
With that said, since the original poster was contemplating replacing a 1.67Ghz G4 (a fairly recent model) with a brand new MacBook Pro, it seems he doesn't have a problem with shelling out for a new laptop either.