AMD FX 64 vs Conroe E6900

all that is is an oced 62 vs an oced 6800.
the next FX (if there is one) will most likley have An L2 of 4 like the upper conroe's
 
don't forget that AMD hasn't even gone for 65nm yet... or lower. we all know that Athlon 64 isn't as good of an architecture in comparison with Core 2 Duo. Athlon 64 was definitely amazing for its day though. i mean Pentium 4 was much worse in comparison per clock. the only thing Pentium 4 had over Athlon 64 really was its Hyperthreading technology... and potential for higher clocks. even then, Athlon 64 X2 battered Pentium D into a pulp. Pentium D is still a good choice for performance/price ratio though, definitely.

Core 2 architecture is definitely revolutionary, that we can all agree on. of course, what with AMD buying ATI, new architectures will come out and Core 2's reign over the cpu market might not last too long for all we know. ATI already has technology to process video conversion with a video card. with such technology combined with AMD's hypertransport, the market for multithreaded processing could easily end up in AMD's lap.
 
Last edited:
I think you need to marry AMD duder. :P
Talk about the future all you want, we are here, now.
The Core 2 Duo is the best thing out there, I bought one, it was the first Intel I have got sense P100 in 1996.

Just get the best and be happy.
 
well the AMD to INTEL right now is two different categories

AMD can still hand with INTELs 65nm while they are at 90nm


when AMD does go to 65nm that will once again take over the crown
 
Impr3ssiv3 said:
well the AMD to INTEL right now is two different categories

AMD can still hand with INTELs 65nm while they are at 90nm


when AMD does go to 65nm that will once again take over the crown
Click to expand...

The move to 65nm from 90nm alone won't make much of a difference.
 
Impr3ssiv3 said:
maybe

but at least they can put more stuff on the chip
Click to expand...

Its not about really putting more "stuff" on the chip. True, with smaller architecture they can put more transistors into each chip but more importantly, smaller architecture allows for more efficiency and less power usage, resulting in better cooling, and in the end high clock rates as well as allowing room for larger caches if needed (budget chips are in a lower priority to need massive caches).
Remember the huge difference between the older Athlon 64s at 130nm and the rather large cooling advantage the 90nm Venice chip had and the rush for people to overclock the hell outta them. The FX60+ and X2 models probably wouldnt have been possible with 130nm because of the huge cooling requirement.
 
Last edited:
Look at the end of the article, about the possible prices:

http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles...?cid=2&id=2010 said:
To date, AMD has almost halved the price of its Athlon 64 processor line-up, but even with the July price cuts, the Processor-In-Box (PIB) version of the Athlon 64 FX-62 will still weigh in at a hefty US$827 and the Athlon 64 FX-64 will probably debut at the usual US$999 mark. This makes AMD's high-end offering not very attractive considering the E6600 is below US$350.
Click to expand...

Umm? What?
 
If AMD goes to the new 65nm with a new architecture then AMD might make a possible come back, many say that AMD will once againt he the champ, who the hell knows, only then when it comes out will we know, until then lets just be happy for the new king of the crown.
 
TonyBAMF said:
If AMD goes to the new 65nm with a new architecture then AMD might make a possible come back, many say that AMD will once againt he the champ, who the hell knows, only then when it comes out will we know, until then lets just be happy for the new king of the crown.
Click to expand...

intel just released the 65nm now intel is making something new cause they know amd will make the 65nm next. so by the time amd released the 65nm intel will release something new. That still puts intel on top.
 
Pr0 said:
intel just released the 65nm now intel is making something new cause they know amd will make the 65nm next.
Click to expand...
Intel released their first 65nm processors almost a year ago.
Pr0 said:
so by the time amd released the 65nm intel will release something new. That still puts intel on top.
Click to expand...
You seem to think that just because a processor has a smaller process size, it automatically has better performance. 65nm P4 vs. 90nm A64 anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top