AM2 is a dissapointment...

[Geoff]

The main reason AMD performs better in games is mainly due to the fact that it has an onboard memory controller. With that, it has a shorter instruction lengths vs. Intels motherboard memory controllers. AMD chips are for lack of a better term, quicker because of the shorter pipes and less stages. They can execute instructions much quicker. The only reason Intels do so well in larger applications such as video editing is because it takes advantage of those longer stages where they can crank out some serious power.

The only reason Conroe is doing so well is because they have taken the old netburst technology, got rid of it and went back to a much wider pipe which in turn, makes the instruction sets shorter with less stages. They also threw in more L2 cache which is a unified cache for both cores.

I wasnt referring to AMD's in general, i was saying that the AM2's are performing slightly better in games because it has DDR2-800 memory.

 

[dragon2309]

I can see a whole new generation of intel fanboys... lol.

dont you think its about time, for too many years AMD have been better, i dont deny t, and you lot have been wallowing in it ever since, about time for intel to gain some of its lost ground back. We can now hold our heads up high ands say "we have intel, go screw yourself" - not directed at you lot on here, but the retards at LAN's that just laugh in your face when you read out your specs.... grrr

LMAO, im gonna enjoy this year, i can tell

dragon

 

[helmie]

w00t! Damn, am I glad i held out and built an Intel rig, hopefully theres a BIOS update for my mobo, then its a straight swap

Yay!

(I think I might revive my thread "Who is going to buy conroe" )

 

[Geoff]

I feel bad for all those people who bought an AMD X2. Since the conroe is alot better, and you can get them as cheap as $209.

 

[jancz3rt]

Lol

OMEGA - you seem to be obsessed with this Conroe phenomenon We all know it's "better" on preliminary tests but why repeatedly bring it up? I like to stay neutral but it seems like you wanna set up a Conroe fanboy team or something. The X2s, as of NOW are among the best performing CPUs so I would not feel sorry for people who have them..pff. What comes in the future, we have yet to see, but rest assured that any great leap will be countered with one or the other player introducing something better. Give it time...

JAN

 

[Geoff]

OMEGA - you seem to be obsessed with this Conroe phenomenon We all know it's "better" on preliminary tests but why repeatedly bring it up? I like to stay neutral but it seems like you wanna set up a Conroe fanboy team or something. The X2s, as of NOW are among the best performing CPUs so I would not feel sorry for people who have them..pff. What comes in the future, we have yet to see, but rest assured that any great leap will be countered with one or the other player introducing something better. Give it time...

JAN

No doubt about it, the X2's are very good. I was just saying that if you recently bought one, then you may would have wanted to wait, seeing how the conroe is cheaper and performs better.

Its like the 7800GTX thing, they cost $750 when they first came out, and i feel bad for the people that bought them since not too long after that the 7900GTX came out, and almost half the price.

I do admit that i have been talking about the conroe alot, it started when i got my core duo, and i was really excited on how it performed.

I'll try not to be so "fanboyish" from now on.

 

[jancz3rt]

Lol

N/P I was just trying to point out that technology moves at an amazing price and inevitably, new things, much better than the previous come out often.

JAN

 

[gamerman4]

wow.....thats sucks......bad........AMD better get rolling in the R&D department or they will be forgotten. Conroe is looking good to me. Hopefully AMD will release a new core size and and CPU to increase performance because this is sad. Also, how will Conroe overclock compared to the AM2 sockets. We will be able to see some better data after AM2 is actually released. Hopefully DDR2 is not the ONLY new thing AMD hopes to make off this socket... maybe shrink em smaller than 90nm

 

[Dialamo]

So, I should halt buying my AMD X2 4200+ this summer and wait and see about the Conroe? A lot of people are saying to wait. Plus, is the Conroe a single core processor?

 

[i.Angel]

So when exactly is this conroe suppose to be out? And it should cost between 210-335?

Now I'm so confused... I don't know if I should buy an AM2 system or wait forever for Conroe to come out... but if those tests are right I'm going to soil myself if I get one...

Dragon- I know how you feel dude. Whenever I go to LAN parties I take so much crap from my AMD buddies... grrr

 

[Modoman]

AMD has nothing interseting on the current roadmap, I don't think they have too much going on as far as a new core design is concerned. Unless they have a new design under very tight wraps it'll be later than 2007 before a new architecture comes from them.

Perhaps, that could be some wishful thinking... nevertheless, i would assume that amd's switch to the higher bandwidth of ddr2, and the fact that just the upper echelon of current cpu's will be transitioned to the new socket (in addition to a couple new cpu's at the launch, though probably nothing special), means that something must be a brewin'. why have all that bandwidth for just the nothing-special cpu's that will be available at first? but of course, intel will probably be on top for a little while if not a long while

 

[Geoff]

is the Conroe a single core processor?

No, its a dual-core.

 

[Skizzor]

I am not going to wait for this. Its not that big of a perfomane boost. Im gunna stick to the socket 939 AMD Athlon 64 3000 for my new pc.

 

[Hairy_Lee]

just remember that the athlon gets no benefit from the increase in memory bandwidth from DDR2 because the athlon architecture isn't starved of data... however, when they start moving to quad core then the extra available bandwidth will be valuable... i also expect a change in architecture from amd that will allow them to make better use of the memory bandwidth available.

also, i read elsewhere that the conroe benchmarks are somewhat dubious because once you deal with data that fills up the cache performance drops off remarkably quickly. now i didn't say this means its being set in stone but i have to agree with the guy's views that intel hasn't always been the most truthful with regards to its products...(remember the launch of pentium 4 anyone)... take a look at this and make your own mind up http://sharikou.blogspot.com/

 

[LithiumSunset]

So, I should halt buying my AMD X2 4200+ this summer and wait and see about the Conroe? A lot of people are saying to wait. Plus, is the Conroe a single core processor?

The AMD X2s are pretty good processors. If you have the money and want it now, get it. No sense in waiting for newer stuff when it's just gonna be outdated in no time. Every time we build machines, they outdate so fast these days, theres no point in waiting.

The Conroe is a 65nm dual core processor.

 

[LithiumSunset]

just remember that the athlon gets no benefit from the increase in memory bandwidth from DDR2 because the athlon architecture isn't starved of data... however, when they start moving to quad core then the extra available bandwidth will be valuable... i also expect a change in architecture from amd that will allow them to make better use of the memory bandwidth available.

also, i read elsewhere that the conroe benchmarks are somewhat dubious because once you deal with data that fills up the cache performance drops off remarkably quickly. now i didn't say this means its being set in stone but i have to agree with the guy's views that intel hasn't always been the most truthful with regards to its products...(remember the launch of pentium 4 anyone)... take a look at this and make your own mind up http://sharikou.blogspot.com/

Yeah I read that article last night. First off though, AMD will be able to make good use of the AM2 platform and DDR2 in the very near future once they start cranking up the Ghz. They are already talking going up to 4Ghz with their processors and once they do that, they will be able to take advantage of the higher speed RAM.

In relation to the "blog assumption" about Intel, it remains to be seen and I question why anyone is trying to push server type tests on a desktop platform chip and saying it can't perform. Of course it won't perform because your flooding the cache. Normal every day use will not do that and Intel knows this.

AMD and their fan camp are getting desperate and are trying to find any little shreds of information to retaliate against Intel and their new architecture. It just doesn't matter what Intel does or who says what about Intel anymore, AMDs fan camp will find a way to retaliate. I usually don't get involved in these discussions but, I felt my opinion was needed.

If I offended anyone, I apologize in advance.

 

[apj101]

I just saw the benchmarks for the AM2, and i must say im very disappointed.

These results were expected based on the last set of tests, at least AM2 chips are edging slightly ahead now.

That really sucks, i thought the AM2 where going to be crazy good. "IT feels like someone has just deflated my heart"

If you were pinning your hope of AM2 chips then you really didn't have any clue what they were. We all knew that bandwidth wasn't an issue for k8+ chips, and knew that the switch to ddr2 would hold nothing for amd other than a marketing plus.

Looks like I'll be tilting towards Conroe then.

sigh, Conroe = chip AM2 = socket, would love to see you run a rig on a socket alone.

As some of us have been saying before, AM2 is basically the same thing as the current X2, except it has a new memory controller that allows DDR2.

The memory controlled is on the cpu, if has nothing to do with the socket type, AM2 does not have a memory controller the X2 cpus on the AM2 do have a memory controller and it is the latter that support ddr2

And the main reason why it performs better in games (slightly), is because of the faster RAM, if it was the same speed there probably wouldnt be any difference.

Again bandwidth is not an issue for the amd k8+, optimisation is mainly the reason for the slight improvement

ooo, groovy cool... me want conroe...

I sence a new fanboy in the making

conroe is a PROCESSOR, am2 is a SOCKET TYPE.

thank god someone sees sence

wait for new chip architectures in 2007. until then, the conroe (if released on schedule) will rule the remainder of the year. thank you, good day.

Amd have nothing in the pipeline, there roadmap shows no new architecture. And in this day and age you really cant keep these things quite, nor do you want to (amd have always played a more open hand than intel)

With that, it has a shorter instruction lengths vs. Intels motherboard memory controllers.

just that right mix of technical terms and bullcrap to get past most users. But not all
Should have left it at your memory controller comment which was all that was needed to be said.

AMD chips are for lack of a better term, quicker because of the shorter pipes and less stages.

The short pipeline may result in more performance, but at a slower rate. Also note that not all intel chips runs at insane pipeline lengths

Pipeline
Much like an assembly line, processors breakdown the execution of an instructions into stages:

* The more stages available, the simpler each stage becomes and the faster each stage executes. The downside is however, if nearing the end of the 'assembly line' something "wrong" happens, the entire thing has to start over (thus the processor becomes heavily dependent on predictors and optimizations to prevent this from happening). Also, the more stages available, the faster the overall clockspeed can be.
* For a processor with few[er] stages in the pipeline, the processor is far more efficient and is able to complete the same amount of work with fewer clock cycles and also the other side of the worst-case pipeline-scenario: if something "wrong" happens near the end of the pipeline, fewer stages need to be re-traversed. The only downside is that net clockspeed is limited (because with fewer individual stages, each stage is more complex than the longer-pipeline variant and you can only rush it so fast)

As far as AM2 performance goes, right now it doesn't look great but, what this will allow AMD to do is, take their processors up in Ghz which will allow them to utilize the higher speed RAM and that's when we will see gains made from the AM2 platform.

AMD's current choice of architecture limits there ceiling clock speed

i would assume that amd's switch to the higher bandwidth of ddr2, and the fact that just the upper echelon of current cpu's will be transitioned to the new socket (in addition to a couple new cpu's at the launch, though probably nothing special), means that something must be a brewin'.

dont count on it, we will be looking at moving into socket-f on amd rigs before i expect to see anything of note from AMD camp. We have the new 65nm cores to come out this year, and AMD will probably be looking to move into the more mobile market with these cores, after all thats the real growth area at the moment

 

[Geoff]

Yes we knew AM2 is a socket, but thats what everyone is calling the new cpu's for slang. Instead of saying AMD X2 AM2.

 

[gamerman4]

Whenever I go to LAN parties I take so much crap from my AMD buddies... grrr

It's hard to fix fanboyism so when you kick their asses at the LAN party, just laugh at their AMD systems.

 

[i.Angel]

Haha even though I have a crapp s478 2.66ghz intel CPU (I'll have you know that I'm running at an average of 35 fps while they are at about 90-100+) and I sitll kick their ass! I'm talking a kd ratio of 9:1 and they are like 1 kill every 2-3 maybe four deaths!

If I get my new computer soon (maybe not with Conroe) I will be able to kick even more ass!