• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Sheds Light on Penryn Enhancements

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
25,793 (3.88/day)
Location
Worcestershire, UK
Processor Rocket Lake Core i5 11600K @ 5 Ghz with PL tweaks
Motherboard MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120SE + 4 Phanteks 140mm case fans
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB SR) Patriot Viper Steel 4133Mhz DDR4 @ 3600Mhz CL14@1.45v Gear 1
Video Card(s) Asus Dual RTX 4070 OC
Storage WD Blue SN550 1TB M.2 NVME//Crucial MX500 500GB SSD (OS)
Display(s) AOC Q2781PQ 27 inch Ultra Slim 2560 x 1440 IPS
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Windowed - Gunmetal
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200/SPDIF to Sony AVR @ 5.1
Power Supply Seasonic CORE GM650w Gold Semi modular
Mouse Coolermaster Storm Octane wired
Keyboard Element Gaming Carbon Mk2 Tournament Mech
Software Win 10 Home x64
Its not an AMD killer. Its not the end of AMD, you folks saying this pisses me off to no end. You worry about their money woes...its gonna happen with the acquisition of a huge company like ATI. In the end it will work out for the better for both companies.


AMD will be fine, their procs will be fine. these should float AMD with Intel if not spar well with Intel. Subtle changes on Intels front and nice improvements, but they really need to go with the on die memory controller, like theyve talked about.

I agree, as I said in an earlier post, there has always been shifts in supremacy, thats normal, some would argue that ATi held the DX9 crown, and some would say that perhaps NVidia has the DX10 at this moment in time, AMD had the performance and 64bit crown (for what thats worth) for about 3 years, Intel came back and edged back on top again, nothing here suggests that Intel will remain on top forever, if AMD can catchup inside of 2 years then thats just another 3 year shift!
 

kakazza

New Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
470 (0.07/day)
45nm and still a TDP of 65W? Disappointing, I hope they have something similar to the E4000 series which uses less power. :)
 

HellasVagabond

New Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
3,376 (0.54/day)
Location
Athens , GREECE
System Name SECONDARY RIG / PRIMARY RIG / THIRD RIG
Processor i920@3.6GHz / i920@4GHz / AMD Phenom II 955
Motherboard Gigabyte EX58-UD4P / Gigabyte EX58-UD7 / ASRock 890GX3
Cooling CoolIT Domino ALC / Thermalright Silver Arrow / Thermalright VenomousX
Memory 12GB DDR3 @ 1800MHZ / 6GB DDR3 @ 2250MHZ / 4GB DDR3 @ 1600MHZ
Video Card(s) XFX ATI RADEON 5970 / GAINWARD NVIDIA GTX 580 / 2xGEFORCE GTX295
Storage 1550GB / 6TB SAS - SSD / 160GB SSD
Display(s) NEC 26WUXi2 / NEC 3090WQXi / SONY 55A2000 (1080P 55inch)
Case COOLER MASTER HAF 932 / COOLER MASTER ATCS 840 / ANTEC DARKFLEET DF85
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster X-Fi Xtreme Music / SoundBlaster X-Fi Fatal1ty Pro / Realtek Onboard
Power Supply CWT 1200W / Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W / Ikonik Vulcan 1200W
Software Windows 7 x64 / Windows 7 x64 / Windows 7 x64
I agree, as I said in an earlier post, there has always been shifts in supremacy, thats normal, some would argue that ATi held the DX9 crown, and some would say that perhaps NVidia has the DX10 at this moment in time, AMD had the performance and 64bit crown (for what thats worth) for about 3 years, Intel came back and edged back on top again, nothing here suggests that Intel will remain on top forever, if AMD can catchup inside of 2 years then thats just another 3 year shift!

Shifts in which CPU is better will always occur. However INTEL was and is richer than AMD that has yet to change and thats what mostly bugs as all. AMD has never seen a worse financial era up till now than the one they are having as we speak.
 
I

insider

Guest
Intel can afford to lose the performance crown for years and it will still have a larger market share and much more money than AMD will have, they are probably rich enough to absorb loses for many years without any major problems.

AMD must get and stay ahead in the performance area backed up with a very clever and aggressive business strategy, in the past they have achieved the former yet still failed to gain significant market share from Intel.

AMD needs to really cut into Intel's worldwide market share, we're talking about HUGE market share gains of 30%> 40%> 50% of the total CPU market, not exactly an easy task when such companies force OEM's to stock nothing but "Intel inside" PC's, any PC maker that refuses will be denied Intel chips and/or find their rival PC makers get Intel chips much cheaper as retaliation from Intel.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
3,288 (0.51/day)
Location
Halifax, Canada
Processor Q6600 G0 @ 3.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus p5k-Premium/Black Pearl
Cooling Luna Block, 240mm rad
Memory Patriot Extreme PC2-6400 2x2GB
Video Card(s) Saphire 5850 1GB
Storage 60GB SSD + 2x500GB/1TB/2TB
Display(s) Samsung 226BW and 50" Panasonic S2
Case Silverstone TJ-09
Audio Device(s) X-fi Prelude
Power Supply Enermax Galaxy Dxx 850watt
Software Windows7 32Bit
Benchmark Scores Super Pi 1M 14.333
well amd were starting to be used more often by hp elc in desktops and laptops but after this fall it may return to be all intel.. I thin intel were the man chips used in pre-built because they had a deal/agreement wtih the pre-built manufacturers.
 

WarEagleAU

Bird of Prey
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
10,812 (1.67/day)
Location
Gurley, AL
System Name Pandemic 2020
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 "Gen 2" 2600X
Motherboard AsRock X470 Killer Promontory
Cooling CoolerMaster 240 RGB Master Cooler (Newegg Eggxpert)
Memory 32 GB Geil EVO Portenza DDR4 3200 MHz
Video Card(s) ASUS Radeon RX 580 DirectX 12 DUAL-RX580-O8G 8GB 256-Bit GDDR5 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video C
Storage WD 250 M.2, Corsair P500 M.2, OCZ Trion 500, WD Black 1TB, Assorted others.
Display(s) ASUS MG24UQ Gaming Monitor - 23.6" 4K UHD (3840x2160) , IPS, Adaptive Sync, DisplayWidget
Case Fractal Define R6 C
Audio Device(s) Realtek 5.1 Onboard
Power Supply Corsair RMX 850 Platinum PSU (Newegg Eggxpert)
Mouse Razer Death Adder
Keyboard Corsair K95 Mechanical & Corsair K65 Wired, Wireless, Bluetooth)
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Well at least you see my point. AMD had a reasonable financial success with the Athlon 64, hence they could afford to buy ATI. They are taking a hit right now, but will bounce back soon enough. Their main problem, and Ive said it countless times before, is they rested on their laurels with the athlon 64 without doing any newer changes to the core. They did small minor tweaks, mainly speed and tdp...but nothing ground breaking. Intel, while they did have two different teams working on two different chips, learned from the mistakes they made and also took some of AMDS bravado with their designs. You see it in the chips they have now, although no on die memory controller. Once Intel goes that route, they will indeed be the biggest player and AMD will have to come up with something else.

However, and I stand by this, IF AMD can offer reasonable priced chips to compete with Intel and still have a nice OC ceiling, they will do just fine. Beat them if you can AMD, but if you spar well enough to keep it even and you offer great performance at a reasonable price, you will do well enough to take a good market share of Intels world. Also, some direct advertising (tv mainly) will definately help.
 

evil bill

New Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
369 (0.06/day)
Location
Scotland
System Name Main Rig | Second Rig
Processor Intel Core 2 Duo Wolfdale E8200 @ 3.2Ghz | Pentium 4 530J 3.0Ghz
Motherboard ASUS P5KC @ 1,600Mhz FSB | Asus P5P800
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro | Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro
Memory OCZ 4GB DDR2-800 (2x2GB) 5-4-4-15 | Corsair 1GB XMS DDR-400 (2 x 512MB)
Video Card(s) MSI NX8800GT 512MB Pre-OCd @ 660/950 | Powercolor X850 Pro 256MB AGP
Storage 500GB WD Caviar SATA300 | Hitachi Deckstar 80GB SATA
Display(s) LG 22" W2252TQ
Case Antec 900 | ATX Window case
Audio Device(s) Onboard High Definition Audio | Soundblaster Audigy SE
Power Supply Hiper 730W HPU-5M730-SE | Tagan 480W
Software Vista 64-bit SP1 | Windows 7 32-bit RC1
However, and I stand by this, IF AMD can offer reasonable priced chips to compete with Intel and still have a nice OC ceiling, they will do just fine. Beat them if you can AMD, but if you spar well enough to keep it even and you offer great performance at a reasonable price, you will do well enough to take a good market share of Intels world. Also, some direct advertising (tv mainly) will definately help.

Agreed - so long as their performance is there or thereabouts, and they are able to offer their old school benefits of reasonable prices and overclocking potential they will keep hold of a viable market share. However, if they fall too far behind Intel they will be in real trouble.
 
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
11,119 (1.70/day)
System Name Apple Bite
Processor Intel I5
Motherboard Apple
Memory 40gb of DDR 4 2700
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 500
Storage Fusion Drive 1 TB
Display(s) 27 Inch IMac late 2017
You guys have you read the specks on the new AMD chips , yes I know it is only on paper, but the bandwith and the chips designs are going to press Intel hard thats why they are doing this. Why do you think intel is running chips at 1.6 to 3.0 ghz when they know these chips can easly be made to run at 3.8 to 4.0ghz or higher and are underclocking them. They are saving a little mghz room for the future. AMD's chips are going to come out hammering and they don't want to push there chips yet. Look, up until a few months ago the old AMD chips were about 5 to 10 percent behind Intel. AMD really does'nt have to change the 64 x2 chips all that much to catch them. Compare a e6600 and e6700 against a fx62 and a 6000+ . The intel chip do beat them but they don't blow them away. All AMD has to increase is the Integer potential and Intel better look out. The 64s already have better memory controller and are more of a true 64 bit design (shoot Vista was made for them) they also have better floating point, so if you add integer potential you have a C2D killer. I am a AMD fanboy and I like Intel aswell but I can also see both sides of an issue.
 
Last edited:

kwchang007

New Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
3,962 (0.63/day)
Location
Severn, MD, USA.
Processor C2D T7200@2 ghz vcore: .9875
Motherboard generic laptop board
Cooling fan control and antec notebook cooler
Memory 2 GBs@ 533 mhz ddr2
Video Card(s) x1400 mobile, overclocked: 526mhz core/ 882mhz ddr
Storage 120 GB@ 5400 rpm fujitsu
Display(s) 15.4" 1440x900
Audio Device(s) integrated
Software vista 32 bit home premium
You guys have you read the specks on the new AMD chips , yes I know it is only on paper, but the bandwith and the chips designs are going to press Intel hard thats why they are doing this. why do you think intel is running chips at 3.0 ghz when they know these cgips can easly be made to run at 3.8 or higher and are underclocking them. They are saving a little mghz room for the future. AMD's chips are going to come out hammering. Look, up until a few months ago the old AMD chips were about 5 to 10 percent behind intel. AMD really does'nt have to change the 64 x2 chips all that much to catch them. Compare a e6600 and e6700 against a fx62 and a 6000+ . The intel chip do beat them but they don't blow them away. All AMD has to increase is the Integer potential and Intel better look out. The 64s already have better memory controller and are more of a true 64 bit design (shoot Vista was made for them) they also have better floating point, so if you add integer potential you have a C2D killer. I am a AMD fanboy and I like Intel aswell but I can also see both sides of an issue.

On paper K10 looks like it's another relatively conservative upgrade of K8. AMD looks like they are going to improve their lead in floating point while trying to catch up in Integer. I honestly think that the cpu world may end up as AMD=Floating Point while Intel=Integer. It's because how neither company really wants to radically change their architecture because they're already good. My view is AMD will have business in the server market due to HTT and high floating point, but with Intel rolling out CSI we may see Itanium push into where AMD is strongest 2+ cpu server boards. Just my 2 cents on the future.
 
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
11,119 (1.70/day)
System Name Apple Bite
Processor Intel I5
Motherboard Apple
Memory 40gb of DDR 4 2700
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 500
Storage Fusion Drive 1 TB
Display(s) 27 Inch IMac late 2017
On paper K10 looks like it's another relatively conservative upgrade of K8. AMD looks like they are going to improve their lead in floating point while trying to catch up in Integer. I honestly think that the cpu world may end up as AMD=Floating Point while Intel=Integer. It's because how neither company really wants to radically change their architecture because they're already good. My view is AMD will have business in the server market due to HTT and high floating point, but with Intel rolling out CSI we may see Itanium push into where AMD is strongest 2+ cpu server boards. Just my 2 cents on the future.


You do know in the 90's the roles were changed AMD was the interger champ and intel floating point champ funny how things change. The new AMD chips do have some serious bandwith.
 

kwchang007

New Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
3,962 (0.63/day)
Location
Severn, MD, USA.
Processor C2D T7200@2 ghz vcore: .9875
Motherboard generic laptop board
Cooling fan control and antec notebook cooler
Memory 2 GBs@ 533 mhz ddr2
Video Card(s) x1400 mobile, overclocked: 526mhz core/ 882mhz ddr
Storage 120 GB@ 5400 rpm fujitsu
Display(s) 15.4" 1440x900
Audio Device(s) integrated
Software vista 32 bit home premium
You do know in the 90's the roles were changed AMD was the interger champ and intel floating point champ funny how things change. The new AMD chips do have some serious bandwith.

It's all how their focuses have changed. Intel goes for higher clocks at the expense of efficiency (yeah I'm talking about Core 2, 13 stages for Core 2 vs 11 stages for K8 and K10). In the 90's....I was a little young to know about things like integer and floating point, lol. Anyways, the 90's were 7 years ago, which is obviously lots of time in the computer world. It will be interesting to see what angle Nehlem takes and see if Intel decided to drop cpu stages to 11 due to a better manufacturing technique (high k with 45nm or w/e they call it). I also think that AMD's cores have a lot of potential, but how well they'll be able to roll them out is another question. Especially the quad cores, because the dies are so big it isn't as easy to roll the off the line as Intel's 2 die's on one package. All in all, K10 looks like it'll be able to stand a chance as long as AMD can drop prices fast enough.
 

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
25,793 (3.88/day)
Location
Worcestershire, UK
Processor Rocket Lake Core i5 11600K @ 5 Ghz with PL tweaks
Motherboard MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120SE + 4 Phanteks 140mm case fans
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB SR) Patriot Viper Steel 4133Mhz DDR4 @ 3600Mhz CL14@1.45v Gear 1
Video Card(s) Asus Dual RTX 4070 OC
Storage WD Blue SN550 1TB M.2 NVME//Crucial MX500 500GB SSD (OS)
Display(s) AOC Q2781PQ 27 inch Ultra Slim 2560 x 1440 IPS
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Windowed - Gunmetal
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200/SPDIF to Sony AVR @ 5.1
Power Supply Seasonic CORE GM650w Gold Semi modular
Mouse Coolermaster Storm Octane wired
Keyboard Element Gaming Carbon Mk2 Tournament Mech
Software Win 10 Home x64
You guys have you read the specks on the new AMD chips , yes I know it is only on paper, but the bandwith and the chips designs are going to press Intel hard thats why they are doing this. Why do you think intel is running chips at 1.6 to 3.0 ghz when they know these chips can easly be made to run at 3.8 to 4.0ghz or higher and are underclocking them. They are saving a little mghz room for the future. AMD's chips are going to come out hammering and they don't want to push there chips yet. Look, up until a few months ago the old AMD chips were about 5 to 10 percent behind Intel. AMD really does'nt have to change the 64 x2 chips all that much to catch them. Compare a e6600 and e6700 against a fx62 and a 6000+ . The intel chip do beat them but they don't blow them away. All AMD has to increase is the Integer potential and Intel better look out. The 64s already have better memory controller and are more of a true 64 bit design (shoot Vista was made for them) they also have better floating point, so if you add integer potential you have a C2D killer. I am a AMD fanboy and I like Intel aswell but I can also see both sides of an issue.

I agree with you, and you know I am an AMD fanboi, however, Integer and Floating point are not the only command functions that the microprocessor commits, there are many, add to that the basic architecture of the processor....they differ, add to that the instruction pipeline architecture, the instruction sets stacked within and on and on and on and you quickly come to the conclusion that if floating point calculus was the only thing AMD was quicker than Intel at currently (which I am sure there will be many others) then there is a long way to go, I spose the bottom line is, dependant on what the CPU is doing depends on how far it is ahead (or behind).

To put it in it's simplest terms, taking out integer and floating point, look at SuperPI which is probably concentrating on Bus efficiency and instruction pipeline efficiency........raw speed and simple short calculations (so prob not Integer of float) you can see just how far ahead Intel is, thats not to say that AMD wont catch them......I am sure they will, just hope it's sooner rather than later.

Let's not forget, when the AMD64 was dominant, some of the P4's still beat it in some processes.....video encoding for example.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,059 (0.45/day)
Location
Baltimore MD
Processor Ryzen 5900X
Motherboard ASUS Prime X470 Pro
Cooling Arctic liquid freezer II 240
Memory 2 x 16 Gb Gskill Trident Z 3600 Mhz
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus 3060 Ti OC
Storage Samsung 960 EVO 500 Gb / 860 EVO 1 Tb
Display(s) Dell S2719DGF
Case Lian Li Lancool II Mesh
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster Z
Power Supply Corsair RM850x
Mouse Logitech G703
Keyboard Logitech G513
Software Win 11
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
1,050 (0.17/day)
Location
indiana
Processor c2d e8400@ 3.8ghz 24/7
Motherboard Abit IP-35e 80$ lol
Cooling zalman cnps9700 led
Memory 2 x 2 gig patriot viper
Video Card(s) evga Gtx 285 oc
Storage 2 x 300gig sata seagate 7200.10 in raid 0/ 1.5TB for backup
Display(s) acer 24" TFT LCD AL2416WBSD
Case Antec 902
Audio Device(s) XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro series
Power Supply ocz gamextreme 700w
Software windows 7 ultimate
AMD really does'nt have to change the 64 x2 chips all that much to catch them. Compare a e6600 and e6700 against a fx62 and a 6000+ . The intel chip do beat them but they don't blow them away. All AMD has to increase is the Integer potential and Intel better look out.

Those are at stock speeds:shadedshu The problem with that argument is that the intel's have alot more headroom as far as overclocking goes. An e6300 will whoop all over a 6000+ overclocked!!? The 6000+ doesn't have the overhead a c2d does. That is why Amd need's to step up:toast:
 
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
11,119 (1.70/day)
System Name Apple Bite
Processor Intel I5
Motherboard Apple
Memory 40gb of DDR 4 2700
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 500
Storage Fusion Drive 1 TB
Display(s) 27 Inch IMac late 2017
Those are at stock speeds:shadedshu The problem with that argument is that the intel's have alot more headroom as far as overclocking goes. An e6300 will whoop all over a 6000+ overclocked!!? The 6000+ doesn't have the overhead a c2d does. That is why Amd need's to step up:toast:

A 6000+ oced to 3.5ghz will beat a e6300 in several thing even a e6300 at 3.4ghz or 3.5ghz, you are wrong I owned one. You would have to get a core 2 duo clocked to about 300 mghz higher than a 6000+ to beat it badly say 3.6ghz to 3.8ghz. A e6420 or e6600 would be a better match for it at say 3.7 to 3.8ghz they would start to pulled ahead then in every aspect, but still in somethings the AMD chip would win, not in most ,but still in several things like science mark 2.0, that doesn't just measure raw power but memory management, chip instruction, floating point, mp3 conversion, Vista performance due to chip set instruction and Vista was designed for the AMD 64 chips. This is a very old arguement if you don't get caught up in fan boy stuff you will see I'm right. The C2D is faster once you get to the e6700 or e6850 all the time and e6600 most of the time anything less is hard to match a 6000+ for the money.
 
Last edited:

kwchang007

New Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
3,962 (0.63/day)
Location
Severn, MD, USA.
Processor C2D T7200@2 ghz vcore: .9875
Motherboard generic laptop board
Cooling fan control and antec notebook cooler
Memory 2 GBs@ 533 mhz ddr2
Video Card(s) x1400 mobile, overclocked: 526mhz core/ 882mhz ddr
Storage 120 GB@ 5400 rpm fujitsu
Display(s) 15.4" 1440x900
Audio Device(s) integrated
Software vista 32 bit home premium
A 6000+ oced to 3.5ghz will beat a e6300 in several thing even a e6300 at 3.4ghz or 3.5ghz, you are wrong I owned one. You would have to get a core 2 duo clocked to about 300 mghz higher than a 6000+ to beat it badly say 3.6ghz to 3.8ghz. A e6420 or e6600 would be a better match for it at say 3.7 to 3.8ghz they would start to pulled ahead then, but still in something the AMD chip would win, not in most ,but still in several things like science mark 2.0, that doesn't just measure raw power but memory management, chip instruction and floating point, mp3 conversion and Vista performance due to chip set instruction and Vista was designed for the AMD 64 chips. this is a very old arguement if you don't get caught up in fan boy stuff you will see I'm right. The C2D is faster once you get to the e6700 or e6850 all the time.

Well....at the same speed Core 2 will beat K10. I don't know what you're trying to say?
 
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
11,119 (1.70/day)
System Name Apple Bite
Processor Intel I5
Motherboard Apple
Memory 40gb of DDR 4 2700
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 500
Storage Fusion Drive 1 TB
Display(s) 27 Inch IMac late 2017
Well....at the same speed Core 2 will beat K10. I don't know what you're trying to say?
I'm not going to have this debate it's exhausting. I'm saying exactly what I'm saying and in something you would be correct and in other thing you would be wrong. The core 2 duo doesn't beat the 64x2 chips in everything just most things until you consider the brand new G0 stepping chips. I'm saying Intel is really not that far ahead of AMD. Not like AMD was a year or two ago over Intel It is much closer and AMD can easily match them maybe not exceed them but match them.
 

kwchang007

New Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
3,962 (0.63/day)
Location
Severn, MD, USA.
Processor C2D T7200@2 ghz vcore: .9875
Motherboard generic laptop board
Cooling fan control and antec notebook cooler
Memory 2 GBs@ 533 mhz ddr2
Video Card(s) x1400 mobile, overclocked: 526mhz core/ 882mhz ddr
Storage 120 GB@ 5400 rpm fujitsu
Display(s) 15.4" 1440x900
Audio Device(s) integrated
Software vista 32 bit home premium
I'm not going to have this debate it's exhausting. I'm saying exactly what I'm saying and in something you would be correct and in other thing you would be wrong. The core 2 duo doesn't beat the 64x2 chips in everything just most things until you consider the brand new G0 stepping chips. I'm saying Intel is really not that far ahead of AMD. Not like AMD was a year or two ago over Intel It is much closer and AMD can easily match them maybe not exceed them but match them.

You're right it all depends on what you look at. In some areas Intels are much faster, while AMD's aren't but AMD also has their strong points. Look at the 1 million super pi thread, my 2ghz core 2 beats AMD's at 2.7 ghz.
 
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
11,119 (1.70/day)
System Name Apple Bite
Processor Intel I5
Motherboard Apple
Memory 40gb of DDR 4 2700
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 500
Storage Fusion Drive 1 TB
Display(s) 27 Inch IMac late 2017
You're right it all depends on what you look at. In some areas Intels are much faster, while AMD's aren't but AMD also has their strong points. Look at the 1 million super pi thread, my 2ghz core 2 beats AMD's at 2.7 ghz.

That is only one test look at science mark 2.0. My 6000+ beat 22 core 2 duo's clocked at similar or higher speeds. In real world computing they are not that far apart. When I ran those tests I didn't really know what I was doing and had some programs were open so It could have gone higher. Still the C2D chips are faster but they hardy blow away the AMD 64 x2 chips. I love the Intel chips and plan on getting a quad core but I'm waiting for AMD to pull the prices down.
 
Last edited:

kwchang007

New Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
3,962 (0.63/day)
Location
Severn, MD, USA.
Processor C2D T7200@2 ghz vcore: .9875
Motherboard generic laptop board
Cooling fan control and antec notebook cooler
Memory 2 GBs@ 533 mhz ddr2
Video Card(s) x1400 mobile, overclocked: 526mhz core/ 882mhz ddr
Storage 120 GB@ 5400 rpm fujitsu
Display(s) 15.4" 1440x900
Audio Device(s) integrated
Software vista 32 bit home premium
That is only one test look at science mark 2.0. My 6000+ beat 22 core 2 duo's clocked at similar or higher speeds.

Woops, forgot to include a good AMD benchmark. Yeah scincemark does well with AMD due to high Floating Point. In floating point they will rip apart core 2, once again, just how the architecture is. Anyways, we can both safely say that core 2 and k8 are good in respective areas right? That's what matters, plus in games, they're both kick ass compared to pentium 4 :toast:
 

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
25,793 (3.88/day)
Location
Worcestershire, UK
Processor Rocket Lake Core i5 11600K @ 5 Ghz with PL tweaks
Motherboard MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120SE + 4 Phanteks 140mm case fans
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB SR) Patriot Viper Steel 4133Mhz DDR4 @ 3600Mhz CL14@1.45v Gear 1
Video Card(s) Asus Dual RTX 4070 OC
Storage WD Blue SN550 1TB M.2 NVME//Crucial MX500 500GB SSD (OS)
Display(s) AOC Q2781PQ 27 inch Ultra Slim 2560 x 1440 IPS
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Windowed - Gunmetal
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200/SPDIF to Sony AVR @ 5.1
Power Supply Seasonic CORE GM650w Gold Semi modular
Mouse Coolermaster Storm Octane wired
Keyboard Element Gaming Carbon Mk2 Tournament Mech
Software Win 10 Home x64
Lol, you cant compare fairly between AMD and Intel on Sceincemark 2, there are too many factors involved, SM2 depends too much on memory bandwidth and latency as well as HDD access times.....cache blah blah.

Of course AMD beat Intel on some things , even clock for clock....point is Intel beat AMD on MOST things so across the board Intel is faster, clock for clock upto 15-20% :eek:....forgot, I am an AMD fanboi :cry: Point is if AMD were not faster in somethings they would not sell any chips! because there is not really any like for like bang for buck arguments in favour of AMD anymore, just look at the prices of the lower end C2D's now, even in the UK you can get them for approx £40 :eek: and they will still clock above 3 Gig, shit in the UK you can now get 2 C2D's for the price of a 6000+)
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (3.81/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
Lol, you cant compare fairly between AMD and Intel on Sceincemark 2, there are too many factors involved, SM2 depends too much on memory bandwidth and latency as well as HDD access times.....cache blah blah.

Of course AMD beat Intel on some things , even clock for clock....point is Intel beat AMD on MOST things so across the board Intel is faster, clock for clock upto 15-20% :eek:....forgot, I am an AMD fanboi :cry: Point is if AMD were not faster in somethings they would not sell any chips! because there is not really any like for like bang for buck arguments in favour of AMD anymore, just look at the prices of the lower end C2D's now, even in the UK you can get them for approx £40 :eek: and they will still clock above 3 Gig, shit in the UK you can now get 2 C2D's for the price of a 6000+)
Yeah, but the price/performance ratio evens out if you don't overclock, which most people don't. Over here, the E6550 and X2 6000+ are about the same price. Stock vs stock, they are basically equals, trading blows depending on the test.

The prices are right in line for average consumers, so the bang for the buck argument is still there, just not for us overclockers.
 

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
25,793 (3.88/day)
Location
Worcestershire, UK
Processor Rocket Lake Core i5 11600K @ 5 Ghz with PL tweaks
Motherboard MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120SE + 4 Phanteks 140mm case fans
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB SR) Patriot Viper Steel 4133Mhz DDR4 @ 3600Mhz CL14@1.45v Gear 1
Video Card(s) Asus Dual RTX 4070 OC
Storage WD Blue SN550 1TB M.2 NVME//Crucial MX500 500GB SSD (OS)
Display(s) AOC Q2781PQ 27 inch Ultra Slim 2560 x 1440 IPS
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Windowed - Gunmetal
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200/SPDIF to Sony AVR @ 5.1
Power Supply Seasonic CORE GM650w Gold Semi modular
Mouse Coolermaster Storm Octane wired
Keyboard Element Gaming Carbon Mk2 Tournament Mech
Software Win 10 Home x64
Yeah, but the price/performance ratio evens out if you don't overclock, which most people don't. Over here, the E6550 and X2 6000+ are about the same price. Stock vs stock, they are basically equals, trading blows depending on the test.

The prices are right in line for average consumers, so the bang for the buck argument is still there, just not for us overclockers.

Yup....I cant argue with that but in my defence, I was addressing the issues raised in this thread and most in here are overclockers :D
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (3.81/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
Yup....I cant argue with that but in my defence, I was addressing the issues raised in this thread and most in here are overclockers :D

:toast:
 
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
11,119 (1.70/day)
System Name Apple Bite
Processor Intel I5
Motherboard Apple
Memory 40gb of DDR 4 2700
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 500
Storage Fusion Drive 1 TB
Display(s) 27 Inch IMac late 2017
Lol, you cant compare fairly between AMD and Intel on Sceincemark 2, there are too many factors involved, SM2 depends too much on memory bandwidth and latency as well as HDD access times.....cache blah blah.

Of course AMD beat Intel on some things , even clock for clock....point is Intel beat AMD on MOST things so across the board Intel is faster, clock for clock upto 15-20% :eek:....forgot, I am an AMD fanboi :cry: Point is if AMD were not faster in somethings they would not sell any chips! because there is not really any like for like bang for buck arguments in favour of AMD anymore, just look at the prices of the lower end C2D's now, even in the UK you can get them for approx £40 :eek: and they will still clock above 3 Gig, shit in the UK you can now get 2 C2D's for the price of a 6000+)


That is all true but not my point.
 
Top