Search results

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3

hello!

AMD always cuts down their competition in marketing. they do it to intel, and now with nvidia. I think it's a crappy way to advertise and makes me want their products less. ..here's looking at you apple.

on die memory controller isn't a patented item by AMD. nor was it invented only by AMD.

check this program out SamuraiInBlack, it will let you slipstream service packs into your xp install, among other things. http://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html

poor AMD. seriously.

hello!

I just had to chime in on the "how well do inte's quad core's overclock" and "enthusiasts don't really seek out quad core processors" comment. wow. pretty safe to say both are not true.

actually people DO care. when you're running hundreds of servers, power savings in dollar amounts adds up. what really should be compared is performance per watt. not just power consumption. a 3ghz xeon is pretty much faster all around than a 3ghz opteron, both of which were tested. it can be...

I honestly don't even consider this good news, considering they're only telling us about specific synthetic bandwidth advantageous benchmarks. if they really had something they'd be saying "40% faster in games" or "50% faster in mp3 encoding". either that or they're being secretive, have to...

thanks, that helps a lot actually. I was thinking the ATX board would extend to the back of the case meaning I would lose an hdd mount at worst. But if I have to relocate the PSU and whatnot I'll probably forget it. too bad, it's the best looking case I've found. Need an ATX case that looks...

How hard do you think it would be to modify the case to take an ATX motherboard?

that is ridiculous if true. who the f wants to spend $200+ dollars every 2 years on a new OS? migrating to a new operating system in itself is a pain in the arse. for me, getting a new OS is somewhat of a "phew glad that's over and I don't have to worry about it for a few (4 or 5 I thought)...

I bet the only reason intel is doing this is to beat AMD to the dual quad/8-core desktop platform. otherwise it still continues to be a bad idea imo. intel has AMD's 4x4 beat already with kentsfield.

pretty much. and yep.

suprised to see it's still 90nm (assuming this is legit). I guess it has pretty much been confirmed it'll be Q1 07 for 65nm. I wonder what temperatures will be like.

I literally read the first few lines, saw the 4mb cache "cheating" comment, and skipped the rest. :rolleyes:

that's just speculation right now.

I'm willing to bet if the roles were reversed, you'd be more than willing to boast how the fx-60 is 200+ points better at 300mhz much less clock speed.

cool site.

I think everyone, except for the bleeding heart AMD fans, pretty much predicted that performance increase.

read toms hardware cpu forum. it's just a gong show of misinformation and blinding biases.

I really like the athlon and opteron logos, but the turion, sempron, and now this live logo, are all pretty bad imo.

that pretty much settles it. it wouldn't be a very smart move for them to encourage overclocking.

looks like their warranty policy here: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_867_2139,00.html "This limited warranty does not cover damages due to external causes, including improper use, problems with electrical power, accident, neglect, alteration, repair...

intel uses basically the same 64-bit extension as AMD. there'll be little performance difference between the two.

people talk about this because the processor is months away, not years. when I say months, we're talking like, 4 or 5. that means the whole cpu scene isn't going to change dramatically. I'm sure AMD will drop the price of the fx-60, they've got to. but by the time conroe is out, AMD will...

AMD started it because it's architecture couldn't scale as high in clock speed (and didn't need to) to reach the same performance as intel's. they didn't want average joe consumer walking into a computer store, comparing a 2.4ghz p4 and a 2.0ghz athlon and assume the p4 was faster.

3 - 5% more performance? http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30290

intel's entire new architecture is built of off merom. the architecture isn't a refresh of yonah or pentium m or anything, it is a new architecture. it's similar to the concept behind the pentium m, but also has features taken from the pentium 4. kind of the best of both.

they did. I don't know which site has the banchmarks. someone will post it I'm sure.

AMD doesn't have issues with 90nm because of their architecture. look at the pentium m, it was fine on intel's 90nm, but the p4 wasn't because of it's design. AMD won't see the same impact as intel with switching to 65nm if you're comparing it to how the P4 improved.

it isn't phantom hardware. it's working silicon, and intel is very much on track to release it in 4 to 6 months. it will exist as it was shown if not better. it will more than likely scale well because of it's lower power consumption. although there's no proof either way. intel has a lot...

this has been discussed a lot in the forums.. a lot. a LOT.. basically intel overclocked an fx-60 to 2.8ghz because that's roughly where AMD will be when conroe is launched. AMD does have their new socket and ddr-2 platfrom coming out, but that really isn't expected to bump up performance...

that voodoo guy's blog seemed pretty biased. glad anandtech put this article out to quiet everyone's suspicions.

seems everyone is trying to milk a dead horse. everyone's looking way too hard to try and find something fishy with the setups that were benchmarked. unfortunately though, when it comes right down to it, even if there was something intel could have done better with the AMD system, performance...

considering AMD is already hitting a thermal wall with thier processors, and probably won't be able to scale much past 3.0ghz until 65nm (which is not coming out until well past conroe), do you really think they can make their cpus perform up to 40% faster in 6 months, and at the same decrease...

fx-60 is AMD's newest chip (minus the new opterons), and they even overclocked it to something you probably WILL see in 6 months when conroe launches.

others have already confirmed that the benchmarks appear to be right with the amd system. here: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=28&threadid=1818276&enterthread=y

you've kinda gone in the wrong direction with your argument. the fact that it's not in production yet, and that it's a sample (not a prototype), means intel has time to further increase performance. intel set up the systems, and they ran games they didn't make. they set up 3 of the gaming...