Anand re-examines Conroe benchmarks

Donnie27 said:
Yes, like this facts?

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1029175283&postcount=104

You might need to google trustworthy sites if that's the case? Yes, the Internet can be both friend and foe. If you'd read the thread, you'd have known that 2.66GHz Conroe as a TDP of 65W and the 3333MHz part is at 95W.
Click to expand...

??!!??? WHAT?! Where did I say anything about dothan's tdp??? ROFL! Donnie, please read the definition of read again. I beg you to quote where I said anything about dothan's tdp.




Trolling;
He offered NO information or views that had anything to do with the thread.
Then a weak attemp to draw flames, dewd that's trolling.
Click to expand...

omfg!? REALLY!? donnie, here you go, just for you, I will quote myself.

ME! said:
Conroe looks to be an absolute monster. The beating it gives AMD is reminiscent of A64 vs p4. GG intel.
Click to expand...

He's been banned before for phucking with me the same way. A sign if ignorance would be NOT seeing his trolling for what it is. Hint, not knowing is ignorance.
Click to expand...

No, I've actually been banned for calling you names. ;) Much like all you intel guys are doing.





No one has spread more misinformation than you have on about your last 15 posts. Now you're showing ignorance. More signs of Trolling. What was he calling me on? We're talking about overclocking. Now please link me to something he disagreed with, had questions about or linked to that proved something different? If I screwed up, correct it. If you do so, do it with correct information, not what you feel in your heart for how much you love AMD.
Click to expand...

I have 15 postsin this thread? lol. Donnie, reading and numbers, come on!
;) :p Donnie, you do this every damn time. You go off on a tangent, misquote people, and attempt to call people fan boys. :eek:
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
because early samples of the AM2 chips have a "known memory controller bug", however, that bug remains undisclosed. seeing the performance, it seems to be pretty clear to me that this bug is simply the cpu not implementing the right memory ratio internally.
Click to expand...

So, if it remained undisclosed, how come you know about it?
Looks like you need to prove:
1) This bug actually exists
2) The CPU that Tomshardware used, suffered from this bug

I think it's a very unlikely story, since the memory ratio is one of the single most basic features of a memory controller. Even if this bug did exist at one point, I doubt it would ever have gotten as far as silicon, let alone into Tomshardware's hands.
If it did, there are a lot of idiots at work at AMD :)
 
savantu said:
You are such an ignorant that it hurts.
Don't you notice that your sources as well as duby's are contradicting each other ?

According to facsnet@idiots , Intel's Prescott is a 50nm chip because its smallest feature size is 50nm.

You came here defending one who claims

1. 65nm tools produce 90nm chips
2. AMD FAB36 has 65nm gear
3. The most important par of a FAB is the building not the tools

I mean , 1 and 2 were shown incorrect by me and empoy , for 2 I even gave a link of Hector Ruiz interview and 3 simply proves that nature is an inexhaustible resource of better idiots.

What duby says is like saying the hangar is important , not the B2 inside.I suppose you agree with him too...
Click to expand...

Note the word generally.
:rolleyes:
 
Wow - good read for most of this thread (thanks to thos who actually posted useful info) but for the most part it contains nothing more then brainless, thoughtless bandwagon jumpers who do nothing more but quote someone else cause they decided to throw in childish names to someone's response and provide no "facts" to back them selves up cause they are not capable of comprising their own researched response to help clarify the situation and set thing in the right direction.
 
Wow - good read for most of this thread (thanks to thos who actually posted useful info) but for the most part it contains nothing more then brainless, thoughtless bandwagon jumpers who do nothing more but quote someone else cause they decided to throw in childish names to someone's response and provide no "facts" to back them selves up cause they are not capable of comprising their own researched response to help clarify the situation and set thing in the right direction.
Click to expand...

I guess they were right, when they said subtlety is harder than an anvil

Maybe I should try being subtle.

let's just say some people are just hard to convince
Click to expand...

Case in point..
 
brainless, thoughtless bandwagon jumpers who do nothing more but quote someone else cause they decided to throw in childish names to someone's response and provide no "facts"
Click to expand...

see above :rolleyes:
 
empoy said:
face the facts AMD f a n b o y s.
Intel's offering is better than K8 architecture. Enough with the "not being produced yet" stabs. Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest is healthy and will be mass produced and affordable.
If you don't want to believe the initial benchmarks then don't. No one is forcing you. If you still believe X2 is better then please enjoy those pricey processors while running 32bit OS and single threaded games. You can also believe that AMD has all of the 65 "gears" inside Fab36. We just simply don't care.

At the back of your mind, you all know that Conroe will be on top of every benchmark in a few weeks. If you call yourselves "enthusiasts" then please take a look at the facts, the microarchitecture and the initial reports available. Please be open-minded enough to accept that it is now Intel's time to shine again. :)
Click to expand...

It's not in the back of my mind. I KNOW that Intel's new offering will crush AMDs current and near future offering. I really don't think any AMD fan will refute that, including me.

However, you are also looking at numbers based off a CPU that, for the most part, doesn't exist because it isn't in the hands of anyone but Intel as of yet. And it won't be fully available until Q3-Q4.

However, I WILL refute the fact that AMD will not release another competitive product in the future. In previous forums, you've stated that AMD will forever be forgotten when "Conroe" (I'm really getting sick of that word) is released. Thinking that is just plain retarded, and for many reasons. The reason we're going to see such a good product from Intel this time around, is because of competition. Without it, we see such crap as the P4 Willamette, which was a complete waste of silicon. The people that should hope the MOST that AMD will stay competitive, are Intel fans themselves.

I could care less what kind of "inside information" you think you have working for Intel (or so you say). If you really worked in areas of design/engineering/product developement, you'd know enough to keep your mouth shut on products that have yet to go public. Otherwise, you might want to read over Intel's intellectual property policies.

Save your convincing for when we actually see the new Intel chip.
 
Scali said:
So, if it remained undisclosed, how come you know about it?
Click to expand...
what the bug itself is isn't known, presumably under nda. the fact that there IS a bug is definitly true though, a quick bit of searching will show this quickly.

will i be able to prove that i'm right yet? hell no :p this is one we gotta sit and wait out.
 
For the n time , Cebit sample tested were stepping F , revision F 4800+ and with DDR2 800 it proved slower than a 4600+ with DDR 400 in Cinebench.

I rest my case.
 
Logan321 said:
Yeah... Like I said before... Tier 1. I doubt there will be any cpus available in the retail channel before christmas... Dell, Compaq, Sony, etc will be getting them before anyone else. So if you're in a rush to get a Conroe, be prepared to buy it bundled with a oem system. :D
Click to expand...

X-mas my ass. I bet Newegg has them in stock by September. The only problem I can foresee is that getting one might be difficult due to the high demand. But, I'm sure Intel already knows this and will be prepared. :)
 
thoughtless bandwagon jumpers
Click to expand...

Clearly this is the part that eludes you. I dont fit into this catagory. I aint leavin. Intel does not have a product out that is worthy.

Conroe may be that product, but it isnt here yet. When it is here, then I'll review the data that is available and compare it with other sources. The same as I do now.
 
ohhh some of them got hurt again...... :eek:

Please don't be sick with Conroe. Think of it as an angel against 6/6/6 ;)
Ok I'll shut up and wait for the Conroe units when they get out of Intel's 65nm working Fabs.

Was there any sensitive information releaved by any Intel employees here? If you just use browser to www.google.com you could find the latest Intel product roadmaps. Most of the microarchitecture details can also be found in the internet.

The "enthusiast" in you seem to be taking over your sense of reality.
 
dark_reign said:
X-mas my ass. I bet Newegg has them in stock by September. The only problem I can foresee is that getting one might be difficult due to the high demand. But, I'm sure Intel already knows this and will be prepared. :)
Click to expand...

I would have to agree. Late Q3 - early Q4 seems right. I highly doubt that they will be totally unavailable until early next year, especially since Intel is a manufacturing powerhouse.
 
empoy said:
ohhh some of them got hurt again...... :eek:

Please don't be sick with Conroe. Think of it as an angel against 6/6/6 ;)
Ok I'll shut up and wait for the Conroe units when they get out of Intel's 65nm working Fabs.

Was there any sensitive information releaved by any Intel employees here? If you just use browser to www.google.com you could find the latest Intel product roadmaps. Most of the microarchitecture details can also be found in the internet.

The "enthusiast" in you seem to be taking over your sense of reality.
Click to expand...

Then am I losing my sense of reality when I say that in a previous thread, you stated you had "inside information" about the future of Intels competition with AMD? Do I really need to find that thread and quote it?

I'd still like to know what exactly you do at Intel, and which facility you work out of.
 
duby229 said:
ahh jeez, here we go again.....

More name calling? How old are you? 3 maybe?
Click to expand...

Hello Pot? You're doing it yet again.


duby229 said:
edit: air craft hangar I get it.... And actually ummm no... It would be more luck how are you going to build that b2 without the factory......
Click to expand...

Then you have a Factory that is still tooling up for stealth while only having the tools for AL, Titanium and etc.. get it?

It is estimated that maybe AMD can start Tap-Out around Dec-06. Even then it takes 8 to 18 months to get Revnue shipments started. These 65nm Processors will be Transistional Products as well since AMD is slated to go with K-10 around August or Sept 07 then that taking the Same 8 to 18 months to see Revenue or profits. If K-10 kicks the crap out of Conroe and or Conroe-2, then expect for AMD to Rape you again but this time without lubrication. They'll be starved for cash by then.

There's some great info on this thread, stop trying to screw it up please?
 
Rocco123 said:
Then am I losing my sense of reality when I say that in a previous thread, you stated you had "inside information" about the future of Intels competition with AMD? Do I really need to find that thread and quote it?

I'd still like to know what exactly you do at Intel, and which facility you work out of.
Click to expand...

I do not think that is important or appropiate to ask.He never said anything on having inside information , what he uses are public sources and his own estimates on AMD.
 
savantu said:
I do not think that is important or appropiate to ask.He never said anything on having inside information , what he uses are public sources and his own estimates on AMD.
Click to expand...

Fine, fine, I'll go ahead and quote it:

empoy said:
let's just say that I have an insider information on what Intel is cooking up as the successor to Conroe/Merom. And its going to be released next year :p :p
Click to expand...

Okay, I admit that it's not appropriate to ask what facility he is at. However, after the above post, I'm curious not at the information he apparently has, but how he would be able to obtain this information (i.e. what area of Intel does he work in).

sorry, also have to quote some more bullshit:

empoy said:
Intel is now making sure that back and forth WILL NOT happen. :)
Click to expand...

Basically stating that AMD will never again be competitive with Intel.
 
it makes me sick that some of you ppl are all giddy over intel stomping amd and hoping amd will never compete again.

it makes no sense at all.. :confused:
 
Jason711 said:
it makes me sick that some of you ppl are all giddy over intel stomping amd and hoping amd will never compete again.

it makes no sense at all.. :confused:
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!

People just want something that is faster than a rivaling company, no matter what (blind fan-b-o-i-s-m). There are some people here that don't understand that competition is what drives companies to become more innovative. If Intel had 100% market share on laptops, desktops, and servers, there would be no reason for something as impressive (apparently) as Conroe.
 
Jason711 said:
it makes me sick that some of you ppl are all giddy over intel stomping amd and hoping amd will never compete again.

it makes no sense at all.. :confused:
Click to expand...
I don't think that's it at all. Competition and lower prices are good for everyone. Most people are just happy that Intel is back in the game again--that's competiton. MANY Intel fans are happy because they now have something awesome to upgrade to. If AMD never makes it back on top then that's their own fault for not staying in the game. Don't blame Intel or its fans for it.
 
dark_reign said:
I don't think that's it at all. Competition and lower prices are good for everyone. Most people are just happy that Intel is back in the game again--that's competiton. MANY Intel fans are happy because they now have something awesome to upgrade to. If AMD never makes it back on top then that's their own fault for not staying in the game. Don't blame Intel or its fans for it.
Click to expand...

And that's completely fine, and I agree. I think the people that were the targets of that post KNOW who they are.
 
Jason711 said:
it makes me sick that some of you ppl are all giddy over intel stomping amd and hoping amd will never compete again.

it makes no sense at all.. :confused:
Click to expand...

Probably only sensibly post so far. I agree completely. YES it's lovely to see Intel competing again for the consumer's sake, but to wish for Intel to destroy AMD indefinately is foolish unless your a financial stakeholder. Of course some of you are, *cough* empoy *cough* in which case you are excused. Don't forget to be a computing fan, not a brand fan.
 
Rocco123 said:
I think the people that were the targets of that post KNOW who they are.
Click to expand...

Some people just like pushing other people's buttons. It does no good to point fingers unless you're really taking this shit seriously.
 
sabrewolf732 said:
??!!??? WHAT?! Where did I say anything about dothan's tdp??? ROFL! Donnie, please read the definition of read again. I beg you to quote where I said anything about dothan's tdp.
Click to expand...

So now who's misquoting? It was a reply to Duby, not Dippy ;) What simple part of that do you NOT understand?

Originally Posted by Donnie27
Yes, like this facts?

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.p...3&postcount=104
Click to expand...

That was to him and you!

You might need to google trustworthy sites if that's the case? Yes, the Internet can be both friend and foe. If you'd read the thread, you'd have known that 2.66GHz Conroe as a TDP of 65W and the 3333MHz part is at 95W.
Click to expand...

A comment he made to me about web searches, nothing to do with you.

A reply to him, again, not you, hehehe. Hell I even QUOTED HIM. Most the quotes you're talking about was a post to him, not you. What good is it to quote something or someone when you can't read well enough to know when I was replying to him and NOT you LOL!? Or you're reading well enough and trying to switch $hit?

omfg!? REALLY!? donnie, here you go, just for you, I will quote myself.
Click to expand...

Yet you continue clown around and still off subject. I own a 3500+ big deal.

No, I've actually been banned for calling you names. Much like all you intel guys are doing.

I have 15 postsin this thread? lol. Donnie, reading and numbers, come on!
Donnie, you do this every damn time. You go off on a tangent, misquote people, and attempt to call people fan boys.
Click to expand...

So you haven't gotten over that yet, uh? Shakes head. The post count was to him, NOT you and in the forum, not just that one thread. Hint, I gave link to the other post he made.

The are no Intel fans or anyone else calling you Retard, Dumbass or Dipshit. Link us to it you if think there is? No one comes close your ignorance and teenaged Trolling BS seen right here. Please cut out the BS and post something having to do with the thread? You're doing just what you accuse me of doing, oh brother. I'll waste no more time on you.
 
perplex said:
Probably only sensibly post so far. I agree completely. YES it's lovely to see Intel competing again for the consumer's sake, but to wish for Intel to destroy AMD indefinately is foolish unless your a financial stakeholder. Of course some of you are, *cough* empoy *cough* in which case you are excused. Don't forget to be a computing fan, not a brand fan.
Click to expand...

empoy is like a drunken frat boy.. "GO INTEL!!... DURRRR!!!"
 
Visaris and Duby, I admire your argumentative skills, but doesn't this invalidate your agrument? From wikipedia's 65 nm article:

Wikipedia said:
65 nanometer refers to the wavelength of the light source used to cure the photoresistive coating on silicon wafers. The shorter wavelength yields smaller etched lines and transistors on the silicon wafer, allowing for more transistors per given area, or more processing power for the same area. Moore's Law states a 100% increase in transistors for a given area every 18 months.
Click to expand...

If this is true, then it would seem that the xx nm process is indeed a lot like the bit in a drill or the font size in word.
 
No not really.

What they are talking about is lithograghy. You can focus a laser at a certain wavelength, and etchout a higher resolution. That's true. But the higher the resolution, the greater the risk of contamination becomes, etc. A particle that was too small to really affect 90nm, may be big enough to interfere with 65nm.

The fab needs to be equiped to deal withj this. Also the chemicals used for 65nm production are differant. And a slew of other things that most people are not capable of grasping, including myself.

The point is, and its the only point that I'm trying to make, that the fab needs to be equiped to handle the tools, and equipement that it uses. fab30 was not ideal for 65nm production, and it would have been impossible to upgrade it while still in production. So they built fab36. Fab36 was designed for 65nm and 45nm production. In the mean time they will have 90nm tools installed producing 90nm parts. When they get the kinks worked out of the system, they will retool for 65nm, and begin it's rampup. Prolly before this year is out.

It really sucks that noone seems to get this. It really is simple.
 
"thoughtless bandwagon jumpers"

minus the thoughtless part, we all should be "bandwagon jumpers". When we are, neither company gets lazy! Being blindly loyal hurts competition.
 
ok, both visaris and duby statements are all correct. I am at fault. Sorry for that. :)

AMD will resurrect from the ashes (like a phoenix) of K8 architecture and once again grab the performance crown. It'll have the most modern Fab facility in the world supplying cost efficient processors and holding nearly 2/3 of the microprocessor market.



year: 2???
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
Visaris and Duby, I admire your argumentative skills, but doesn't this invalidate your agrument? From wikipedia's 65 nm article:

65 nanometer refers to the wavelength of the light source used to cure the photoresistive coating on silicon wafers. The shorter wavelength yields smaller etched lines and transistors on the silicon wafer, allowing for more transistors per given area, or more processing power for the same area. Moore's Law states a 100% increase in transistors for a given area every 18 months.
Click to expand...
If this is true, then it would seem that the xx nm process is indeed a lot like the bit in a drill or the font size in word.
Click to expand...
wow, nothing could be further from the truth. they actually use electromagnetic waves with a wavelenth something like 193nm... (extreme ultraviolet), the interference is what allows them to create things smaller than the wavelength size.
 
AMD will resurrect from the ashes (like a phoenix) of K8 architecture and once again grab the performance crown. It'll have the most modern Fab facility in the world supplying cost efficient processors and holding nearly 2/3 of the microprocessor market.
Click to expand...

Sorry empoy if that is how I came across. I think Conroe will be a great chip. It's about time too.

But that is not what I said at all. I simply stated in this thread and others that Until we see the chip configured, installed, benched, and compared by third parties like HardOCP, the numbers that Intel released mean close to nothing.

I also stated that fab36 was designed to meet the requirements of 65nm production, but in the mean time they are planning the initial ramp up on 90nm.
 
duby229 said:
I also stated that fab36 was designed to meet the requirements of 65nm production, but in the mean time they are planning the initial ramp up on 90nm.
Click to expand...
and anyone who tries to refute that will get a rebuttal from me.
 
empoy said:
ok, both visaris and duby statements are all correct. I am at fault. Sorry for that. :)

AMD will resurrect from the ashes (like a phoenix) of K8 architecture and once again grab the performance crown. It'll have the most modern Fab facility in the world supplying cost efficient processors and holding nearly 2/3 of the microprocessor market.



year: 2???
Click to expand...

i hope your right. ;)
 
duby229 said:
But that is not what I said at all. I simply stated in this thread and others that Until we see the chip configured, installed, benched, and compared by third parties like HardOCP, the numbers that Intel released mean close to nothing.
Click to expand...

I'd agree if Intel had just released a bunch of numbers. But they didn't. They allowed a plethora of sites to come in and bench a clean system with Conroe installed, and next to it was a clean AMD system overclocked to represent the offerings AMD will have in six months. While there is definitely room for the exact percentage to change, I think that it is a fair conclusion to make that Conroe will beat whatever AMD has out by a significant percentage. Things can only change so much in six months.

Think of who they're addressing here. Conroe benchies aren't ending up on CNN, they're showing up on enthusiast sites like AnandTech. The enthusiast audience will be much less forgiving than the general public if when Conroe comes out it's the second coming of Prescott. Making this stuff up would be just plain dumb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top