Core duo clobbers AMD FX60

brand new hardware clobbers old hardware. I think a more fair match would be something in a K8L vs. something Core Duo..

EDIT: Anyways, I would say this could be expected. ;) but kudos to Intel.. I knew they would not sit idly by while AMD continually handed their asses to them, well in the top gaming performance bracket at least... I am looking forward to their new offerings.
 
well, i guess there is no such thing as a fair fight in this world..( if it is a fair fight some one must have done something wrong) ... Also, Core Duo is basically a dual core , die shrunk pentium-m..... Pentium M was released in march 2003..... Athlon 64 was in september 2003.... so the Core Duo's architecture is actually older than the A64's.
 
and the Pentium M was a die shrunk, tweaked P3. The p3 was a die shrunk, tweaked P2... all the way back to the PPro... you cant really say that becuase a processor is based on on something its inherently older, the a64 has a LOT in common the K7 too.
 
Clobbers? Are you guys looking at different charts or something?

The T2600 only edges out when overclocked, they aren't showing any overclocked AMD chips...

Also, as I thought and as usual CPU performance means very little in modern Game titles (except for maybe Oblivion) as most poeple run in GPU limited scenarios.
 
The anandtech core duo / Opty 165, 175 comparison was better. Overclocked vs overclocked and stock vs stock is a more fair comparison.

But yea, Yonah is a beast, especially when overclocked. And starting out at 31W makes it an amazing chip right now.
 
Those Yonah's look nice, but they are only 32 bit. I like my 64 bit for future upgrades.

Conroe will be the shit, hope AMD has something up their sleeves other than the K8L in 2008.
 
J-Mag said:
Clobbers? Are you guys looking at different charts or something?

The T2600 only edges out when overclocked, they aren't showing any overclocked AMD chips...

Also, as I thought and as usual CPU performance means very little in modern Game titles (except for maybe Oblivion) as most poeple run in GPU limited scenarios.
Click to expand...

Yes, clobbers would not be the right word, but I was keeping in align with the OP.. "edges out" would be more appropriate.
 
J-Mag said:
Clobbers? Are you guys looking at different charts or something?

The T2600 only edges out when overclocked, they aren't showing any overclocked AMD chips...

Also, as I thought and as usual CPU performance means very little in modern Game titles (except for maybe Oblivion) as most poeple run in GPU limited scenarios.
Click to expand...


I was wondering the same thing. I wouldn't even call on par for the reason that it's overclocked.
 
Core Duo at 2600mhz VS. FX60 at stock (2.6ghz)

Xvid encoding 11% faster than FX60
DVD Ripping 1% faster than FX60
MP3 encoding 22% in favor of Athlon FX60
Image Processing 6% faster than FX60
Quake 4@640 by 480 - Tie (less than 1 FPS)
Quake 4@1024x768 - 4% faster than FX60
Fear 640x480 19% faster than FX60
Fear 1280x960 - Tie
Far Cry 800x600 - 12% faster than FX60
Far Cry 1280x1024 - 15% faster than FX60

Hardly anything to get you knickers in a knot over! :D

 
Um, duh, it was the Same with the Penitum M. But only on certain benchmarks. Some were just awful.
 
freeloader1969 said:
Quake 4@640 by 480 - Tie (less than 1 FPS)
Quake 4@1024x768 - 4% faster than FX60
Fear 640x480 19% faster than FX60
Fear 1280x960 - Tie
Far Cry 800x600 - 12% faster than FX60
Far Cry 1280x1024 - 15% faster than FX60
Click to expand...
that makes me scratch my head. i guess fear is video card limited at 1280x960..

i was actually expecting core duo to do a lot better than that at equivilent clocks from things we've seen in the past :confused:
 
freeloader1969 said:
Core Duo at 2600mhz VS. FX60 at stock (2.6ghz)

Xvid encoding 11% faster than FX60
DVD Ripping 1% faster than FX60
MP3 encoding 22% in favor of Athlon FX60
Image Processing 6% faster than FX60
Quake 4@640 by 480 - Tie (less than 1 FPS)
Quake 4@1024x768 - 4% faster than FX60
Fear 640x480 19% faster than FX60
Fear 1280x960 - Tie
Far Cry 800x600 - 12% faster than FX60
Far Cry 1280x1024 - 15% faster than FX60

Hardly anything to get you knickers in a knot over! :D
Click to expand...

:D unless you encode alot :D, would love to see the games at higher resolutions, like 1280 x 1024, come on....
 
old hardware vs new hardware just dosent work

comparing conroe to A64 right now is just stupid. OF COURCE conroe will do better, newer techonology no?
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
old hardware vs new hardware just dosent work

comparing conroe to A64 right now is just stupid. OF COURCE conroe will do better, newer techonology no?
Click to expand...

Core Duo doesn't mean Conroe...
 
you can't compare stock to OVERCLOCKED. Well, maybe you can but I guess you know what to expect, don't you?
 
styleboy said:
yeah but what about my commodore 128.... :)
Click to expand...

Can't we all be friends? :(
...
.....
.......
besides we all know my ipod owns your commodores ;)
 
$BangforThe$ said:
Why would you want to see higher Res that doesn't show the power of the CPU just the GPU.?
Click to expand...

Because the CPU these days can be a bottle neck, and since the core duo was beating the amd more with higher res, why not go higher.... until the vid card is a bottle neck.



What are they supposed to compare Core Duo too ? they need to compare it to something - AMD compared their FX to Intel older chips,.... it always happens, who ever comes out with something new, they need to give you an idea of what it can do.....
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
i know that. my comment did not apply to what the OP is presenting. it for the argument you can't compare old to the new
Click to expand...

Well, of course you can compare the old to the new.. lets look at the heritage of the FX60.
it is the thetest interation of the K-8 .....die shrunk to 90nm, with Dual core and with Dual Channel memory controllers........based on K-8 technology. first released in septermber 2003.........
Core Duo is based on the pentium M platform...die shrunk to 65nm, with dual core and also with Dual channel memory architecture.........based on pentium-m technology...first released in march 2003.... ...

The chip T2600 was released on the 5th of Jan 2006.. The Fx60 was released on 10th Jan 2006... so the Core Duo T2600 chip is older than the Fx60 too.!'

By most standards, this is can only be considered "older technology" beating newer technology.
 
MrGuvernment said:
:D unless you encode alot :D, would love to see the games at higher resolutions, like 1280 x 1024, come on....
Click to expand...


Then you wouldn't see any difference at all. Games are GPU bound not CPU bound. You have to turn the settings way down to see any difference in CPUs.
 
Clock for clock? Why don't they call it what it is? 20% overclock vs. stock. This *might* be applicable if they could guarantee that every single T2600 could achieve a 20% OC. As it is, it's just another B.S. article that will spawn thousands of B.S. threads just like this one.
 
Rabid Badger said:
Clock for clock? Why don't they call it what it is? 20% overclock vs. stock. This *might* be applicable if they could guarantee that every single T2600 could achieve a 20% OC. As it is, it's just another B.S. article that will spawn thousands of B.S. threads just like this one.
Click to expand...

The article confirms that a Intel Core Duo running at 2600MHz is faster than a Athlon 64 FX60 running at 2600MHz under a specific set of hardware.

Yes you can argue the merit of whether it is fair comparing an O/C"ed CPU's performance with stock performance.. but then again, everyone who has bought a Opteron 165 or overclocks a CPU will definately find it benificial to have these type of articles.
 
evilmedic said:
Well, of course you can compare the old to the new.. lets look at the heritage of the FX60.
it is the thetest interation of the K-8 .....die shrunk to 90nm, with Dual core and with Dual Channel memory controllers........based on K-8 technology. first released in septermber 2003.........
Core Duo is based on the pentium M platform...die shrunk to 65nm, with dual core and also with Dual channel memory architecture.........based on pentium-m technology...first released in march 2003.... ...

The chip T2600 was released on the 5th of Jan 2006.. The Fx60 was released on 10th Jan 2006... so the Core Duo T2600 chip is older than the Fx60 too.!'

By most standards, this is can only be considered "older technology" beating newer technology.
Click to expand...

Best post I've seen in about 5 weeks, in fact Back to back good posts.

evilmedic said:
The article confirms that a Intel Core Duo running at 2600MHz is faster than a Athlon 64 FX60 running at 2600MHz under a specific set of hardware.

Yes you can argue the merit of whether it is fair comparing an O/C"ed CPU's performance with stock performance.. but then again, everyone who has bought a Opteron 165 or overclocks a CPU will definately find it benificial to have these type of articles.
Click to expand...

QFT!
 
Well, you did put this into perspective.

There are people out there who don't give a damn about 64-bit and who love to OC. I can understand this article being a good source for them. To these people I suppose Core Duo could "own".

That said, it means nothing to me as my apps require 64-bit and I'll probably never OC. So to me, these benchmarks are nothing short of silly and seem to show AMD "owning".

That's a fair take, don't you think?
 
evilmedic said:
Well, of course you can compare the old to the new.. lets look at the heritage of the FX60.
it is the thetest interation of the K-8 .....die shrunk to 90nm, with Dual core and with Dual Channel memory controllers........based on K-8 technology. first released in septermber 2003.........
Core Duo is based on the pentium M platform...die shrunk to 65nm, with dual core and also with Dual channel memory architecture.........based on pentium-m technology...first released in march 2003.... ...

The chip T2600 was released on the 5th of Jan 2006.. The Fx60 was released on 10th Jan 2006... so the Core Duo T2600 chip is older than the Fx60 too.!'

By most standards, this is can only be considered "older technology" beating newer technology.
Click to expand...
but as was brought up before, where do you draw the line if you're gonna do that? cause if you're gonna call duo a glorified pentium M, the FX-60 is a glorified K7... i'd be surprised if K8 and K7 really do have more in common than core duo and dothan.. but then what's to stop you from saying that it's all x86 based, which means they're all glorified 186's? ;)

i realize that in the past, i've linked conroe to being a glorified dothan.. but i think i've changed my mind now that i know more about it. the basic core has been changed, thus it's a new architecture.
 
AM2 release, you can get a Sempron +3800 for about $150 - sorry AMD, but your price cuts BETTER be better then that

mmmm, sempron +3800, or Intel Dual Core 805 for $40 cheaper.......
 
MrGuvernment said:
AM2 release, you can get a Sempron +3800 for about $150 - sorry AMD, but your price cuts BETTER be better then that

mmmm, sempron +3800, or Intel Dual Core 805 for $40 cheaper.......
Click to expand...

They have even worse problems with their middle-range products that will have to compete with Conroe, Yonah and Pressler that cost less, a LOT less.
 
Donnie27 said:
They have even worse problems with their middle-range products that will have to compete with Conroe, Yonah and Pressler that cost less, a LOT less.
Click to expand...
AMD currently sells every single CPU they make. Demand is currently very high, and AMD has high prices to match that. Simple supply vs. demand.

When Conroe comes out AMD's demand will drop, and their prices will drop with it to ensure that AMD can keep selling all their chips.

Your comparison of predicted Conroe launch prices to pre-Conroe AMD prices is pretty funny. :)
 
visaris said:
AMD currently sells every single CPU they make. Demand is currently very high, and AMD has high prices to match that. Simple supply vs. demand.

When Conroe comes out AMD's demand will drop, and their prices will drop with it to ensure that AMD can keep selling all their chips.

Your comparison of predicted Conroe launch prices to pre-Conroe AMD prices is pretty funny. :)
Click to expand...

I almost agree! Not just simple Supply and Demand but Poor shopping!

No, it is funny how many folks are willing to be raped by current prices knowing they'll be cut in Half in a little over two months. Even funnier are folks telling folks to spend money right now LOL!
 
comparing a desktop chip and a laptop chip is like comparing an apple to an orange.

and besides , only enthutiast will get to play around with the lappy chip but 95% of consumers will get desktop chips for a desktop com.

Every second the conroe is delayed, AMD wins, because INTEL is all talk and no action until conroe rolls off the production line and into the consumers computer.

Couroe/core duo thrashing AM2 > Its like an F1 car outrunning an EVO9.Can you buy an F1 car? not now, but the evo9 is just in the dealership , waiting for you to take it home now...

same logic applies to the AM2 VS conroe mentality here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top