• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

New Conroe Benches

shungokusatsu said:
WOW, 230fps vs the FX 62's 140... Why are all these new benches so drastically different from the [H] review, something is seriously wrong.
Click to expand...

The difference is that in the [H] review they benched at a higher resolution and were GPU bound so there couldn't be much of a difference between the three processors in performance. With a fast processor like Conroe you need to ither bench at 800x600 to eliminate the GPU or if you're going to bench at a higher resolution like 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 then you need high-end cards in SLI/Crossfire. Even then i would just stick to 800x600 or a low resolution when you are reviewing a CPU. If you want to point out that there isn't much of a difference with a single video card like the 7900 GTX then do so but it doesn't help to make the review into one big GPU limitation when its suppost to be solely about a new processor.
 
I take that back, turns out [H]'s benchmarks were GPU limited in EVERY scenario. Why on earth would somebody buy a $1,000 CPU and mix it with a $400 GPU? They should have done more benching, with a wider variety of configs.
 
Are you guys even looking at the resolutions all those benches are at? The difference is [H] tested what we run at games at, not 800 x 600 or 1042 x 768.
 
Opie said:
Are you guys even looking at the resolutions all those benches are at? The difference is [H] tested what we run at games at, not 800 x 600 or 1042 x 768.
Click to expand...
and the difference is that the GPU would've blocked out differences in the chips.

Running a lower resolution means we get to see what kind of lead the chips would have if we take everything else out of the picture.

The [H] review stands for now, but once the GPU is upped, the results should be different. Now, to see how well Conroes scale up when the resolution is upped as well.
 
Opie said:
Are you guys even looking at the resolutions all those benches are at? The difference is [H] tested what we run at games at, not 800 x 600 or 1042 x 768.
Click to expand...

The point being made is that at the resolution used with a single 7900GTX, the GPU is the limiter. Running at a lower res gives a better idea of the headroom a CPU has. So when the 7900 is replaced by a 8900, or runs in SLI, and you run at the 1280x1024 res, then a difference would be seen
 
yea, go read benches from another site, Hardocp dropped the ball big time, their gaming benches are worthless imho
 
gwai lo said:
and the difference is that the GPU would've blocked out differences in the chips.

Running a lower resolution means we get to see what kind of lead the chips would have if we take everything else out of the picture.
Click to expand...

And how does that help you? Clearly the $530 C2D is the best buy out there, but be honest with yourself, in high end gaming there is nothing to chose between the 2 brands in terms of raw performance.

And whats an 8900?
 
Opie said:
And how does that help you? Clearly the $530 C2D is the best buy out there, but be honest with yourself, in high end gaming there is nothing to chose between the 2 brands in terms of raw performance.

And whats an 8900?
Click to expand...
It helps me because I know once we move on, from a graphics standpoint, I know the chip will still have some power left.



Anyway...the Neoseeker oc'ing section didn't give temps. :(

Interesting..the hothardware review puts the 975 + 6800 matchup as the lowest power consumers. o_0
 
Opie said:
And how does that help you? Clearly the $530 C2D is the best buy out there, but be honest with yourself, in high end gaming there is nothing to chose between the 2 brands in terms of raw performance.

And whats an 8900?
Click to expand...

I was being hypothetical. 8900 would be the next generation Geforce. So a more powerful single card solution that might not be GPU liomited at the resolutions used in the review.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
yea, go read benches from another site, Hardocp dropped the ball big time, their gaming benches are worthless imho
Click to expand...
Why are they worthless when they show you exactly what you would experience? You aren't going to run the game at 1024x768 are you?

Also every review where they ran at higher resolutions showed exactly the same result as [H]'s result.
 
Dude, even mid range processors will run at the same framerates as top end cpus when paired at high resolutions with good cards. Unless you plan on gaming at low resolutions, why sweat it? You'll have to advance 3 or 4 generations to outstrip current cpus the way things have been moving the last several years. All this FX60 does for me is load into maps quicker.
 
yea, go read benches from another site, Hardocp dropped the ball big time, their gaming benches are worthless imho
Click to expand...

I REALLY don't understand why people look at CPU benchies at 800x600 and say that one CPU beats another in games.... That's NOT the point of buying the best CPU to game with: to game at 800x600 so why bench it there?

Me, personally, I thought the [H] review was perfect.

I can understand that one might be faster in the sense it will give the same FPS with an Anti-Virus, Firewall, BitTorrent or whatever else is in the backround, but they should test it that way.

To say that Conroe is 30% faster then AMD at gaming is foolish when it is CLEARLY NOT going to be used in that 30% situation.

The [H] has stood by Real-World Real-Benchies for quite a while, and going to 800x600 benchies would be a step in the wrong direction for them.

They gave you Real-World Gameplay benchies, and they proved one thing: 95% of games out there are GPU limited, not CPU limited. Once the new GPU's come out, the story might change, but for right now, whatever CPU you buy that's in the 2.5+Ghz range is more then enough to play games.

IMHO Conroe is Next-Gen, but nothing else is. Conroe, just like most CPU's is being held back. The Core Architecture has room to grow, and mature. This is a good thing.
 
shungokusatsu said:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?art=3161

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=6184

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=6188

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/348

I'm not trying to bash [H], but it's now very clear something is wrong with their reviews, [H]'s are getting much lower fps then all these others.
Click to expand...

Listen bro, I have been nice with you bashing us over and over tonight, and have fully explained how we do things differently here than doing canned benchmarks. I don't mind opinions, but the repeatedly saying we have it wrong does not sit well. Take it somewhere else.
 
EQTakeOffense said:
I REALLY don't understand why people look at CPU benchies at 800x600 and say that one CPU beats another in games.... That's NOT the point of buying the best CPU to game with: to game at 800x600 so why bench it there?
Click to expand...

Because your not seeing the big picture. When you bench at 800x600 you help to eliminate any influence of being GPU bound and allow the CPU's to really shine to their max performance. This gives you an idea which processor is truly faster in that game. This factor will be more important as you upgrade your graphics cards down the road. Currently with a single 7900 GTX you wont see a big difference in most games at higher resolutions. At that same resolutions i can safely say you would see more of a difference with a SLI/Crossfire setup or especially a new G80/R600 card. The point is that you're holding back the performance of the processor because of the lack of performance on the graphics card part. If you plan to upgrade when the new DX10 cards come out it might be beneficial for you to know which CPU is truly faster and by how much.
 
Banko said:
Why are they worthless when they show you exactly what you would experience? You aren't going to run the game at 1024x768 are you?

Also every review where they ran at higher resolutions showed exactly the same result as [H]'s result.
Click to expand...

Worthless because as a benchmark of the computational power of the CPU (NOT GPU) they fail, they rely on GPU power for results in this "CPU test". I know they like "real world" and all, but there are actually ppl that run at 1024 and 1280, me being one of them... and yes, there are tons more like me that do....
 
EQTakeOffense said:
I REALLY don't understand why people look at CPU benchies at 800x600 and say that one CPU beats another in games.... That's NOT the point of buying the best CPU to game with: to game at 800x600 so why bench it there?

Me, personally, I thought the [H] review was perfect.

I can understand that one might be faster in the sense it will give the same FPS with an Anti-Virus, Firewall, BitTorrent or whatever else is in the backround, but they should test it that way.

To say that Conroe is 30% faster then AMD at gaming is foolish when it is CLEARLY NOT going to be used in that 30% situation.

The [H] has stood by Real-World Real-Benchies for quite a while, and going to 800x600 benchies would be a step in the wrong direction for them.

They gave you Real-World Gameplay benchies, and they proved one thing: 95% of games out there are GPU limited, not CPU limited. Once the new GPU's come out, the story might change, but for right now, whatever CPU you buy that's in the 2.5+Ghz range is more then enough to play games.

IMHO Conroe is Next-Gen, but nothing else is. Conroe, just like most CPU's is being held back. The Core Architecture has room to grow, and mature. This is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Because a review with basically alot of this doesn't tell me which CPU is going to be better for gaming, when I can alleviate the GPU bottleneck with a new video card upgrade.

http://i72.imagethrust.com/images/F12/view-image/benchmarks.html
 
Most people buy GPU's way more often than CPU's.

A low resolution benchmark will show you what you can expect with the next generation of graphics cards, and where your bottleneck will be.
 
burningrave101 said:
Because your not seeing the big picture. When you bench at 800x600 you help to eliminate any influence of being GPU bound and allow the CPU's to really shine to their max performance. This gives you an idea which processor is truly faster in that game. This factor will be more important as you upgrade your graphics cards down the road. Currently with a single 7900 GTX you wont see a big difference in most games at higher resolutions. At that same resolutions i can safely say you would see more of a difference with a SLI/Crossfire setup or especially a new G80/R600 card. The point is that you're holding back the performance of the processor because of the lack of performance on the graphics card part. If you plan to upgrade when the new DX10 cards come out it might be beneficial for you to know which CPU is truly faster and by how much.
Click to expand...


Hehe, yeah, it will show you which CPU is "truly faster" in a game at 800x600 with all the eye candy turned off. ;) I know that is how I play my games.

As soon as we have DX10 cards we will certainly show the results.
 
I am really interested in quad SLI benchmarks with conroe, I think ai am nearly 100% cpu limited even at the highest of high resolutions, i think i would see a nice boost from conroe
 
Thank you intel for finally giving us what we wanted!! Now I will spend all my hard earned $$$s ony our chips! :)
 
gwai lo said:
Except with Firing Squad, they did runs with Crossfire.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_performance/page15.asp
Click to expand...

The thing that gets me...while gains become more apparent, they are still minimal, on the most powerful GPU setup money can buy right now.

I still see no reason at all to switch from my AMD setup to conroe. I don't think I will ever been SLIing, so im not going to worry about buying a processor now that offers no benifit until another round of video cards come out. It seems pretty pointless to jump on the bandwagon now. When prices come down, and there is a need, I may look into conroe. For now, my AMD setup is just fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top