Intel vs. AMD

Mort81,

Ya Think!! How bout Zip Code! LOL!! ROFLMAO!!! Oops, did myself a hurt! LOL!!

Clock On,
theone

 

lol, how about country

 

Mort81,

I'd comment but I got to stop laughing before I do myself another hurt!
Besides, we've sillied this thing to death! LOL!!

Clock On,
theone

 

LOL

@mort + theone

u 2 can come visit MY "country" anytime in the near future! or would i be on a diff. planet in terms of comparisons? i still have my own Intel 3.4ghz Extreme Edition Northwood/Gallatin chip that will put a hurting on ANY Prescott single core chips...overclocked or not~

that particular chip is on my oldest system i currently own (server-only)...it does what it should and downloads/uploads onto a single VERY old Western Digital 500gb IDE drive that is well beyond it's warranty! lol, got a Liteon SOHW-1693S for optical and 2gb of Mushkin DDR pc-3200 4x512mb 2-2-2-6 timings~ that memory AT THE TIME years ago, cost me close to $600 U.S for 2 kits (512mb x 2 per kit)....man, how far memory prices have dropped and how far technology has advanced!

interesting points of view when travelling down Intel vs. AMD memory lane wouldn't you say?

 

docTY,

Wouldn't even bring it to the party. I'll bring the A64 4000+ single core clocked at 3.0+ I mean this is Intel vs AMD, isn't it? LOL!!! Somebody has to defend the AMD side, don't they? LOL!!! I sure as hell can't win with a Prescot! ROFL It wouldn't be an unfair advantage, would it? It only OC's to 3.1. That's only 30%! Besides, you issued this challenge so I get to pick the weapons, so Nanny, Nanny, Boo, Boo! LOL!!!

Clock On,
theone:}

 

I think you're thinking of Merom, but the T7000 series have that architecture. The T2000 series had Yonah, but that was noticeably slower. A 2.13Ghz Yonah did compete with my X2 4200+ though, so they can't have been that bad.
As for you Ken, the fact that you've owned a Gallatin means that you're either rich, or interested in older high performance tech. Those things pushed big numbers, but god they were expensive!

 

I think the 2.13GHz Pentium M was when Intel really first flexed the muscles of Conroe tech. OC'd to 2.3GHz it was benchmarking close to an FX55/57 in gaming!

It couldn't keep up in media and such. But I swear I almost shat myself when I saw it benching that high in games.

 

Pentium M was conroe-based? You learn something new every day, I thought it was the Core solo.

 

The Pentium M's architecture was the Dothan chip, Not the Conroe! It's EIST SpeedStep technology, a completely different design.

Clock On,
theone

 

Which ranged from the Pentium M described, down to the Celeron M in my parents' laptop. Ewww. 256MB of RAM is bad enough but I reckon a half-decent P3 would beat that thing limbless. I may not have seen a vast difference between my 4200+ and 3Ghz C2D (although I did see one) but the Core 2 and that laptop are worlds apart.

 

i think its easier to think of it the other way around, were the conroe is born out of the pentium m's.

while intel us was pushing the pentiums(presscot) as far as they could go intels overseas (israel i think) was working on a more effiecent proc from the p3 design which is what ultimatly brought us the conroes.

 

marsey99,

The funny part of that story is there were 6 engineers who worked on the P3 Coppermine and when Intel canceled the development of the Coppermine, these guys kept on working on it because they believed in their design over anything else Intel had in the works at the time. I spite of Intel telling them to "cease and desist", they kept at it and damn near got fired until finally were forced to showed the "Powers that be" the fruits of their labor. Imagine if they had gotten fired! No Intel Conroe! No one else had a clue what they had accomplished! Imagine if they had sold their ideas to AMD if they had been fired by Intel! I doubt there was anything Intel could have done about it as it was considered obsolete chip architecture that had been abandoned by Intel years before!

Clock On,
theone :}

 

Newer isn't always better, but of course Intel made up from that mistake, and unless AMD are going to haul some big numbers out of the Thunderbird architecture, I think there's some catching up to do!

 

im still waiting to see AMD's "Phenom" processors to come out and how they stack up against Intel's quad-core currently, i'm going to sell mine soon (Q6600) as i'm just not content on the OC'in prowess of it, even on water...3.4ghz highest i've been able to attain, which to most people 1000mhz/1ghz OC is all nice and dandy, but it's not good enough for me LOL i've put the idea of phase change cooling off until a later time...

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12640

 

I'd be more than happy to settle for 3.4Ghz lol, but I suppose compared to the Duos that is a bit pants.

 

Sam,
The AS5 I used for my CPU cooler and the Northbridge seems to have cured. I measured the air temp at the side inlet vent below the 80mm fan at 24C. I also changed to a higher 31 cfm 80mm fan blowing out, so now it actually pulls some of the heat out of the case off the top of the CPU cooler. The other one didn't have enough cfm to overcome the airflow from the Silverstone 120mm in the rear! A little louder than before but not annoying. Works obscenely well! LOL!!



L to R: rear fan, CPU HSF, Hard drive, GPU, core 1, core 2, CPU , MB and Idle speed!

Clock On,
theone :}

 

Although I can't live with the noise normally, at my LAN party I turned my silverstone fans up to the 1800rpm mark. My X1900XT now idles at 39C and runs full load around 52. For a graphics card that normally runs at 56C idle and 91C load using the stock cooler, that's incredible.

 

sammorris,

They do move large quantities of air at relatively slow rpms and are much quieter doing it than the original 37 cfm fan was at full speed! That's why I had to put a better 80mm in the side air duct. The old one just wasn't moving any air. If I made it blow in my temps went up! Now, I can feel heat being removed by it and feel airflow. The static vent draws enough air to hold a piece of bond paper without support from the desk! Helps keep my "very" overclocked video card cool!

Clock On,
theone :}

 

wild speculation here based on no fact other than my opinion


i cant see phenom being a huge jump in performance for amd, its a slightly tweaked amd64 that now supports ddr3. in my mind its an evolution of now old tech and not the revolution that is/was core 2 duo.


i honestly hope i am wrong as the compition is good for us as buyers, but from what i have read it doesnt seem like amd will be catching up this year and if intel keep pushing the limits with c2d...who knows when they will?

 

Although I don't want to agree with that, I do, and I expect Intel may now have a lead equally as long as AMD did over the Netburst architecture. Difference is, the vast giant Intel could handle that misfortune, can AMD?