Intel 5x faster per watt.

[Stoneburner]

I dont understand that inquirer writer's claim that this chip will give AMD a run for its money. TO say that you have to know what AMD will have at the same time. Barring that, is all he saying that Intel will catch up with AMD's current standards in about a year? That's not really much of a compliment.

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Intelia
Now lets just go for the very smallest gain . Conroe SSE3 64 bit 65 watts if it is 2x faster than a dothan 2.26 I am going to be thrilled to death. Merom is stated to be 3x faster than dothan so Iam being really concervative

No, you're being an idiot.
Mermon is NOT stated to be 3x faster than Dothan ANYWHERE except your head.
It's stated to have 3 times the performance per watt that Dothna does, and with a die shrink and dual cores, as Furen said, that's fairly reasonable.But it's not necessarily going to be 3x as fast.
Hell, it might be the exact same speed, but consume 1/3rd of the power, and Intel's numbers would still be true.

Rude ass here learn to read !!!! THIS is from link on first page.

Merom will deliver a three times performance per watt while Conroe will include a 5X improvement in performance per watt. All of these are 65 nanometre dual core processors. By Q3 of 2006, sales of 65 nanometre chips will surpass existing 90 nanometre process chips, he said.

PERFORMANCE PER WATT != PROCESSOR PERFORMANCE

 

[jkostans]

lol all I found was some old professor who wrote a lot of books.

"Howard Zinn (born August 24, 1922 in Brooklyn, New York) is an American historian and political scientist, whose political philosophy incorporates ideas from Marxism, anarchism, socialism, and social democracy. Together with Noam Chomsky (with whom he has collaborated on several books and speaking engagements), Zinn is among the most well-known figures of the radical Left in the United States."

Sounds like he'd be fun at a party

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: jtworldwide2

Originally posted by: Intelia
YES it does but the 4GHZ dothan kills the 4GHz FX57 and dothans have been clocked there.

Sample read of Conroe

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25623

ahh the inquirer, the most reliable source of information on the internet

Ananda has the same read intodays news good enough for ya?

 

[Farmer]

Intelia, try posting less and thinking more. Also, try not to completely ignore what everyone else is telling you.

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Elcs
I wonder whether these will be "up to x3 and x5 times the performance" or "x5 better in SiSoft Sandra Tests!!!!"

Ill believe it when I see it. Ill buy it if it suits my price range/overclocking needs/performance expectations.

S939 is probably going to be skipped. Socket M2 looks like my target for now unless Intel can change my mind.

Keep in mind there talking about 2cores vs 1 core. so you can can figure it to be about a 50% better performance clock for clock than a P4C and a 30% better clock for clock than a dothan .
Anand'S news today says clocks for the conroe will be 2.5-3.0 so a 3.0GHz Conroe would be =+ a P4C @4.5 GHz..
My husbands old P4C 3.2GHz was O/C2 4.3+ on water and a chiller . I don't know its performance no. but his new dothan@ 3Ghz on water and chiller comes up short according to what he has told me. David really liked the P4C and its performance.

He hates the P4P says its junk hot and no performance

 

[jkostans]

If only you had somthing to support these numbers you are pulling out of your butt. You are assuming, and making an ass outta yourself in the process.

 

[Intelia]

Howard Zinn is someone my husband admire's greatly . Zinn2b is my husband LOL

 

[Sentential]

I think its pretty accurate seeing how the Yonah X50 Pentium chews up about 33W @ 2.12ghz (8x266)(dual 2x2MB). 5X sounds about right.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: Matt2
I agree with Vegitto.

if it really was 5x faster per watt, then a Conroe at 100watts 3.0GHZ would be equal to a Smithfield at 15GHZ??

I don't think so.

Intelia, you gotta remember that Intel is marketing it's product to sell. You don't think Paul's putting a spin on things to talk up his new architecture?? I would be after the Prescott disaster.

You agree with vegitto this is what he said.
if it really was 5x faster per watt, then a Conroe at 100watts 3.0GHZ would be equal to a Smithfield at 15GHZ??

If you would read what it says 5x faster per what . So you guys take 5x 3 and come up with 15GHz LOL

We were using 100watt EXAMPLES. You said Conroe will be 5x faster than Smithfield per watt.

AS AN EXAMPLE we said that if SMithfield uses 100watts and Conrow also uses 100watts then a 3.0GHZ Conroe would be equal to a 15GHZ Smithfield. Am I right? A Conroe running 100watts @ 3GHZ would be equal to a 15GHZ Smithfield running the same watts. 15GHZ is 5x faster than 3GHZ... RIGHT?

It has become apparent to me over the last couple of days that you are a to the death Intel maniac, no matter how poor Intel products are. You are equally interested in creating Intel based threads that you KNOW are going to draw AMD users and their opinions. You have no interest in opening your mind to the other side of the coin and insist on starting flame wars due to your one track mind.

I think your threads would be better served on an Intel forum.

/thread

 

[Keysplayr]

I was trying to put together an AMD rig. I bought the mobo and was having a helluva time getting a CPU for it that I wanted. So, I gave up. Now that I see what should be available next year, I'm kinda glad I didn't find a deal on an A64. I can wait for Merom/Conroe. What I have now is sufficient. The AMD rig was just a whim anyways.

 

[Pabster]

see below.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Intelia
YES it does but the 4GHZ dothan kills the 4GHz FX57 and dothans have been clocked there.

Yeah, for about 15 seconds on LN2 to show a CPU-Z screenie.

Let's be realistic here. Indeed, Dothan does offer better performance clock-for-clock than the other offerings; But in the real world, it only excels in gaming. For everything else it gets stomped senseless.

You are starting to remind me of Dothan, and I'm not talking about the CPU core.

Edit: And before you accuse me of being a zealot, keep in mind I own a pair of shiny new Inspiron 9300 lappys with Dothan chips. And I love 'em. But they are NOT performance champs by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Intelia]

Conroe doesn't use 100 watts . so you have to take 65 watts. Alsi P4P is closer to 130 watts. 65+65= 130 than divid 5x by 2 since it takes 2 conroes to equal 130 watts . so if their talking single core vs dual core you end up basicly with 50% faster .

I used smithfield a@ 130 watts divided by 2 and got 2 1/2 x performance increase.

 

[Matt2]

For the last time it was a freakin example.

It's over a year away anyways.

If Intel told you that if you sold your house and cars they would provide you with 100x performance per watt we would be sitting here reading from you what a wonderful idea that was, wouldn't we?

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Intelia
YES it does but the 4GHZ dothan kills the 4GHz FX57 and dothans have been clocked there.

Yeah, for about 15 seconds on LN2 to show a CPU-Z screenie.

Let's be realistic here. Indeed, Dothan does offer better performance clock-for-clock than the other offerings; But in the real world, it only excels in gaming. For everything else it gets stomped senseless.

You are starting to remind me of Dothan, and I'm not talking about the CPU core.

Edit: And before you accuse me of being a zealot, keep in mind I own a pair of shiny new Inspiron 9300 lappys with Dothan chips. And I love 'em. But they are NOT performance champs by any stretch of the imagination.

Conroe the cpu were talking about will support SSE3, have fusion opps, 4 wide execution, 64 bit . and just an all round amd killer.
Fact is yonah is going to give AMD fits.

The majority of the people @ these forums are in fact gamers tring to find an edge on the competion .

 

[Intelia]

There are only hardcore AMD fanboys who won't except what Intel is bringing to the table. Dothan is here right now . power usage is great. gaming performance is great . the fact it lacks sse3 hurts it . But to be fair take a stock dothan @ 2.23 put it against a AMD 64 running at 2.2 GHZ and the dothan dominates almost all the benchmarks.
I will get a link and compare only at the same GHz and you will see

 

[Pabster]

Wrong again. First off, there is no stock 2.23. The fastest is the 2.13/533. And it loses nearly every benchie (save a few gaming ones) to the A64 @ 2.2 as well to Prescott P4's. Why don't you read up a little before spewing FUD?

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wrong again. First off, there is no stock 2.23. The fastest is the 2.13/533. And it loses nearly every benchie (save a few gaming ones) to the A64 @ 2.2 as well to Prescott P4's. Why don't you read up a little before spewing FUD?

Wrong
My mstake I got it wrong here is link

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/pentiumm-780.html

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wrong again. First off, there is no stock 2.23. The fastest is the 2.13/533. And it loses nearly every benchie (save a few gaming ones) to the A64 @ 2.2 as well to Prescott P4's. Why don't you read up a little before spewing FUD?

Wrong

LINKS LINKS LINKS!!!!!!!

Who am I everyone?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Intelia

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wrong again. First off, there is no stock 2.23. The fastest is the 2.13/533. And it loses nearly every benchie (save a few gaming ones) to the A64 @ 2.2 as well to Prescott P4's. Why don't you read up a little before spewing FUD?

Wrong

Ok, show me your 2.23GHz STOCK Dothan chip if I'm wrong. It doesn't exist.

Second, check out your buddy Tom's review of the Dothan versus Prescott and Athlon 64 RIGHT HERE and you can clearly see that after the gaming benchies, Dothan gets its ass handed to it on nearly every single benchmark. Sometimes by quite a wide margin.

Start providing some facts instead of FUD, ok?

 

[Intelia]

I said 2.23 it was 2.26 sorry LOL

There is not 1 bench this cpu would have lost to the same clocked AMD chip the 3800 is the lowest 1 they used .

 

[Pabster]

Intelia, you are (again) talking about a product that isn't even available yet.

And in your own review that you linked @ Xbit the benchmarks speak for themselves -- Dothan is clearly put down by the mightier Athlon and Pentium 4 contenders in nearly EVERY SINGLE TEST.

 

[Matt2]

This thread is pointles, you must realize that Intelia.

Your ENTIRE argument in every single thread you post in is based on a fantasy of yours where AMD stops R&D and production of all new cores and sticks with the same A64 architecture while Intel rolls all of these super CPUs out. Much like Intel did with the P4.

No, sorry, AMD is not Intel.

 

[Intelia]

Matt post links to AMD future products I would love to read or if you want post to IBM there the true developers of the AMD 64.