AMD may take it back with k8L... I don't think it will be quite as decisive though, IMO I see k7/athlon vs PIII all over again, albiet with floating point and interger performance swapped relatively...
perhaps I spoke too soon about AMD vs. intel stock.... though right now would seem a better buy for intel stock... IMO the stock of such companies is dictated by their market position. conroe will immediately boost intel stock... k8l will level the two a little... then over time... in the long run though intel can only really loose market share so any investment in them is sketchy(though AMD is largely in debt so it applies both ways)
i agree i have largly been an AMD supporter for awhile but once i have seen thouse conroe numbers i am dissapointed a 2.6 DC processer beating out a 2.8 DC by 40% i think that can get alot of people guessing. and did i mention that intell was $500 and the AMD was a $1100+ processer. i have been a amd fanboy for awhile but with thease conroes comign out. i think i will be geting the EE conroe that is 3.33 DC. projected early 1st 07 at $1000. with 4mb L2. as you all know right now AMD and intell numbers dotn really match up because amd may have lower numbers but they by far out pace the intels. so a intel may be runing 3.36 but a 2.6 AMD kicks its :censored: this being said if you have been to toms hard wear and you know a thign or to about over clocking you might be jumpign ship. for many years now amd has been kicking intel's :censored: in the relm of over clocking, but im afraid the tides have changed. intel's pentium D 805 2.226Ghz at $130 has been a low levle home chip for normal users. but they had a look and realized that it is one of the best over clockers their are. it has a rather low FSB 133 and a multiplayer of x20. (if you knwo about overclocking that should ring your bell.) so they got the pentium d 805 up to 4.0 on air. and this is a dual core processer mind you. so as you can guess i am ordering mine right now. my plain is to get two systems a system with a conroe EE in it and a system with a pentium d 805 OC'ed. so all thign beign said thease are all my opinions. i dont meen to step on any ones toes just saying what i know.
umm you mean 15-25%... not 40%... and for thge reord the EE is 3.0GHz not 3.3... furthermore unless the multi is unlocked there is no reason to get the EE voer the standard as they should OC about the same...
where i read it was sayign 30-40 and they said 3.33 but i am goign to wait and see ill probly wait a month and see witch is worth it o BTW it has 4mb L2 as compaired to 2 L2 beign a programer i really apreciat the extra L2
per clock it's "only" 15-25%(give or take) more powerful depending upon the situation. Furthermore, cache doesn't matter enarly as much when you have a better system bus... IN FACT, having more cache can hinder performance, as cache latencies increase the higher you go. that's why the performance boost between the 5XX P4s and the 6XX p4s was debateable, in some cases, the extra cache latency made the 6XXs perform WORSE, and in netburst cache is far more vital than on non-netburst. going from 2mb shared cache to 4mb shared cache won't really net anything.
Um, No. I have an Pentium D and the spec sheet on it puts its high temp around 66 C, not exactly cool. Although the shuttle air cooling works relativly well and keeps mine around 48-52. Still not chilling any drinks on it.
to emphasise this again: AMD chips run MUCH cooler than netburst chips my overclocked opteron idles as low as 26C(and while gaming might go to 31-37ish 38-46ish with both cores full load using stock cooler[depending on ambient of course]), netburst overheats a ----load, k8 runs cool... only time AMD had heat issues was around the Palomino era and that's how many years ago... EDIT: from now on I beleive one should be required to either be presenting hard numerical data or a link to a review to support any claims...
