Fuse-WireBOUT TIME ANAW im a huge ATI fan. always have been since my first 9600. man, i miss that card. awell stuck with a 9550 in the mean time, NEED MONEYS

mod it to 9600 boi

Solaris17mod it to 9600 boi

well my 9550 has double the memory of my old 9600 (128mb) running stock it almost the same, but spud107 oc'd it before i bought his old rig off him and it runs much faster, my 9600 never got oc'd because i neglected the cooling, or at least thats what he said i think, he knew more about my old rig than i did

Anyone remember that rumor of a Phenom 30,000+ 3dmark06 score? Just wait! Anyways, that Intel processor rocks!:rockout: How cool is 4ghz+ on air!?!!!

man I want it now!!!!

All I can say is wow. No one can deny Intel definitely has something here, as with the original Core 2 series. All we AMD fans cab do it wait and see if those old rumors are true...I really hope they are lol

Well if AMD's server chips are anything like their desktop chips i'm going to say amd wont be breaking 30K 3dmark06 anytime soon :P

Jebus....that's a really, really fast system. What's the best clock speed out there? Wasn't it like a pr at like 6 some ghz? Or maybe only 5 some.

I think people are forgetting why it scores so well. 12 megs of cache and only one thread. What do you think the result will be. Intel knows they cannot compete with AMD on an architectural level, therefore, using all the money they wrongfully acquired (see anti-trust suit) to make cache to cover the performance disparity it would have without it. Genius, no. Smart move, yes. Don't give them too much credit.

Am I an AMD fanboy? Sure. Did I say anything inaccurate? Hardly.

just my .002 :P

TheGuruStudI think people are forgetting why it scores so well. 12 megs of cache and only one thread. What do you think the result will be. Intel knows they cannot compete with AMD on an architectural level, therefore, using all the money they wrongfully acquired (see anti-trust suit) to make cache to cover the performance disparity it would have without it. Genius, no. Smart move, yes. Don't give them too much credit.

Am I an AMD fanboy? Sure. Did I say anything inaccurate? Hardly.

just my .002 :P

It's 12 mb of cache compared to 8 mb on current ones because of 45 nm...they have more silicon they can use, so why not use it? And part of the way large cache is because of the dated FSB system....otherwise I would think Intel wouldn't use that much cache, alot still, sure but not that much.

kwchang007It's 12 mb of cache compared to 8 mb on current ones because of 45 nm...they have more silicon they can use, so why not use it? And part of the way large cache is because of the dated FSB system....otherwise I would think Intel wouldn't use that much cache, alot still, sure but not that much.

That was my point with the FSB (and lack of IMC). AMD can't afford the FABs and tons of engineers to move to smaller processes as quickly. I guess I'm just saying it's all related.
Turn the tables and I believe intel would be down for the count, since they've lost what innovation they once had (which was many yrs ago).

TheGuruStudThat was my point with the FSB (and lack of IMC). AMD can't afford the FABs and tons of engineers to move to smaller processes as quickly. I guess I'm just saying it's all related.
Turn the tables and I believe intel would be down for the count, since they've lost what innovation they once had (which was many yrs ago).

i agree.

Effective Marketing

We, clearly, can expect vastly improved performance, thanks to an overall IPC improvement, cache increase, new / improved SSE instructions, and a 45nm process which yields lessened power requirements and consequent reduced thermal output.

I, however, take this noteworthy 4140 MHz (on air) achievement, with a grain of salt… as I usually do with other Intel benchmarks involving engineering samples.

The latest of these (ES models) caused a great stir, and to Intel’s credit, helped to stimulate the market (and their market share) via their robust marketing engine, which includes handing out the best-performing engineering samples for review (amongst countless other avenues).

I speak of the recent Q6600 and E6850 (G0 stepping), which echoed in forums near and far with 3.6 GHz and 4.0 GHz claims, respectively, on air and with little to no voltage increase (again, we speak of engineering samples).

While there are some exceptions, there are very few who have an absolutely stable Q6600 above 3.2 GHz or E6850 above 3.7 GHz on air (without having to increase voltage significantly or contend with upper-threshold temperatures).

While 3.8 GHz is a more reasonable and realistic air-cooled maximum for the QX9650 (concerning 99% of the populace, who will not be endowed with an engineering sample), it is still quite a remarkable feat of engineering and a reflection of Intel’s absolute strength (and current dominance) in the market.

OK ok check this guys....i bought this magazine called cpu (computer power user) and theirs this article about benchmarks and listen to one of the quotes this guy rahul sood gave out.....and i quote

So, AMD decided to unveil Phenom running at 3ghz without showing actual benchmarks. what is showed was a game running smoothley with all details enabled, which makes perfect sense to me. And for the record, if you were to benchmark Phenom at 3ghz, you would see that it kicks the living crap out of any current AMD or intel processor-it is a stone cold killer. I'm guessing that AMD will be able to launch some parts at higher clocks than it is currently showing in its roadmaps.

not sure where he is getting his info but i actually kina doubt it and im an amd fan boi...not for clocks the fact they dont usually make it past 3.2 doesnt bother me..its the challenge of getting an amd past 3 or to it that lites my fire but if this guys info is even semi correct could be intresting.

Nice to see a fresh opinion on Intel and AMD.


I love that all oc records have ATI cards in them though <G>

Damm....:banghead: i want to get the new Core 2 Quad.... Hope my Abit FP-IN9 Fatal1ty 650i support the cpu.....:rockout:

Fuse-Wirethese different variants do my head in!! i just want to know will it fit in a p35 if i got one??

yep p35 is intel 45nm ready.. and they do well with quads.. Im trying to find me a q6600 g0 stepping locally.. they can hit 3.6 on air which is not to bad.. though Im sure it will run warmer @ 3.6 than this one did at 4.1 (I think so anyway, might be wrong there is alot of cache on these 45nm chips= more heat if I remember right).

Solaris17OK ok check this guys....i bought this magazine called cpu (computer power user) and theirs this article about benchmarks and listen to one of the quotes this guy rahul sood gave out.....and i quote

So, AMD decided to unveil Phenom running at 3ghz without showing actual benchmarks. what is showed was a game running smoothley with all details enabled, which makes perfect sense to me. And for the record, if you were to benchmark Phenom at 3ghz, you would see that it kicks the living crap out of any current AMD or intel processor-it is a stone cold killer. I'm guessing that AMD will be able to launch some parts at higher clocks than it is currently showing in its roadmaps.

not sure where he is getting his info but i actually kina doubt it and im an amd fan boi...not for clocks the fact they dont usually make it past 3.2 doesnt bother me..its the challenge of getting an amd past 3 or to it that lites my fire but if this guys info is even semi correct could be intresting.

Funny thing about what he's saying is that to run a game maxed out details is going to push the graphics way harder than the cpu. To really test the cpu in a game....drop everything to as low as possible to try and get rid of any bottleneck in the gfx. Then bench that way. Granted turning on things will slow the cpu down, but I'm pretty confident in saying a A x2 6000+ will run games maxed out a playable frame rates...just depends on the graphics.

well i agree about what you say. but imo it matters more on older games. in like the newer games were it stresses physics and is codded for the newer cpu's i think things like shadows etc are more graphics based but i think with the new generation of harware and games its getting balanced again.

service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2856930

anyone else notice that kingpin has a higher cpu score with a 5.25GHZ q6850?

kinda funny. lol

yogurt_21service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2856930

anyone else notice that kingpin has a higher cpu score with a 5.25GHZ q6850?

kinda funny. lol

it is at 5.25ghz though...

Solaris17OK ok check this guys....i bought this magazine called cpu (computer power user) and theirs this article about benchmarks and listen to one of the quotes this guy rahul sood gave out.....and i quote

not sure where he is getting his info but i actually kina doubt it and im an amd fan boi...not for clocks the fact they dont usually make it past 3.2 doesnt bother me..its the challenge of getting an amd past 3 or to it that lites my fire but if this guys info is even semi correct could be intresting.

That is a great magazine! A lot of seasoned vets write for it. If Rahul says that Phenom kicks ass.... I deffinitely believe him!:D

erockerThat is a great magazine! A lot of seasoned vets write for it. If Rahul says that Phenom kicks ass.... I deffinitely believe him!:D

actually the whole article was about how benchies mean diff things to diff ppl. and how synth benchies werent everything in games as he said if you have a good system 600pts in 06 isnt going to make the game unplayable its true it was actually quite a compelling article.