trog100dont by fooled by the 2006 cpu score.. its a single core x 3.. your dual is a single core x 2.. being as most things stiil just use one of the cores its the single core score that really tells u how fast the things are..

sandra does pretty much the same thing.. pretends a quad core is 4 x as fast as a single.. which of course is utter rubbish in a world which is mostly single thread still..

trog

Trog before you stuff your foot in your mouth, go run 2006 and check cpu useage during the two tests.

Open mouth, insert foot.

MusselsThe FX chips cost a ton here in aus, so it will be different overseas. The sup com issue is odd, but may just be related to the expansion - everything runs great on the two intel systems, but slow as poop on the AMD system with the 8600GT.

Price wise, the FX-62 retails for $1100 in aus, while my quad core goes for $350.

However the phenom just hit the market here, around $350 for the quad 9500 model. This puts aside my price concerns, however i do think the performance will be lacking compared to intel... so these tri-cores better have a good price advantage when they hit.

Don't buy from yr country then if it's too expensive, get us other tech heads to sort out a deal with you to save you cash! I got my FX from the states as I did the 2 2GB ram kits I use and the 6100 AM2 from Sovereign :rockout:

rhythmeisterDon't buy from yr country then if it's too expensive, get us other tech heads to sort out a deal with you to save you cash! I got my FX from the states as I did the 2 2GB ram kits I use and the 6100 AM2 from Sovereign :rockout:

yeah i did, got the FX off this forum :D m original point was merely about pricing, since they were so expensive here... but then the quad cores came out at a respectable price, so it doesnt really matter now.

i know some of you guys are doubting AMD for what they are releasing, but i say its far better than what they released, because AMD was sitting high and dry for a year- a year and a half, CPU Pricing for the A64 was out of my range, well now the 5000 BE is in my range and i intend on grabbing that along with a Asus/DFI 790FX motherboard, ATi Radeon 3850 (First party) 512, and a HT Omega Sound Card.

Yeah I think AMD can still compete, but it's going to have to be a price war, if they can get those X3's in range of the Core 2 Duos they can do some damage.

Oh yeah, and HT Omega sound cards rule, I have an HT OMEGA Claro+

OrbitzXTI can't understand why people are pleased with these results. Intel's aging quad core beats all of AMD's new chips fairly easily at stock, and I have to believe the new 45nm chips will absolutely destroy them in benchmarks. Were also not mentioning how easily Intel's chips can OC, gaining more performance for price while staying cool. The Phenom 9500 on NewEgg is almost the same price as the Q6600, it's bugged or so I hear, and gets outperformed. The only thing ATI & AMD got right in my book in the last year or so is the 3800 series.

Hey the Intel is clocked higher & has masive cache "Q6600, 65 nm, 8MB L2, 2.40 GHz" That is the only reason it wins the benches. disable cache on each processor and see what happens, I think you might be supprised and clock them both the same. AMD cpu's have always been overclockable. Then you might have something to talk about. :)

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2.2ghz (Clocked at 2.53ghz stock cooler *31 degees*) 4gb PC6400 DDR2800, MSI K9A2 790X MB, ATI X1800XT (60FPS in WoW all day long) adding second Crossfire X1800 this week. I know graphic cards are aging but they work great.

OdenHey the Intel is clocked higher & has masive cache "Q6600, 65 nm, 8MB L2, 2.40 GHz" That is the only reason it wins the benches. disable cache on each processor and see what happens, I think you might be supprised and clock them both the same. AMD cpu's have always been overclockable. Then you might have something to talk about. :)

so let me get this str8 ... "i" have an advantage and "i" must remove it so "you" can feel better about "yourself"?

[I.R.A]_FBiso let me get this str8 ... "i" have an advantage and "i" must remove it so "you" can feel better about "yourself"?

That is not what I said. I said basically if you want to compare processor power you should disable the cache and clock them the same. Then you can see which is the more powerful core. It is a Apples to Apples test, not a Apple to watermellon test that I am sugesting. I apoliguise if it came across that I thought you should remove your advantage. I just ment it is hard to compare things that are so different with out trying to level the field. I mean Phenom is giving up 6mb cache and some speed and I think it would be much closer should the playing field (i.e. cache and speed) be matched.

OdenThat is not what I said. I said basically if you want to compare processor power you should disable the cache and clock them the same. Then you can see which is the more powerful core. It is a Apples to Apples test, not a Apple to watermellon test that I am sugesting. I apoliguise if it came across that I thought you should remove your advantage. I just ment it is hard to compare things that are so different with out trying to level the field. I mean Phenom is giving up 6mb cache and some speed and I think it would be much closer should the playing field (i.e. cache and speed) be matched.

but thats not how i get it out of the box ... i understand if u said overclock, but intentionally cripple ... naw brah

[I.R.A]_FBibut thats not how i get it out of the box ... i understand if u said overclock, but intentionally cripple ... naw brah

I was saying cripple them both the same not cripple Intel and leave tha Phenom alone.

OdenHey the Intel is clocked higher & has masive cache "Q6600, 65 nm, 8MB L2, 2.40 GHz" That is the only reason it wins the benches. disable cache on each processor and see what happens, I think you might be supprised and clock them both the same. AMD cpu's have always been overclockable. Then you might have something to talk about. :)

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2.2ghz (Clocked at 2.53ghz stock cooler *31 degees*) 4gb PC6400 DDR2800, MSI K9A2 790X MB, ATI X1800XT (60FPS in WoW all day long) adding second Crossfire X1800 this week. I know graphic cards are aging but they work great.

so intels clockspeed advantage doesnt count? yes it does, because AMD *cannot* OC any higher. their chips are bumming out around 3GHz on air, vs 3.6GHz on the intels - intel already has a performance per MHz lead, so that just means AMD cant compete.

Disable cache... lol, now you're reaching for it. disable the cache and who gives a shit, everything will run slow. We arent here to find out how to make the AMD faster, we're here to find and use the fastest for our own uses.

AMD's cpu's have always been overclockable... oh sure. its just that intel clocks higher now. core2 series kinda owns phenom in that respect. oh and nevermind that the 45nm intels have more cache and OC even higher, so things are looking kinda bad for phenom...

Over Clocking is on a per processor basis, and you might get a Intel up to 3.0+GHz but the same version of that processor might fry at 2.9GHz it is not consistant on all chips. I have seen AMD's Clocked over 3.0+ghz on air and not fry. It is a gamble if you get that one chip that overclocks perfect or not, and we all know not all of the processor Intel or AMD ship are perfect for overclocking.

What I am trying to say is that you seam to be hating on a more bang for the buck crowd. You tell me what requires the CPU power we have and can tax any of the processors with the right amount of ram and a good video card. I can build a AMD Based system for less then a comparible Intel System.

OdenOver Clocking is on a per processor basis, and you might get a Intel up to 3.0+GHz but the same version of that processor might fry at 2.9GHz it is not consistant on all chips. I have seen AMD's Clocked over 3.0+ghz on air and not fry. It is a gamble if you get that one chip that overclocks perfect or not, and we all know not all of the processor Intel or AMD ship are perfect for overclocking.

What I am trying to say is that you seam to be hating on a more bang for the buck crowd. You tell me what requires the CPU power we have and can tax any of the processors with the right amount of ram and a good video card. I can build a AMD Based system for less then a comparable Intel System.

Sorry buddy, but Core 2's tend to have an overclocking history far better than the phenoms. In fact, the only Phenoms I've seen at 3ghz were early engineering samples (kinda odd), and the new 9850s. The Athlon 64s get way better overclock percentages (especially in AM2+ motherboards like mine) than any K10 processor does, but they compare even worse clock for clock with Core 2 than the phenoms do.

Don't get me wrong, I am an AMD fan (just fan, not fanboy) and I plan to stick with AMD because I like their chipset platform of not making me purchase a new motherboard to run newer processors (like some Intel and Nvidia ones -exclude s939 to AM2 plz) and you're right that you can build a comparable AMD system to an intel system for the same price usually. The only downside is that provided you don't buy a prebuilt machine and have a decent motherboard, those same two PCs with similar performance becomes dissimilar as soon as you put the Core 2 one at the same speed as the Athlon 64 (start: Intel 2.4 and AMD 2.8-3.0; finish Intel 3.0 and AMD 3.0). Even worse is that Intels can usually get around 3.4ghz with air cooling typically and AMDs Athlons on Brisbane rarely pass 3.2ghz and the Windsors rarely pass 3.6ghz.

However, I am looking forward to seeing how the tri cores (8x50) overclock now that a troublesome core has been disabled (it is kinda ironic that there are two instances of "Core 2" giving AMD trouble).

OdenOver Clocking is on a per processor basis, and you might get a Intel up to 3.0+GHz but the same version of that processor might fry at 2.9GHz it is not consistant on all chips. I have seen AMD's Clocked over 3.0+ghz on air and not fry. It is a gamble if you get that one chip that overclocks perfect or not, and we all know not all of the processor Intel or AMD ship are perfect for overclocking.

What I am trying to say is that you seam to be hating on a more bang for the buck crowd. You tell me what requires the CPU power we have and can tax any of the processors with the right amount of ram and a good video card. I can build a AMD Based system for less then a comparible Intel System.

intel Q6600's are a safe bet, every last one will do 3GHz on stock volts on stock cooling.
Air clocks, i'm shocked if i see one that cant reach 3.6GHz with a decent cooler, and water can do 4GHz. AMD is the one with the guesswork here, intel have been quite reliable. I'm talking from experience, while you're going on general information with no specifics.

Some generations (conroe/kentsfield) OC great, others fail (allendale) but they're all reliable to reach around the same area. None of what you're saying is 'wrong' but it is inaccurate.

all of you guys are turning this into a flamewar, who cares whos e-penis is bigger, knock this crap off.

Somewhat off-topic question here... what the hell does "diffused" mean (on the IHS of that CPU)?

eidairaman1all of you guys are turning this into a flamewar, who cares whos e-penis is bigger, knock this crap off.

i dont think it has reached that far but aint no harm in nipping it in the bud.

Cant wait to go Spider when these come out...

they should be pretty good since B3 stepping will probably be in retail

eidairaman1all of you guys are turning this into a flamewar, who cares whos e-penis is bigger, knock this crap off.

i'd say it was at 'heated discussion' and not even at arguing yet :P

certainly was on the thin red line guys

I thought it was a good discussion. Not a argument at all.

OdenHey the Intel is clocked higher & has masive cache "Q6600, 65 nm, 8MB L2, 2.40 GHz" That is the only reason it wins the benches. disable cache on each processor and see what happens, I think you might be supprised and clock them both the same. AMD cpu's have always been overclockable. Then you might have something to talk about. :)

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2.2ghz (Clocked at 2.53ghz stock cooler *31 degees*) 4gb PC6400 DDR2800, MSI K9A2 790X MB, ATI X1800XT (60FPS in WoW all day long) adding second Crossfire X1800 this week. I know graphic cards are aging but they work great.

you do understand that C2Q hae a massive cache because they would take a massive performance hit if they had to send more and more data across the already clogged FSB to the ram so intel keeps jacking more cache on the chips to counteract this, however AMD uses HT and an onboard mem controller so it doesn't have to send data packets across the bus to talk to the ram it links directly thus AMD chips can have a much smaller cache and not suffer a performance hit

quite frankly who cares, the X3 should be priced around 100 dollars for the base models and top out around 160 for the top model. Making it a better buy than any dual core simply because of the shift to multi-threading.

candle_86quite frankly who cares, the X3 should be priced around 100 dollars for the base models and top out around 160 for the top model. Making it a better buy than any dual core simply because of the shift to multi-threading.

you can get some pretty amasing performance from an OC'd dual core for that price too. it really depends what apps you're running - a gamer on current games would be better with a 5000BE or an E6750 OC'd/