AMD Dethrowned. Intel Steps up.

[Brookfield]

I have been asked to re-open this, I didn't close it, so I hope I'm not treading on someone's toes, if arguments continue though, I will close it again for good.

 

[alvino]

Whatever...I can tell this thread is going to hell anyways...

 

[Half Evil]

Well it will. Although I didnt think it should have been locked.. so eh.. I complained about it.

 

[JustinMcG67]

The Quad Cores aren't even true Quad Core processors. They are two dual core processors rubberbanded to each other.

Intel did the same thing with Dual Core. They do these things just to say, "We came out with it first". Their Quad Cores will have the same problems as their "Double" core processors

Define what a 'true' dual/quad core is. Because if you have multiple cores it doesn't matter how they communicate, just as long as they do communicate. Th Kentsfield will be a quad-core processor. It might even be worth purcahsing, who knows.

As for the Conroe. I hope it comes out soon so we can see how the Extreme Edition performs in the benchmarks.

 

[lhuser]

What both companies should do is to actually make secure speeds, have 3DNow and 3DNow Pro and well as multi-task. They should both be resistant, flexible and reliable. Mix Intel's reliability and AMD's gaming...total power man!

 

[JustinMcG67]

What both companies should do is to actually make secure speeds, have 3DNow and 3DNow Pro and well as multi-task. They should both be resistant, flexible and reliable. Mix Intel's reliability and AMD's gaming...total power man!

That's actually a really good idea. A processor that could combine all the pro's from each company, would br the best processor.

 

[r_moore04]

yeh, wot kind of spec would ya make it, eg, clock speed, L1/L2/L3 Cache, FSB and Bus Speed

 

[JustinMcG67]

Probably a 2GHz FSB, L2 cache of 3+ MB, and an L3 cache of maybe 256+. The clock speeds might actually be less then most people think. Or, maybe intel has blended it's high frequency with a higher clock rate, which if that's the case, this thing will be a beast.

 

[SSE5]

Intel would have no reason to rig the Conroe to make it look better - the architecture, and everything about the processor, is simply superior to that of the AMD64 - as is expected. Also, they know very well the consequences of "rigging" everything in their favour - since enthusiasts will be watching closely for benchmarks when the actual processor launches anyway, so the whole idea is just twisted because some are still in denial. Which is interesting in itself - since I see here that there are some old AMD fanatics that seem to have become... Reformed, I guess we'll say.

The thing is, Intel already has "combined" "AMD's" gaming with it's reliability. The main reason AMD64 did so well in gaming was it's shorter pipeline - where games are concerned, the longer the pipeline, the longer things take. Whereas the shorter AMD64 pipeline processed information far quicker - branch prediction could do nothing for Intel where gaming was concerned, but hyper-pipelining was designed with media in purpose, not gaming. Plus, with Conroe's widened pipeline (Thus, 4 instructions per cycle instead of 3) the Conroe does more than the AMD64, despite the longer pipeline. It's simply better in every way - minus the memory controller. Manufacturing in the bulk Intel does, it would cost them money when they can get similar performance increases in other ways, for less. It's a big corporation after all.

That said, the Conroe is the competition for AMD64 that we never saw. However, I've heard from sources inside Intel that they've already got a new successor core to Conroe through several stages of development. Needless to say - Intel isn't standing still anymore. We're just waiting on it's competition - so we can all get that competitive price war we've all been waiting for.

 

[alvino]

Very nicely said.