AMD's answer to Intel Core 2 Duo EE

2006-12-05 04:55:24

#1

<[onex]>Headstone: Member; +102|6700|New York

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/30/ … uad_cores/

You have got to be kidding me. I knew they had nothing to compete against them. Why release something that you cant even get the Mobo for? Just the ram alone would buy you a good C2D system LOL. AMD did come up with something that in the future is going to be pretty awesome, but what happens when you have 8 processors running in that thing? Imagine the power requirements and heat!!!!! This is a total defeat for AMD, and if there chip(due out today) doesnt come close to Intel, Id say AMD is pretty much sunk for quite awhile.

Sad really, i was counting on something i could actually buy and run. I love my FX-55 and would love another AMD rig when i upgrade after Feb. But from what im seeing and reading, Its going to be probably a E6300 with 9X multi, thus giving me a 100% overclock on air with very manageable heat.

Thoughts?

Last edited by <[onex]>Headstone (2006-12-05 04:55:49)

2006-12-05 05:03:05

#2

Greenboi: Member; +14|6365

There is a mobo for it, http://www.firingsquad.com/media/hirez. … ges/04.png

Good choice on the intel c2d, im in the same situation, upgrading from my trust amd64, and gonna get a E6600, looks like AMD have met defeat...for now. benchmarks show that their fastest is still slower than intells E6/700 cores.

Ah well, i know who im moving on to

2006-12-05 05:03:17

#3

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6565|NYC / Hamburg

that was bound to happen, more cores only have a smallish impact currently (most software is still single treaded) and you have the added latency with multiple sockets. now when amd goes 65 nm and produces faster quad core chips, 2 of those in a quadfather mobo will rock. but until then i guess its only something for true AMD fanboys

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2006-12-05 05:08:11

#4

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6714

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/30/brute_force_quad_cores/

You have got to be kidding me. I knew they had nothing to compete against them. Why release something that you cant even get the Mobo for? Just the ram alone would buy you a good C2D system LOL. AMD did come up with something that in the future is going to be pretty awesome, but what happens when you have 8 processors running in that thing? Imagine the power requirements and heat!!!!! This is a total defeat for AMD, and if there chip(due out today) doesnt come close to Intel, Id say AMD is pretty much sunk for quite awhile.

Sad really, i was counting on something i could actually buy and run. I love my FX-55 and would love another AMD rig when i upgrade after Feb. But from what im seeing and reading, Its going to be probably a E6300 with 9X multi, thus giving me a 100% overclock on air with very manageable heat.

Thoughts?

E6300 has a multi of X7 only.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2006-12-05 09:27:26

#5

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6599|132 and Bush

From my post "Sit down Quadfather you got smoked"..lol

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=55173

It's not looking much better for AMD
Intel Kentsfield trounces AMD Quad FX

In raw performance and performance per Watt

By Theo Valich: Thursday 30 November 2006, 00:16
THE LAUNCH OF THE QUAD FX is imminent, and the first benchmarks are starting to appear on-line. Our Japanese colleagues at PC Watch managed to score a world exclusive and file the very first review of the Quad FX, in its fastest iteration, the FX-74.

First of all, older versions of CPU-Z recognise this product as "Opteron 8130 EE", which means this product is recognised as Opteron for Socket AM2, but placed on Socket 1207.

The testing was conducted on ASUS L1N64-SLI WS (workstation) motherboard, not on the Deluxe product that Nvidia advertised at first. CPUs were clocked at 3.02GHz, while Corsair Dominator memory worked at 754MHz, due to divider issues.

Test scores reveal that Quad FX manages to achieve equal performance to Core 2 Extreme QX6700 in SiSoft Sandra 2007 and PCMark05 and narrowly edged it in memory tests: both L1, L2 and system memory latency are better on QuadFX than on Kentsfield, but that's nothing new.

However, taking a look into media encoding shows that QuadFather just gets crushed by Kentsfield, especially in MPEG-2 8Mbit reproduction. But the worst result for AMD is a look into power consumption and performance per watt. AMD system consumes far more power than Intel, sometimes even double that Kentsfield setup.

In the end, price is the real winner here. You can buy AMDs "quad-core" package for 599 dollars (FX-70, 2.6GHz part), and two FX-74 CPUs will set you back by 1000 dollars or euros. Even if you don't like to shell out hefty sums of money for the CPUs, no one can oppose the fact that you can now buy quad-core parts at same price of dual cores from yesterday. µ

More about the QuadFX and how it faired against native, dual-die single-packaged Core 2 processor can be found here. µ
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36050

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 10:53:44

#6

p3lvicthrust: Banned; +16|6400

I disagree

2006-12-05 11:16:36

#7

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6547|UK

I am not sure who said it but whomever it was hit the nail on the head!

Intel is like the lambourghini and AMD is like a dump truck.

Obviously the lambo (Intel) is faster, but hitch up a huge load on the back and hulkin brute of a truck (AMD) and it will for sure over take the bright yellow super car spinning it's wheel's strugling to put down that power.

Or atleast he said something along those lines ^^^^

Martyn

2006-12-05 11:18:37

#8

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6599|132 and Bush

Bell wrote:
I am not sure who said it but whomever it was hit the nail on the head!

Intel is like the lambourghini and AMD is like a dump truck.

Obviously the lambo (Intel) is faster, but hitch up a huge load on the back and hulkin brute of a truck (AMD) and it will for sure over take the bright yellow super car spinning it's wheel's strugling to put down that power.

Or atleast he said something along those lines ^^^^

Martyn

Maybe if the c2d's where waaaaaaayy more efficient. Not exactly a characteristic of a Lamborghini.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 11:26:03

#9

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6547|UK

Actually I feel it is very fitting analogy to use.

Obviously that example is perhaps an over simplification of the matter, there all many other factors to consider, however in the intrest's of time and level of difficulty to understand, such an example was a good metaphor.

Martyn

2006-12-05 11:31:25

#10

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6599|132 and Bush

Bell wrote:
Actually I feel it is very fitting analogy to use.

Obviously that example is perhaps an over simplification of the matter, there all many other factors to consider, however in the intrest's of time and level of difficulty to understand, such an example was a good metaphor.

Martyn

Well, this is going to get funny.
I lambo(c2d) does this by using less power, which equates to less strain, which equates to less stress on itself increasing it's shelf life. This is why AMD is going to be 65nm soon, they have seen the light and are parking the dump truck(AMD) in the garage. Watch and see my friend.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-12-05 11:31:52)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 11:32:25

#11

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6770|PNW

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/30/brute_force_quad_cores/

You have got to be kidding me. I knew they had nothing to compete against them. Why release something that you cant even get the Mobo for?

That's not really AMD's official answer. It's been in the works for awhile. But seeing as they're still going to pussyfoot around this coming year (unless they have some secret Big Kahuna planned), I'm seeing myself in blue.

But to their credit, these processors are cheaper in pairs than a Kentsfield, though the latter still kicks their collective asses.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-12-05 11:33:18)

2006-12-05 11:53:50

#12

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6547|UK

Kmarion wrote:
Bell wrote:
Actually I feel it is very fitting analogy to use.

Obviously that example is perhaps an over simplification of the matter, there all many other factors to consider, however in the intrest's of time and level of difficulty to understand, such an example was a good metaphor.

Martyn
Well, this is going to get funny.
I lambo(c2d) does this by using less power, which equates to less strain, which equates to less stress on itself increasing it's shelf life. This is why AMD is going to be 65nm soon, they have seen the light and are parking the dump truck(AMD) in the garage. Watch and see my friend.

When are they going 65nm? Roughly anyway

Regardless, from what I see the dump truck has the better 'towing capacity'. Or multi-tasking when heavly laiden with processes.

Though I can easily see the justification in the argument C2D is the superior chip overall atleast.

Martyn

2006-12-05 12:33:22

#13

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6599|132 and Bush

Bell wrote:
When are they going 65nm? Roughly anyway

Martyn

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=418

http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20061004PR211.html
"Although AMD appears to be lagging behind its rival on 65nm deployment, the company is fully gearing up for 65nm production and Chartered should play a critical role in supporting AMD's goal to have 90% of its CPU lineup advance to 65nm production in 2007."

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-12-05 12:34:49)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 12:55:03

#14

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6547|UK

Kmarion wrote:
Bell wrote:
When are they going 65nm? Roughly anyway

Martyn
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=418

http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20061004PR211.html
"Although AMD appears to be lagging behind its rival on 65nm deployment, the company is fully gearing up for 65nm production and Chartered should play a critical role in supporting AMD's goal to have 90% of its CPU lineup advance to 65nm production in 2007."

Thankin you for the time to find that for me.

Martyn

2006-12-05 13:00:16

#15

DeCon_1: Member; +16|6518|Atlanta, Georga U.S.A.

Even though AMD will have a 65nm processor in 2007, by the time AMD's 65nm processors comes out Intel will have their 45nm processors ready to trounce it as well.

2006-12-05 13:08:27

#16

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6599|132 and Bush

DeCon_1 wrote:
Even though AMD will have a 65nm processor in 2007, by the time AMD's 65nm processors comes out Intel will have their 45nm processors ready to trounce it as well.

SHH!! secret stuff man..

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 15:12:06

#17

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6599|132 and Bush

Bell wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Bell wrote:
When are they going 65nm? Roughly anyway

Martyn
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=418

http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20061004PR211.html
"Although AMD appears to be lagging behind its rival on 65nm deployment, the company is fully gearing up for 65nm production and Chartered should play a critical role in supporting AMD's goal to have 90% of its CPU lineup advance to 65nm production in 2007."
Thankin you for the time to find that for me.

Martyn

Actually I just saw the official announcement came out today.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/Virt … 09,00.html

This is awesome news.. tighter competition means lower prices and superior chips to the consumer.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-12-05 15:14:00)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 15:16:46

#18

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6412|Finland

i got 3500+ but those C2Ds look so cool, literally overclocking monsters for me

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2006-12-05 16:18:33

#19

doc. josh: Member; +48|6543

Iam so getting one of them to go with my monster 8800GTX and i wont have to buy new memory hahah 4x 1gb sticks

2006-12-05 17:00:31

#20

Maj.Do: Member; +85|6750|good old CA

Kmarion wrote:
Bell wrote:
Kmarion wrote:

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=418

http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20061004PR211.html
"Although AMD appears to be lagging behind its rival on 65nm deployment, the company is fully gearing up for 65nm production and Chartered should play a critical role in supporting AMD's goal to have 90% of its CPU lineup advance to 65nm production in 2007."
Thankin you for the time to find that for me.

Martyn
Actually I just saw the official announcement came out today.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/Virt … 09,00.html

This is awesome news.. tighter competition means lower prices and superior chips to the consumer.

Great for the consumers. Also Kmarion i just ordered a 8800gtx.... couldnt wait for ati. Ill see which one is better then sell my 8800

2006-12-06 06:38:19

#21

<[onex]>Headstone: Member; +102|6700|New York

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/30/brute_force_quad_cores/

You have got to be kidding me. I knew they had nothing to compete against them. Why release something that you cant even get the Mobo for? Just the ram alone would buy you a good C2D system LOL. AMD did come up with something that in the future is going to be pretty awesome, but what happens when you have 8 processors running in that thing? Imagine the power requirements and heat!!!!! This is a total defeat for AMD, and if there chip(due out today) doesnt come close to Intel, Id say AMD is pretty much sunk for quite awhile.

Sad really, i was counting on something i could actually buy and run. I love my FX-55 and would love another AMD rig when i upgrade after Feb. But from what im seeing and reading, Its going to be probably a E6300 with 9X multi, thus giving me a 100% overclock on air with very manageable heat.

Thoughts?
E6300 has a multi of X7 only.

The one due out in January will allow the Multi to be changed to 9X that has been confirmed. Thats why people are lineing up to get this core when its released, me being one of them. Im from the school of Pay less and overclock to more expensive LOL.

2006-12-06 07:24:32

#22

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6412|Finland

doc. josh wrote:
Iam so getting one of them to go with my monster 8800GTX and i wont have to buy new memory hahah 4x 1gb sticks

That's so unfair I have to buy new cpu, mobo, cooler and ddr2 ram

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2006-12-06 20:39:06

#23

<[onex]>Headstone: Member; +102|6700|New York

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/30/brute_force_quad_cores/

You have got to be kidding me. I knew they had nothing to compete against them. Why release something that you cant even get the Mobo for?
That's not really AMD's official answer. It's been in the works for awhile. But seeing as they're still going to pussyfoot around this coming year (unless they have some secret Big Kahuna planned), I'm seeing myself in blue.

But to their credit, these processors are cheaper in pairs than a Kentsfield, though the latter still kicks their collective asses.

1000 watt PSU, 300 dollar Mobo, over 400watts in idle, and well over 600 load, plus you have to figure the heat output is off the charts. Couple that with the fact you need the crazy amount of ram and the kind you need, one of these would set you back alot more than an intel. Intel WILL be useing there quads in stacked system configs, thats there goal, and i think they will be doing so even before AMD gets there act together by 2008, and thats a big IF.

2006-12-07 00:08:12

#24

beerface702: Member; +65|6691|las vegas

AMD get it together!

once barcelonia is out it should get pretty tight in the cpu wars, hopefully intel one have 45nm by mid late next year

CROSSING fingures

2006-12-07 00:37:08

#25

Bernadictus: Moderator; +1,055|6735

AMD had the the chance to kill Intel with better processors, only Intel woke up, and produced their CD and C2D.
They pawned AMD because AMD did not innovate.

BF2S Forums AMD's answer to Intel Core 2 Duo EE

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Bell wrote:

Bell wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Bell wrote:

Bell wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Bell wrote:

DeCon_1 wrote:

Bell wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Bell wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Bell wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

doc. josh wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Board footer