A64 X2 kills P4EE 840 (dual-core) in gaming

HyperYagami · May 9, 2005

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzY2

Even in the multimedia area (Divx encode for example) X2 is able to keep up with the EE 840, unlike the single core counterparts.

Pretty obvious what I'd buy next...

JudgeDredd · May 9, 2005

Ouch, $500 for the low-end...

Gonna have to start saving up.

Sentential · May 9, 2005

JudgeDredd said:
Ouch, $500 for the low-end...

Gonna have to start saving up.

Kinda a moot point how something peforms if you cant buy it. Last I heard any Ferrari slaughers my poor Toyota Corolla, but you dont see me driving one lol

r0frog · May 9, 2005

Hmm, good point there

But AMD are annoying me... Updating everything so fast >< I want drip feeding back... Then I didn't have to upgrade every day.

dropadrop · May 9, 2005

Sentential said:
Kinda a moot point how something peforms if you cant buy it. Last I heard any Ferrari slaughers my poor Toyota Corolla, but you dont see me driving one lol

As far as I'm aware, you can't buy either of them from the store just now...

OCS911 · May 9, 2005

E0 Stepping Venice and San Diego just came out and now Dual Core

I'm thinking of purchase AMD 3700+ San Diego but now I should think again. AMD and Intel are big ripped off by coming out new chips so fast, keep getting broke all the times

HyperYagami · May 9, 2005

Sentential said:
Kinda a moot point how something peforms if you cant buy it. Last I heard any Ferrari slaughers my poor Toyota Corolla, but you dont see me driving one lol

Well the point is Ferrari is a better car than Corolla right-way-up and up-side-down no matter which way you look at it. Whether you or I have one is completely moot.

AMD's dual-core offering is either about the same or better than Intel's, and this time is with the actual thing not just on paper. Hard for you to swallow isn't it.

Sentential · May 9, 2005

HyperYagami said:
Well the point is Ferrari is a better car than Corolla right-way-up and up-side-down no matter which way you look at it. Whether you or I have one is complete moot.

AMD's dual-core offering is either same or better than Intel's, and this time is with the actual thing. Hard for you to swallow isn't it.

LOL.... dude you just dont get it. You can build anything to beat another product if you set the price high enough. Had the X2 prices been more aggressive I would agree with you. However in this case they are ridiclous. It is clear they do not plan to sell very many.

Clearly AMD's pricing scheme is a pipe-dream, much in the way you view these results. Lets see something affordable compared to something affordable.

In summary, you wont buy one so quit drooling lol. One thing I never liked about the "my ____ is better than your _____" threads is the impracitability of it.

Unless you are physically going to buy one to show the world how Intel sucks at gaming against your shiney new X2; then there is no need for this kind of thread. Period, sorry

You cant buy an X2, neither can I. However for $350 I can buy a Smithfield. Therefor since $$$$$ is the ultimate determiner of who wins or loses, AMD loses again. Not because their technology is worse, but because they cant "see the forest for the trees". No one wants a CPU for $1200, no matter HOW good it is.

HyperYagami · May 9, 2005

Sentential said:
However for $350 I can buy a Smithfield. Therefor since $$$$$ is the ultimate determiner of who wins or loses, AMD loses again.

I do agree with you on that. I won't say AMD "loses" but the $500 pricing is indeed...ouch.

speed bump · May 9, 2005

Unless you are physically going to buy one to show the world how Intel sucks there is no need for this kind of thread. Period, sorry

I would think about sen except the thought of having a CPU that hits 45°c under a prommy at 4.6ghz scares me and an x2 4000 is supposedly going to be less than $1000 while an 840EE is $1200. Thus if I didn't have college to pay for I would more than likely look hard at an x2 CPU.

You cant buy an X2, neither can I. However for $350 I can buy a Smithfield. Therefor since $$$$$ is the ultimate determiner of who wins or loses, AMD loses again. Not because their technology is worse, but because they cant "see the forest for the trees". No one wants a CPU for $1200, no matter HOW good it is.

I do!!!!!!! and then I wan't void its warranty with another $1500 in cascade to cool it

zip22 · May 9, 2005

my favorite quote of the review:

If achieving encoding digital video and playing a 3D shooter simultaneously cannot be described as a desktop computation “holy grail,” I don’t know what can be.

gotta love the dual core hype.

Sentential · May 9, 2005

HyperYagami said:
I do agree with you on that. I won't say AMD "loses" but the $500 pricing is indeed...ouch.

Well I can actually lol. Will you buy an X2 at $500? Didnt think so

Therefor AMD loses. Why? Because Ill buy Presler/Smithfield in a heartbeat @ $250-350

Sentential · May 9, 2005

speed bump said:
I would think about sen except the thought of having a CPU that hits 45°c under a prommy at 4.6ghz scares me and an x2 4000 is supposedly going to be less than $1000 while an 840EE is $1200. Thus if I didn't have college to pay for I would more than likely look hard at an x2 CPU.

In your case, I agree wholly. If you are going to buy it, then go right ahead and praise it. Why? Because you have the balls to pay for the advantage.

Basically my feelings to consumer products can be summed as follows:

Buy it or stfu

Robert · May 9, 2005

AMD X2 or some nice graphic card, that is the big question. they both will be very expensive. I'm starting saving some money for it, I'm only hoping.

Intel DualCore at 3.2Ghz is already almost max power of motherboard can handle ~130W. AMD at 2.2Ghz is already like 3500+ at lower power with better chance for OC to 2.6-2.8Ghz on good air cooling.

AMD X2 have HT to help proformance in games plus a DualCore like Pentium D. AMD X2 should win just about almost all benchmarks in both applications and games.

HyperYagami · May 9, 2005

Sentential said:
Will you buy an X2 at $500? Didnt think so

How do you know I won't? I paid $400 for my 1st Sony dual format 4x DVD-burner!

Sentential said:
Therefor AMD loses.

Prediction based on the initial pricing is premature at best. There's no way AMD will/can hold on to that pricing for long.

OC Detective · May 9, 2005

Ferrari v Corolla comparsion doesnt cut it! They are both top end cpus (and prices accordingly) so surely the comparsion would be say Ferrari v Lamborghini!
Bottom line is the best AMD has to offer beats out the best Intel has to offer in the dual core desktop segment - get used to it.

OCS911 · May 9, 2005

AMD Dual Core for $1000 and Intel Dual Core for $1200 :drool:

don't forget that you need another couple hundreds to spare on watercooling or phase change, I don't think aircooling can handle that much of heat

Sentential · May 9, 2005

OC Detective said:
Ferrari v Corolla comparsion doesnt cut it! They are both top end cpus (and prices accordingly) so surely the comparsion would be say Ferrari v Lamborghini!
Bottom line is the best AMD has to offer beats out the best Intel has to offer in the dual core desktop segment - get used to it.

Im not compareing the EE to the 4400 X2. I am comparing the lowest grade of each. That is what matters more than these vaporware CPUs that dominate the top end.

OC Detective said:
Bottom line is the best AMD has to offer beats out the best Intel has to offer in the dual core desktop segment - get used to it.

I know you are better than that. While AMD has better peformance, no doubt, they wont win this war unless they bring prices down...which clearly they wont. Peformance doesnt mean a thing when you cant afford it.

Yeild issues still plague the hammer core. Unless they get their yeilds up they cannot reasonably make an effort to reduce the price. The X2s are prices that way as to prevent people from buying them. Why? Because they cant make them

OC Detective · May 9, 2005

Dunno where you get the yield nonsense from but just think that Intel has 3 wafer fab sites on 300mm and AMD has 1 on 200mm The increase in wafer size means they can produce twice as many wafers on 90nm as AMD from this factor alone. The clean room space for AMD is 150 ksq ft v 470 ksq. ft for Intels 3 fabs (roughly 3 times more) - so that mean a factor of 6x manufacturing capacity for Intel. As the ratio between Intel and AMD in cpu production is roughly 5:1 that would mean if AMD had yield problems then so does Intel - so please kill off that particular urban myth.
Perhaps they are priced as such so as to ensure dual core Opterons sales are not adversely impacted - ever thought about that?
Also moving 1 - way dual core Opterons to the more popular socket 939 as is rumoured is hardly indicative of a company with yield issues!

OC Detective · May 9, 2005

OCS911 said:
AMD Dual Core for $1000 and Intel Dual Core for $1200 don't forget that you need another couple hundreds to spare on watercooling or phase change, I don't think aircooling can handle that much of heat

Er not as much as an issue as you would think.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=2

A64 X2 kills P4EE 840 (dual-core) in gaming

Registered

Member

Contributing Member

Member

Member

Member

Registered

Contributing Member

Registered

Member

Member

Contributing Member

Contributing Member

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Contributing Member

Member

Member

Similar threads