AMD - Intel Ready for Dual-Core Battle

interesting thing. I agree with AMD on the gaming issue anyways and probably wait another year before considering dual core...

Im glad you said that, because im considering upgrading before a year. Im thinking to upgrading to a 3000+ (64 bit) with a decent sli videocard like a 6600gt, is that worth it, considering im on a low budget.

yeah im gonna hold off too untill all the bugs are fixed up. then yahoo!

id love to get one except id have to wait for a few years proberly before i could afford one :(they should just stop bring greedy mother f**kers we know that whoever has the cheaper usually will get the customers. damn it that means intel for once :(

@CaTThe setup is worth it, but i'd put in a 3500+ or 3800+ - its not much more expensive.

AMD 4000+ by amd beats intels dual core in almost all tests in benchmarks. Like AMD claims, gameing has nothing to gain yet

not ideal for gamers? whose gonna buy this for $1000??

"Anonymousat 18:53 24/4/2005yeah im gonna hold off too untill all the bugs are fixed up. then yahoo!"What bugs?

Businesses that need high power servers.

A 64 3500+ is alot more expensive then a 64 3000+ where I live (Australia, QLD)64 3000+ is $21564 3500+ is $38464 3800+ is $535([url removed] just not sure if I should wait till the 3500 comes down to a reasonable price ($250) wich by the time I save up prob will have. Thanks for your input.

Read the intial reviews onAMD's dual-core Opteron at Techreport.com[url removed] dual-core Opteron processors are extremely well executed on all fronts, based on what we've seen. AMD's dual-core design has a technical elegance that Intel's can't match, and that design brings superior performance..."Intel, plain and simple. You are getting your ass kicked here.

CaT, I would get a 6800Gt instead of the 6600Gt. The 6800GT might cost more, however, one 6800GT will perform better then 2 6600GT's in SLI. And when prices drop for the 6800GT next year when you're going to buy your system, you can pick up another 6800gt....

i think ill upgrade fully to 64bit when theres sufficient driver support for it but a few words of wisdom AMD ALL THE WAY intel made tooooo many mistakes with the p4 and it looks like they havent learned a thing over the last year or so

I wish AMD would get onto DDR2 already. Im sure these Dual Cores can go up to 600 to 800mhz memory wise.I hope DDR2 for AMD stays on 939 like dual cores will be.

i have a amd 64 3000+ and a geforce 6600 without gt. doom 3 and farcry are both running at high fps. if you are low on budget and want a computer buy the same, its more than enough and cheap.

geforce 6600 gt and geforce 6600 haev the same chip, you can overclock a 6600 to 6600gt and have about the same performance. the memory of the 6600gt is a bit faster but its no big deal when it comes to performace

Stick with amd 3200xp+++ and a nice video card 6800GT or x850 with 512mb of video ram and pc3200 3gigs of ram or even 2gigs and ull be kickn some ass on games with the fps u get

Great, while im at it I may aswell upgrade to a 64 4000+ with 3gigs of ram and 2 6800Ultras, SLI.(not forgetting the 21inch LCD with 8ms responce)

I dont think there will be as large a wait till we see some game engines being created for these multicore cpu's as we might believe. Despite the difficultly involved.

The 6600gt is a waste of money quite frankly. Spend the extra cash and get the 6800GT or even better, the XL800 which cost $100 less then the 6800GT and runs faster in most DX games minus DOOM3.

i got a P4 hyperthreaing chip, and i find overall its much better, although i'll admit if i only wanted a computer for gaming i would get the amd, i hope this dual core thing takes off, i find windows is much more responsive with hte hyper threading, and a dual core should improve on that i would of thought, but i like to see that nearly everyone who will post in the comments in this place is always biased for or against, people who open minded views never seem to post...or exisist anymore..

Anonymousat 7:2 26/4/2005 you should see the intial results of dual Operton vs. Intels Dual chips in all applications. Intel needs to come up with something quick. P4 hyperthreading is not enough to keep them in this race. Especially in 64bit applications. Intel is behind the curve. They need to spend less money on advertising about how the P4 is so great on performance(compared to itself) and more on actual real world results against AMD! The tests even with single cpu's have AMD winning most of them except a few. And those tests are only lost by a few seconds or frame rates at best. Don't fall for Intels propaganda. They have billions to b.s. people, however, real world results tell the whole truth. And that truth shows Intel is behind.

THE THING THAT YOU LOOK AT IN BUYING AMD 64 IS THE REV MODEL AS THE NEW E VERSON HAS SSE3, .09 CORE AND USES LOT LESS POWER (3000+(1.8GHZ) =47W) SO OVERCLOCK HEAT HEADROOM IS GREATER. FOR COOLING COOLMASTERS HYPER 48 IS GREAT AND IS 18 DS YOU SHOULD CHECK IT OUT UMART HAS IT THATS WHERE I GOT MY ONEAS FOR INTELS AT 3.2 IT PRODUCES 115W THAT ALOT OF HEAT IT DOESNT GIVE YOU HEADROOM WITH AIRCOOLING

Why the hell would gamers or average users buy a Intel chipset?????????

some people thinks, that if they have more GHZ they have a better processor :D

So true Anonymous at 10:37 27/4/2005.Just look at the results since AMD released the Athlon chips years ago. GHZ meant sqaut as those chips continually beat Intels best offerings...

Intel offers a more stable product, where as every AMD I've ever owned sucked ass!

sry but, ive had an AMD for the past...4 years maybe...and its never once crashed. Noe has my brother's, mom's, all my friend's etc. Sry to say, Intel's aren't any more stable than an AMD ;)

cant belive this row is still going on ! wtf do u need more cpu power for ????? i got a p4 3.4EE with a gf5600, my brother has a xp2800 with a 6800 , his is better for games !!!! get a grip FFS u dont need anything faster than a 2 gig cpu !!! dont belive the hype

and for those of u that go out and get a new cpu every 6 monthsHahahahhhahahhaaahahahaahahahahhau been had !I got my p4 extreme for £240 off ebay, i wouldnt have upgraded but i blew my board. it doent do anything any faster or slower than any other cpu i have used, and as for benchmarks.....get real they are not real world and dont let bullshit websites tell u otherwizei read the other day that a fx55 was 29% faster at unzipping a 100mb file! wow 1.22 seconds, well worth the £500+ price u think !

"i read the other day that a fx55 was 29% faster at unzipping a 100mb file! wow 1.22 seconds, well worth the £500+ price u think !"Yup 29% for files. You should see the results for gaming. And this is where it really counts. At least for us at this forum. The results are alot higher. Across the board. If you have the cash, and you're a gamer. Buying a Intel chip is pointless.And the most expensive P4 extreme chip costs more then the most expensive AMD chip. No brainer for me.

Lets not forget either that AMD seem to be having no problems getting thier FX series chips out when scheduled either. 53, and 55 came out not probs on time and I bet the 57 is sitting waiting in some warehouse somewhere. Least can be said about intel. Where are the 4GHZ chips!!?

The 4GHz chips from Intel were cancelled sometime back due to heat issues and performance issues. Even with 4Ghz they were no match to AMD's offerings. So they canned it. Something like the NV30.....

Forget about Intel VS AMD fighting for the crown with the Extreme Edition vs the FX55. I agree I have seen a lot of benchmarks but since I can’t afford any of them and the performance you may get from a 2 CPU solution could be better for Digital Content Creation of multimedia programs I am more in the side of the Opterons. I have right now an Opteron 242 = 1.6 GHz it runs just perfect to me with 1GB 333DDR. I have played a lot of games with a Radeon 9200SE which is at the lowest level for the gaming world but if fine for me. My brother has a 9800PRO with 128MB in a similar system same motherboard. CPU, RAM and brand of Hard Disk since mine is 200GB and his HD is 160GB. His PC rocks. I agree that for gaming anything above 2GHz is fine but it all depends on the video card you may have. Mine is not meant for high settings.Talking now about dual cores when I upgraded my old 2.4GHz to this Opteron 1.6HHz, (yes it sounds weird but I found it better on everything with less GHz) it convinced me that my brother told me that the socket 940 was designed from the ground to support Dual Cores CPU. I have a Tyan Tiger s2875 Mother Board and from the article that I just red from the firs person that posted and URL it said that any motherboard supporting the new Opteron 252 made in the 90nm process can be used with Dual Core CPU after a BIOS update. Well I just checked at Tyan’s website and found an update to the BIOS that can make it compatible to that Opteron CPU. But I think being compatible with that CPU is not enough since it doesn’t state support for Dual Core.QUESTION: If I put two dual core CPUs in a dual Opteron mother board I may get a total count of 4 CPUs? If that is the case It will be great, but if I can use only one socket it will be better to buy 2 separately I think. But there are a lot of Ups and Downs that must be taken apart.I bet there will be future support for gaming with multicore CPUs since the next generations consoles will be implementing mul

Read Platemoon's post first continautionwill be implementing multicore CPUs developed by IBM. It does mean that to take full advantage of the consoles processing power the game makes may need to create engines that can take multithread. I bet next year it will be interesting.

GO AMD ^_^

AMD > Intel...Period.

the AMD Athlon XP processor 3200+ operates at a frequency of 2.2GHz yet can outperform an Intel Pentium® 4 processor operating at 3.0GHz with an 800 FSB and HyperThreading on a broad array of real-world applications for office productivity, digital media and 3-D gaming.

3200 is equivilent to a 3.2GHz

You guys ever been to amd's website? worst website ever!