Final Words

The performance picture with regards to Conroe hasn’t really changed all that much - on average we’re still seeing a bit over a 20% increase in performance over an overclocked Athlon 64 FX-60.  While it’s worth noting that these results should be taken with a grain of salt, we really were not able to determine any cause for suspicion based on Intel’s setups.  The machines were as clean as they could get, with the BIOS oversight having no tangible impact on most performance. 

Believe it or not, Intel doesn't seem malicious in their intent. The AMD system could be better configured by using a RD580 based motherboard instead of a RD480 platform, but other than that there's not much else that can be done to improve the performance of the system Intel used. Obviously we're not going to rely on these initial benchmarks for our final take on Conroe, but the scores are extremely interesting to say the least.

Conroe is supposed to launch in Q3 of this year, and here we are at the end of Q1 with some fairly impressive performance numbers.  What could happen over the next quarter or so? 

AMD will be launching Socket-AM2 in Q2 of this year, which will bring about more memory bandwidth as well as lower power consumption thanks to the Energy Efficient CPUs that will ship on the platform.  We have yet to see whether or not real world performance will go up as a result of the move to DDR2, but it very well may. 

On the Intel front, there is a lot of time for performance optimization with regards to Conroe and its platforms.  It’s also worth noting that the 2.66GHz E6700 we previewed here is simply a high end mainstream part, it is not an Extreme Edition flavor of Conroe.  At 2.8 or 3.0GHz, a Conroe EE would offer even stronger performance than what we’ve seen here.

Updated Performance Charts
Comments Locked

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • Larso - Thursday, March 9, 2006 - link

    This conroe thing is truly interesting news. At last Intel has dropped the netburst mishap and developed a useable cpu.
  • Furen - Thursday, March 9, 2006 - link

    Man, we didnt see so many people complaining about netburst when it was whoring the Athlon XP... I agree that it needed to be replaced but it wasn't all bad...
  • Darth Farter - Thursday, March 9, 2006 - link

    looks like this round is going to Intel as it did with the northwood.

    Let's see what the underdog will have in store for us.

    I myself suspect AMD having much more focused on the quad core server arena where it's likely going to whoop ass the way conroe is doing now in regards with FP performance
  • stelleg151 - Thursday, March 9, 2006 - link

    Great work, and Im glad you got that FEAR anomoly worked out. It is definately exciting seeing such a leap in performance.

    That being said, I personally would have put a little bit more emphasis on the fact that these processors are still scheduled to be 3-6 months away, as this is in the most extreme sense a PREview and not a REview.
  • IHYLN - Thursday, March 9, 2006 - link

    good job clearing the air Anand. And whoever was that person was who called me an idiot for saying the crossfire 1900xt setup was GPU limited, I snub my nose at thee.

    Great job on intel's part for actually making a desirable CPU and I hope AMD can match or exceed.
  • Calin - Monday, March 13, 2006 - link

    At least a lower price will benefit everyone. As long as processor performance is concerned, AMD won't gain the crown easily. Looks like Intel will be on top again.
    I say this is good, as prices for AMD processors were a bit static. I hope for a price war :D

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now