For the past recent years, ppl at Intel has make fun on themselves when they developed Pentium 4. Why? I can't really prove much but AMD has brought in products that trashed Pentium 4, Pentium D or Pentium EE. As a fanboy of Intel, I was upset of it and gave a thought on switching over to AMD processors which are quite popular and dominates the gamers and markets today. Some of the products are Athlon FX series, Athlon X2 series and others.
Not until a few days ago when I stumbled upon a few forums discussing on Intel's newest product to be launched, namely Conroe or Core Duo. Hardly believing on the points that are being discussed, I started to look for some articles regarding to it over the web. Surprisingly, as being claimed by most of the forumers, Core Duo(Conroe) is the latest product by Intel that has been benchmarked by most of the tech reviewers. The results are tremendous, even comparing to the most powerful processor, FX series. They claimed that Conroe produces 20% more performance than a FX60. I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that. I browsed even more through the net and found some pictures for proofs. I can't really say whether they are solid or not, but it does gave me a new hope on Intel. Intel has already launched the roadmap for Conroe and said it will be released to the consumers around July or September.
Conroe is based on a dual core architecture and believed was altered from Yonah(another codename for Intel chips). Yonah as being claimed, was on par with FX when it is running on the same speed. Anyway from the benchmarks, Conroe beat FX in most popular games such as Half-Life 2, F.E.A.R, Unreal Tournament and etc. When being compared on media encoding, Conroe finishes faster by an impressive margin.
Systems involved in benchmarking :
The Conroe system was based on an Intel "BadAxe" 975X motherboard modified to supply less voltage. This box had 1GB of DDR2 667MHz memory set at 4-4-4 timings. The graphics setup consisted of a Radeon X1900 XTX and a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire Edition running together in dual-GPU mode. (We checked around back, and the CrossFire dongle was there as expected.) The Conroe processor itself was running at 2.66GHz. Here's a look at the system properties page. You can see that the system was running Windows XP SP2.
Intel configured a competing AMD-based system for comparison that they said was intended to approximate, as much as possible, where Athlon 64 performance may be by the time Conroe hits the market. To that end, the Athlon 64 FX-60 processor was overclocked to 2.8GHz, and the system's 1GB of DDR400 RAM was set to 2-2-2 timings with a 1T command rate. The same Radeon X1900 CrossFire graphics subsystem was in the AMD box, along with a DFI LANParty RDX200 motherboard based on the Radeon Xpress 200 CrossFire Edition chipset.
p/s: I've been looking for a topic to post and discuss for awhile now. Thanks to the mods for inviting me over to join fakap! I think this one would be interesting enough? I must admit I am a fanboy of Intel, yet I am not so biased to ignore others views or reasonable thoughts. Do correct me if I'm wrong though. Sorry coz couldn't provide any pictures, as we know hotlinking is illegal and is just plain wrong.