HEXUS.reviews :: Intel Core 2 Duo/Extreme Processors

[bradyjames]

When can we see some 64 bit benchmarks? Is there some sort of embargo from Intel on running 64 bit benchmarks because I've not seem them anywhere on any reviews of the Conroe? It would be great if Hexus became the first site to post some official 64 bit benchmarks of the Conroe up against an Athlon 64.

[DR]

We haven't run any yet - but very good point

[bradyjames]

I've had another trawl around the web and it looks like there are a couple of sites that have run benchmarks of 64 bit apps on a 64 bit OS. As there are only a couple of them it is hard to draw a conclusion but it appears that the Conroe is slighty slower at 64bit than 32bit and as we know the A64 is generally faster. However even with the reduced performance the Conroe seems to come out fairly well and still seems to beat the A64 in most benchmarks although the gap is smaller than it would be on 32 bit apps.

[ishtar]

Oh so just because it can encode a vidfile or a music file a few seconds faster its awesome? Ahh i'll stick with my optys.

[dangel]

Makes bugger all difference in-game to me - i'm playing at 1600x1200 and the cpu just isn't the bottleneck in my system..

[chuckskull]

Yeah in gaming anything above about 3500+ (or equivalent intel) makes little difference. Dual core will probably help you if you run other stuff in the background (torrents, AV/FW). Even then you'll only get a few FPS.

[ExceededGoku]

have you guys actually played any MMORPGs or games like CSS with lots of people on the server? Even my system was brought to its knees last night on a server running gun game mod... And having a better CPU is good for general loading times, I'm certainly not limited by anything else other than ym CPU atm. (I have a 15kRPM 36.7Gb SCSI hdd, with 2Gb XMS3200@2-2-2-5, and my X1900XTX; So I really can't see any other potential bottleneck other than processing power. Of which the Conroe has loads, I'm certainly not regretting my purchase)

[chuckskull]

have you guys actually played any MMORPGs or games like CSS with lots of people on the server? Even my system was brought to its knees last night on a server running gun game mod... And having a better CPU is good for general loading times, I'm certainly not limited by anything else other than ym CPU atm. (I have a 15kRPM 36.7Gb SCSI hdd, with 2Gb XMS3200@2-2-2-5, and my X1900XTX; So I really can't see any other potential bottleneck other than processing power. Of which the Conroe has loads, I'm certainly not regretting my purchase)

Sometimes things crap out no matter how much processing power you have. It was more likely the server machine having a bit of a fit rather than yours.

Of course it's a bit hard to tell without constant real time monitoring of all your stats.

I think we can all agree that more power is a good thing though

BTW: may I be the first to say "jammy bastard"

[dangel]

No I don't play MMORPGs or CSS - it's not my cup o' tea - why do they load your cpu excessively versus the limitation of your network connection etc? Loading times - bottleneck is obviously the hard drive(s) which won't load your cpu anyway and i've no problem in that respect (my load times are low). All the benchies i've seen at 1600x1200 show pretty low benefits from dropping in a faster cpu for gaming - and that's what you'd expect as obviously the majority of the work done at those resolutions is by the GPU. The reason they use low resolutions for CPU benchies is just that - to show situations where the FPS isn't limited by the GPU.
If I built a whole new conroe system tomorrow i'd see very small increases in FPS for a very large outlay. If I bought a new graphics card i'd see a huge jump..

Undoubtely the conroe is a great CPU but is it best bang for buck? With current AM2 prices i'd be looking long a hard about which direction to go when building a new system.

[kalniel]

Heh seconded.

A local computer has very little to do with network lag

And yes, I don't think anyone is suggesting you go out and replace your existing equipment - if it's fast enough to do the job now, then there's no reason to. However, if you are in the market for a new system then it'd be daft not to consider a core 2 duo as possibly a first choice component.

[dangel]

I get tempted to build a new system just because I enjoy building them more than using them It'd be interesting to work out AM2 versus Core 2 on a price per fps gain basis

Plus, of course, god knows what's happening with ATI and AMD merging - are we likely to see designed-in performance boosts for ATI graphics on the AMD platform?

[ExceededGoku]

No I don't play MMORPGs or CSS - it's not my cup o' tea - why do they load your cpu excessively versus the limitation of your network connection etc? Loading times - bottleneck is obviously the hard drive(s) which won't load your cpu anyway and i've no problem in that respect (my load times are low). All the benchies i've seen at 1600x1200 show pretty low benefits from dropping in a faster cpu for gaming - and that's what you'd expect as obviously the majority of the work done at those resolutions is by the GPU. The reason they use low resolutions for CPU benchies is just that - to show situations where the FPS isn't limited by the GPU.
If I built a whole new conroe system tomorrow i'd see very small increases in FPS for a very large outlay. If I bought a new graphics card i'd see a huge jump..

Undoubtely the conroe is a great CPU but is it best bang for buck? With current AM2 prices i'd be looking long a hard about which direction to go when building a new system.

Thing is that on games like that the more objects there are on screen the more lag that you get, this is evident on every MMO in the main city. Having a faster CPU reduces that lag tremendously, although of course network speed does play some part.

Bang per buck though.. I'm not so sure, I reckon the 3800 is an awesome CPU and its cheaper than the E6300. I personally would give bang for buck oft
Low end: AMD64 X2 3800+/4200 > Intel Core 2 Duo E6300/6400
Mid range: AMD64 X2 4400+/4600 < Intel Core 2 Duo E6600
High end: AMD FX62/4 < Intel Core 2 Duo X6800/6900
I don't see the E6300 as having much of a point

[dangel]

Thing is that on games like that the more objects there are on screen the more lag that you get, this is evident on every MMO in the main city. Having a faster CPU reduces that lag tremendously, although of course network speed does play some part.

Ok, let's look at WOW - probably the most popular MMORPG:



"As you can see this game is more CPU dependent than the other games we tested. The graph is very consistent and shows precisely how the CPUs lineup performance wise. The Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 is leading the pack, with the Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 below it and the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 processor trailing. Notice though that the difference in performance isn’t impacting gameplay as the difference is actually very miniscule. It is so small, in fact, that in the game you don’t know which CPU is which, you can’t tell the difference."

"When it comes to playing games, the only persons that need to be even a little concerned with upgrading their CPU to a Core 2 processor might be those with high-end SLI, CrossFire, or GeForce GX2 video cards and we have yet to prove that due to the testing limitations we ran into. Then, and only then, you might see an Intel Core 2 processor deliver a performance advantage.

Lastly, I would advise everyone that is thinking of rushing out and purchasing their latest upgrade that we are sure to see HUGE pricing slashes out of AMD before the end of the month."
(article: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...50aHVzaWFzdA==)

In other words, if you have stupid amounts of graphic power (i.e. SLI/crossfire) then (predictably) your bottleneck moves to the cpu - on single card systems the difference in-game with a higer end processor is neglible. So again, I come back to my situation where the _only_ thing that will significantly up my framerate is a new graphics card (and i'm not doing that till DX10 parts appear).

[ExceededGoku]

But the question is where did they take those benchmarks in game? Those could have been on the first parts of the noob area just killing random mobs...

[dangel]

But the question is where did they take those benchmarks in game? Those could have been on the first parts of the noob area just killing random mobs...

Er... well follow the linky provided - "For our gameplay evaluation, we chose a path that takes us through an indoors environment to an outdoors environment, through a city, through different villages, and ended with the effects of a spell being cast." (which seems to fufill your requirements in that they were in a city)


None of this is surprising - i've known i'm not cpu limited in-game for a long while just by watching the cpu meter on my 20x4 LCD panel on my desk..

[Steve]

When it comes to playing games, the only persons that need to be even a little concerned with upgrading their CPU to a Core 2 processor might be those with high-end SLI, CrossFire, or GeForce GX2 video cards and we have yet to prove that due to the testing limitations we ran into. Then, and only then, you might see an Intel Core 2 processor deliver a performance advantage.

I'm afraid I can't agree with this. First off, in that review, at the very beginning they basically try to say "our way of testing is the best, everyone elses way is ****". Sorry, that's false. They have a different way of testing. I have my opinions of it, both positive and negative. In any case, that gives them no grounds to make such blanketed claims.

Anyway, when it comes to play games, the people that need to be concerned with upgrading their CPU to a Core 2 processor is those thinking about future proofing. OK the term itself is ridiculous at the rate technology progresses, but G80 isn't all that far away folks...