Next Gen CPUs: AMD's Socket AM2 Lineup and Intel's Core2 CPUs

I've been battling with myself for a while now on the issue of processors. AMD's new AM2 Processors are supposed to be great, but I've heard that they are having a slow start, with only minimal imrpovements. On the otherhand, Intel's Core2 CPUs have been tested against the high-end AMD CPUs, and even with a lower clock speed, perform better. Hopefully AM2 CPUs will start to pick up speed.

In addition, AMD is cutting prices signifigantly this month to compete with the performance of the Core2 processors. This means more bang for your buck, even though Intel will have the upper edge on performance.

It appears that Intel is focusing not so much on clockspeed, but instead FSB, caches, and other things that contribute to the overall performance of a CPU. I'd like to see both though; a large advancement in clockspeed and cache/whatnot, but I guess that would = $$$.

In this thread we discuss the two leading CPU developers, and debate the pros/cons of each.

I also have one question for you. Having only ever owned a Celeron, I have little first-hand experience with the high-end CPUs. Assuming my video card is allpowerfull, would a system with an AMD X2 4200 AM2 or equivalent CPU handle modern/next gen games at full settings with ease? I realize that CPUs have little to do with this, but my little experience with them makes me ask.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by KrazyTaco

My system is running that exact same proccessor you mentioned with a Geforece 7900 GT and 2 GB RAM and it can play all the modern games I have (Battlefield 2, FEAR, Half-Life 2) on all high settings with all effects on.

And what (roughly) is your FPS, and do you think that that CPU will be able to handle the next generation of games (while still on max settings)?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by KrazyTaco

Pretty sure it will handle next-gen games to, I assume your talking about stuff like UT2K7 and Quake Wars?

Yeah. Thanks, it's good to know that it will be effective for a while.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Omnislash124

Is this the same thing as the new generation AMD QuadCore crap that I was reading about in a random magazine earlier?

I think that's AMD's counter to the Conroe, and it's called 4x4 something. It's basically 2 Dual-Core chips on the same board, which gives you 4 phisical processors, and an additional 4 logical processors, for a total of 8 "CPU"s, I guess you could say. It is indeed impressive, but it will cost quite a bit.

Originally Posted by Render

As far as I know, AM2 changes NOTHING in relation to speed over S939 versions of the same chip. AM2 chips are simply S939 chips that use less wattage and require (slower) DDR2. If anything, performance has decreased because of the new RAM.

I am hoping that AMD bust out some new chips that aren't just the same ones with different socket. As I said before, the AM2 socket appears to be moving slowly, but, but maybe some new CPUs for AM2 will come out that really are improved over 939.

I'm also a fan of AMD, so this pressure to switch to Intel is really difficult. The difference between the X2 and the Conroe is pure numbers, and both will perform as amazing as anyone would want. However, if AMD cuts their CPU prices by 50% (which is rumored), an X2 at about $200 is very tempting, even over the $316 Conroe. You've got to remember; Is the increased performance of the Conroe actually going to be noticable over the X2? I mean, you'll get better benchmark numbers, but as far as doing the things to do from day to day (games, encoding, etc), I don't think you'll be able to say "Wow, this Conroe sure is better than my X2".

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by evilboris

AFAIK the Core Due 2 beats the shit out of the X2 at the moment, in every possible way (heat produced, price, watts eaten, and of course performance),

But AMD will soon have price on their side.

Originally Posted by evilboris

If I was informed right, it will allow both cores to be used with only 1 thread, so applications not supporting the dualcore function will be able to use the power of both cores.

That sounds great, if it's true, but I guess we have to wait and see.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Kaiten

I heard prices are going to be high until this fall (or even later) due to the OEMs hogging the CPUs.

Where did you hear that? The Core2 CPUs are actually really cheap.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by killmoms

Well, the prices that Intel sets are cheap. A lack of supply and a high demand will drive up prices for the end user at the beginning—that's just basic economics. If a retailer can charge more and still move units because some people want 'em, why not take the extra profit? Once units become more plentiful, prices will go down.

Even if retailers decide to charge more, you can sometimes get them for wholesale/near-whole sale prices (if you know the right people, or buy from the right place). I don't expect the Core2 prices to be much higher than the prices that Intel sets.

FELIPE NO