Comments on: Intel's Core 2 Duo lives up to hype

Supporting early claims, Intel's upcoming Core 2 Duo outperformed AMD's chips in several independent tests by a wide margin.

[thenet411]

Oh, here we go...

I can see it now. This is going to become a huge debate with the Intel guys on one side and the AMD guys on the other just like Apple/Windows debates.

Look, both companies have good processors. Both companies do basically the same thing. Intel may be on top now (a point that is debatable) and then AMD will come out with a new processor and be the big kid on the block and it will all start over again.

Lets not start a huge debate over which one is better.

[anarchy1999]

i agree

chips go in cycles. this year it's clearly an intel year (except for the opteron area). next year amd will release some new chips, and they'll take the lead too.
i myself couldn't care less about some of these amd wakos trying to legitimize their investment.
if i want to buy a new system, and performance is a priority then intel gets my business. if i'm in a tight budget then it's amd. apart from chips i would rather spend more money on ram, video cards, sound cards, software...
there are more important things in a pc to worry than the chip company. dah...

[teeter3000]

"Meets or Beats"...

Despite the author's obvious enthusiasm for getting to display a marked performance for Intel's new chips (anyone out there gettin' a rub?), there wasn't much talk of the obvious. While it's true that Intel's new breed will 'meet or beat' the power consumption of AMD's last-generation and benchmark higher... that really doesn't address the real power of AMD's recent surges...

They were able to build a BETTER chipset, that consumed LESS power, and more importantly, cost LESS than bloated Intel chipsets. Intel had become so self-assured, that like Microsoft felt little need for innovation and improvements...and AMD latched onto this like a shark and was able to out-perform them and gain a substantial market-share. Nothing against the company inself, but this fact wasn't even given a glance in this glaringly biased 'review'.

Comparing the performance of a next-generation chipset to the last-generations' and being astounded that a marginal difference occured at all is curiously hilarious. Maybe the new benchmark isn't showing a marked improvement, but rather sustained competence.

[Lindy01]

What chipsets??????????

Chipsets are AMD's weakest link....they have none. Conversly Intel chipsets are the standard to beat. Intel chipsets are rock solid.

On the AMD side its NVIDIA, SIS, and VIA....all commonly refered to ******** by many.

AMD had a more efficient and less power consuming CPU product that out performed Intel CPU's.

Now Intel has a more efficient, less power consuming...that out performs any and all AMD products all at a lower cost.

Match that to their chipsets and much higher FAB capacity and you have a smack down IMHO

[Lindy01]

What chipsets?

AMD does not have any??? They use NVIDIA, SIS or VIA....and they are mostly horrible...often called s**tsets. NFORCE is plagued with problems.

Intel on the other hand has the BEST chipsets probably the best product they make and supported by the likes of Windows out of the box.

AMD had more effiecient, less power hungry and better perfroming CPU's. Now Intel blew all of that out of the water and at much cheaper prices.

Get a clue.

[vocaro]

Typo

It's lead was clear --> Its lead was clear

[microsoft slayer]

More intel market fluffs

only 20%? hardly something to declare victory over.

[Jonathan]

Red Alert! Fanbois to your posts!!!

Pathetic

[samkass]

Intel Victory

"only 20%? hardly something to declare victory over."

How much faster while at the same time consuming how much
less power does Intel have to achieve in order to declare victory,
at least for this year? Considering their position a year ago, this
is a huge victory for Intel. No, it's not going to make owners of
current top-of-the-line AMD rigs throw it all away and start
over, but anyone upgrading a system more than a year or two
old would be foolhardy not to seriously consider the Core 2 Duo.
AMD doesn't appear to have anything in the pipeline to match it
for a year or so, and it's definitely the fastest chip out there.

Unless you can't afford it, get it.

[Des Alba]

I am partial to Pentium D (Presler)

I don't worry about the 135-watt power requirement of the D versus the 65-watt power requirement of the Core Duo. I can see where that may be a player for some people using battery power, but not for me. Any Pentium D was blowing away the competition before the first Core Duo was even available to the public. I'm not going to trade my D-930 in for any Core Duo any time soon.

[Juanchito_2006]

Cyclical, as everything

Intel i486, AMD Am486, Intel Pentium, AMD K6-2, Intel Pentium III, AMD Athlon, Intel Pentium 4, AMD Athlon 64, Intel Pentium 4 HT, AMD Athlon FX-55, Intel Pentium D, AMD Athlon 64 x2, Intel Core Duo, Athlon FX-62, Intel Core 2 Duo, AMD...

[djcaseley]

Good point...

...well made.

I do hope neither company ever gives up the ghost. We'd buy the new processors anyway, so money aside, being top is for bragging rights, and its a two horse race. If AMD had decided not to go against the P1, there's no way we'd be seeing the performance we have now.

[fred dunn]

AMD Wake UP! Intel has a Athlon Killer...

I have been an AMD Athlon fan since day one but I also thought highly of the Intel Pentium III.
It was when Intel came out with the P4 and in particular the 850 chipset with it's horrible Rambus interface when I divorced Intel from any of my systems.
So far what I have seen of the Core Duo for the Desktop "Conroe", I am thoroughly impressed. At the same time I am somewhat depressed that AMD did not see this coming as this is going to devastate AMDs desktop sales.
AMD still has the advantage in the 4way and higher server market because of their architecture but their upcoming 4x4 desktop campaign looks to be a washout before it's even introduced.
Unless AMD has something up it's sleeves that I don't know about my next upgrade will be to an Intel MB and CPU, something I haven't done in about 5 years.
AMD, you had better wake up or become just a pleasant memory.

[J_Satch]

And the real winner is...

...the consumer. Get over your personal bias and enjoy the fact that some damn fine CPUs from both camps are available and getting cheaper. :)

[herkamur]

Proof that competition works

If only all sectors enjoyed this kind of competition my computing world would be a better place.

[john55440]

Low Heat...

>offers up an incredible combination of performance and value, coupled with low heat and power specifications.<

I would think that low heat would translate to greater reliability.

I had a CPU chip die on me once, so I am leary of chips that are said to run very hot.

[wheelzup]

Haven't we seen this same thing between ATI and Nvidia?

It's still going on but this looks so much like the battle for video card dominance it's almost laughable. I look at it this way, you use what has met your needs in the past from the perspective of performance and cost. I don't really care which company I use to put together a new system, I just want everything to do the job.

[Amazingant]

So what's the speed?

I've seen all this talk about how much better they are than this or that. What's the actual processor speed though?