Deneb Has Got Some Speed
- Thread starter WC Annihilus
- Start date
Rastalovich
New member
+1 for the mobos tbh.
FarFarAway
New member
PLEASE AMD please do well 
Zoot
Active member
Nehalem no doubt is the superior chip.
The archectiture is better than Deneb, for example:
Nehalem can do 4 wide instructions, while Barcelona / Deneb can do only three. Nehalem also has much lower latency cache and at the same time, it has 8MB L3 cache that is much more than Barcelona.
The archectiture is better than Deneb, for example:
Nehalem can do 4 wide instructions, while Barcelona / Deneb can do only three. Nehalem also has much lower latency cache and at the same time, it has 8MB L3 cache that is much more than Barcelona.
°TheMadDutchDude°
Banned
Intel IMO has always been the better chip to go for, and still is, and always will be..
The fact that it goes up to 4.3GHz on air.. I still believe that a 3.8GHz Q9550 will be a lot faster, the extra cache helps ofcourse and by the looks of it.. higher FSB too? One thing though, I don't see why it is going to be the next gaming chip, I've read claims of Intels Q6600 beating the Q9950 by AMD, so whats the deal with that?
The fact that it goes up to 4.3GHz on air.. I still believe that a 3.8GHz Q9550 will be a lot faster, the extra cache helps ofcourse and by the looks of it.. higher FSB too? One thing though, I don't see why it is going to be the next gaming chip, I've read claims of Intels Q6600 beating the Q9950 by AMD, so whats the deal with that?
°TheMadDutchDude°
Banned
Intel IMO has always been the better chip to go for, and still is, and always will be..
The fact that it goes up to 4.3GHz on air.. I still believe that a 3.8GHz Q9550 will be a lot faster, the extra cache helps ofcourse and by the looks of it.. higher FSB too? One thing though, I don't see why it is going to be the next gaming chip, I've read claims of Intels Q6600 beating the Q9950 by AMD, so whats the deal with that? The AMD is much newer than the Q6600. I believe the Q6600 is still by far one of the best chips Intel have ever made. Sure, the Q9*** series are nice with the extra cache and FSB etc, though.. they're still not as stable as the Q6600, the temperature sensors don't work too well on some of the chips etc!
The fact that it goes up to 4.3GHz on air.. I still believe that a 3.8GHz Q9550 will be a lot faster, the extra cache helps ofcourse and by the looks of it.. higher FSB too? One thing though, I don't see why it is going to be the next gaming chip, I've read claims of Intels Q6600 beating the Q9950 by AMD, so whats the deal with that? The AMD is much newer than the Q6600. I believe the Q6600 is still by far one of the best chips Intel have ever made. Sure, the Q9*** series are nice with the extra cache and FSB etc, though.. they're still not as stable as the Q6600, the temperature sensors don't work too well on some of the chips etc!
°TheMadDutchDude°
Banned
Ooh, LOL didn't know that.
Yeah I had to go through the Prescott but I survived!
I have only ever had.. one AMD system and regret not going for the P4 2.8GHz.. but it wasn't my choice at the time, my dad had to pay for it and he naturally listened to his dad, unfortunate.. would have been a much better system than the AMD rated at 1.53GHz!
Come on PV.. lets have a chat on MSN bud
Yeah I had to go through the Prescott but I survived!
I have only ever had.. one AMD system and regret not going for the P4 2.8GHz.. but it wasn't my choice at the time, my dad had to pay for it and he naturally listened to his dad, unfortunate.. would have been a much better system than the AMD rated at 1.53GHz!Come on PV.. lets have a chat on MSN bud
°TheMadDutchDude°
Banned
Okay bud, no problems.
What are you benching at the moment?
What are you benching at the moment?
Rastalovich
New member
I`ll make a decision when 775 becomes too old (which is gonna be a heck of a long time), but I`d like to see an AMD surge.
Too much energy saving green stuff for future pcs tbh.
Too much energy saving green stuff for future pcs tbh.
°TheMadDutchDude°
Banned
name='Zoot' said:What about the good ol' Athlons?
Hated them, always been an Intel man and always will be. I don't like AMD, they are slower, and as far as I am conserned behind on the market, Intel are always the ones to get there first.. and still manage to do a better job of it!
QFT.name='Zoot' said:
Erm no they don't...not always. Don't forget that AMD licensed x86-64 to Intel, as they had it first. Intel just named theirs EMT64 to avoid copyright issues. Anyway back on topic - I'm looking forward to seeing what AMD's 45nm chips can do and I hope the performance bridges the current gap quite considerably. I hate a one-sided fight.
