I'd love to know what temperature it was sitting at while overclocked, I have a 4800+ and a Zalman 9500 and that sucker could fry eggs anywhere after 1.45V, 2.75Ghz. Good to see a K8 processor competing with an E6600 though.

"AMD K8 micro-architecture turned pretty obsolete" Because of Intel incentives and marketing money ? Let us not forget that the Core architecture is Pentium III/M based with intelligent and big cache..

Was all of the CPU's tested with 64-bit Vista? Benches do indicate still improved performance on XP, don't they? Why was ScienceMark left out? Bottom line, should I trust your benching Ilya?

32bits bench would probably favor the intel cpu even more since some of the tweaks intel use in its C2D do not work on 64bits mode.

don't get delusional, the current AMD cpu just plain suck.

When something is slower, it sucks
Enough explanation?

Would you pay 450$ instead of 300$ just for having a performance loss?
Me not.

And if say "45W more power consumption" and "no overclock"?
That's the inner meaning of "sucking".

Sciencemark=AMD benchmark
Glad not to see it.

AMD had the lead over intel for more than 3 years in a ROW !!! Intel can't beat that! If you take a good look at the many benchmark results you'll notice the fact that the K8 is a very good design after all. It's quite old and it's on average not that much slower compared to the newer generation intel core.

Intel has the fastest platform at the moment. But I have yet to see intel maintain that leadership for more than 12 months. I bet intel can't do that. We've still haven't seen any Core chips above 3GHz.
And that's not without a reason. Overclock doesn't mean a thing. I've seen a 7GHz Pentium 4 chip so think about it.

Intel is @65nm, AMD is still @90nm and yet AMD is able to do (almost) the same thing intel can @65nm. So intel will need to switch pretty quick to 45nm if they want to stay ahead of AMD
So if you're an intel fanboy you better be careful because soon AMD will laugh at your face.

Remember Northwood? I still remember the intel fanboys back then.
Core 2 Duo is the same story. Soon AMD will take the performance crown back from intel. Intel won't even manage to keep the lead over AMD for more than 12 months. Mark my words.

I see that there are many AMD haters speaking up right now. I mean what is your peoples problem with AMD? AMD has a better platform compared to intel. Now you don't hear too much about it all because intel cpu's are on average faster.

Once AMD restore their performance lead you'll understand why intel has only been "lucky" for a few months.

AMD will be the nr1 chip maker in 2009. Intel has the fastes chips at the moment but in the near future they'll need a lot more than just fast processors.

What CPU do you have in Home Man???
The Config..in AMD is Though but when you Know how to do it the AMD will Win with Intel CPU, the most problem with AMD chipsets are that there is no good Mainboard for this CPU because it is too NEW and Intel is showing only things that they had 5 years ago, so their chipsets are better Config... with CPUs, CORE DUO is nothing new it has only Buffer bigger nothing more nothing less so what can you say about that???
Buf...8mb or 4mb makes big change, so AMD must work with this problem..!!

good if around 300$

K8L is on the way...

Buying the fastest processor does not always work for everybody. The only component that slows down the computer is the hard drive, so you should opt for a faster (low accessing time) hard drive when going for the fastest processor.

For an architecture to last for three years and still be slightly behind of the latest processor that has a newer and advanced architecture takes a lot of effort. Intel can not be two to four times faster than AMD's old architecture, so they go easy on AMD by only going 1.25 times faster. That is their downfall when the K8L comes out.

AMD has Intel beat on total system price. Also only AMD systems provides nVidia's SLI which is more reliable, stable, and economical than ATI Crossfire which Intel supports on majority of their chipsets.

Sure we can get the fastest processors that can win all brag wars, but it does not help to improve total system performance and paying close to $2000 for a complete system.

I prefer buying AMD systems because they are still are half the price compared to Intel systems. Though, I suggest do not buying any faster than AMD Athlon64 X2 4600+.

BTW, yelling out gibberish while making your point does not make any point. Writing your yelling and raving in proper grammar will make your point.

poor amd

well, it seems AMD is having alot of troble staying up there with intel, from what it looks like, i dont think i will be buying any AMD CPU's for While.

CPU: C2D Qx6700
HDD: Seagate Cuda 500Gb
Video: Nvidia GF 7950 GT
Board: Evga 680 I

Is is important to note that AMD has been able to keep a foothold in the upper echelons of the processor market for a long time now, without any major changes to their architecture.

AMD has taken what has been repeatedly called an 'obsolete' technology and forced it to perform alongside the newer 'next generation' technologies that were the initial reason it was called obsolete.
For that reason I still have faith in their engineering capability.

All of that aside, I am waiting for K8L to settle all debates, one way or the other.

I think I should also mention that in most benchmarks the 6000+ is only slightly outperformed by the e6700, yet costs around $60 less.

Intel гавни& amp;#1097;е!!!! сука блять интел дерьм& amp;#1086;, куряч& amp;#1080;й памет ито лутше в милио& amp;#1085; раз за проце& amp;#1089;соры Интел! !! АМД это круто! !! и не надо лахма& amp;#1090;ить бабуш& amp;#1082;у!!!!

the amd athlon 64 x2 6000+ might not be the fastest CPU in existance but since its recently lowering in price its pretty much worth purchasing it instead of the more expansive core2duo e6600.
i realy hope AMD will lower the price a bit more soon and i also hope they will stop producing older models so they can take a large margin away from intel for the low buget and main stream market.

I would like to see more info on rendering in premier pro. A time means nothing to me with out more info on the raw file and length of the film.

waw bi3a2id

gra3o