AM2/Conroe dilemma

SoftLanding · Post by **SoftLanding** » Tue May 30, 2006 4:50 pm

I'd like to buy parts for a new system build before July 1 (for tax reasons).

It looks as though a Conroe chip would be better than an AM2, but of course Conroe won't be available until July.

What should I do? Should I just buy an AM2, or should I buy all the parts I can now for a Conroe system and then buy a Conroe chip when it comes out? Is it possible to buy Conroe compatible motherboards now? If so, what do I look for to check that's it's Conroe compatible?

My no. 1 priority is noise reduction, but performance comes a close second. I live in a hot climate and my machine will need to operate in ambient temperatures of 40C, though right now it's cool as it's winter here.

I also need a system capable of hardware virtualisation to run Windows under Xen (both AM2 and the latest Intel chips support this, but a suitable BIOS is also needed).

Thanks in advance.

=assassin= · Post by **=assassin=** » Wed May 31, 2006 5:49 am

I certainly wouldn't buy any components now and then buy the CPU much later, as they'll most likely be cheaper in a month or so. If you can, wait as long as possible for Conroe - if you really have to get to get stuff before July 1st, then leave the motherboard as well until after - the DDR2 memory, hard drives, case etc all the usual stuff can be used in both Intel Conroe and AMD AM2 boards....

In either case, if you want things to run cooler, try undervolting the processor and it should help quite a bit.

SoftLanding · Post by **SoftLanding** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:05 pm

Thanks =assassin= - your advice is very helpful.

I'll have to work out what type of DDR2 memory I can buy. I don't know what all the options are.

McBanjo · Post by **McBanjo** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:42 pm

SoftLanding wrote:Thanks =assassin= - your advice is very helpful.

I'll have to work out what type of DDR2 memory I can buy. I don't know what all the options are.

PC6400 will be standard for AM2 and I think that goes for Conro as well. That's 800Mhz in speed.
If you want to overclock you might want to buy faster memory but if you going to underclock or have it at standard speed then just buy some budget rams. Unless Intel has integrated a memory controll in Conroe then timings doesn't mather much.

Some brands considered to be good (no order):
Crucial
Corsair
Kingston
OCZ
Gskill
Mushkin

You might want to check up EPP. It's basicly a little chip on the memory that gives you more settings to play with but also make the memory goes in the speed and latency it's suppose to do. Makes it easier than it is. Atleast that's how I've got it.
So far only Corsair and OCZ has EPP memorys so far but more should probibly come.
You need both EPP certified memory and motherboard for it to work

thegoldenstrand · Post by **thegoldenstrand** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:55 pm

Intel revealed a superior processor back in March and now today AMD has revealed a vastly superior processing platform.

I have been torn between the two.. I just posted what sounds dumb until you think about it that AMD's news today is more significant than Intels of a few months ago. but.. still a tough decision.. better processor for today or better platform for tommorrow?

I have bought much of the other things.. but.. as we all know.. prices they keep dropping..

having said that.. if I was to go the Intel/Conroe route, I would go with the new Conroe ati board that is coming out, with current or next generation ati video card and call it good..

In regards to memory, don't buy any until the end of the month. But go ahead and buy then.. the memory will cost cost over $200.. avoid the budget crap.. good memory is worth it.. Corsair and Mushkin have Latency 4 PC-6400 DDR2 800 memory that is good and for a budget you could go with the OCZ PC-6400, but you can probably get the PC-7200 from OCZ for a similar price to what the Mushkin and Corsair are offered for. I would go with 2 GB (2X1) and it will cost you about $250-275 at the end of this month.

Hard Drives.. I have some if you want them.. I made the mistake of buying a raptor from CompUSA.. buy from newegg.. you get newer hard drives.. the raptor I bought last month was manufactured back in April of 2005. The 36 and 74 GB raptors just had a new version released.. and they really don't make that much noise and should be cooler than the previous 51 C raptors that they are replacing..

I have an Akasa 62 Eclipse.. it is not a silent pc case.. if you want a really quiet one.. go with the new Lian Li PC-80.. no quieter or better made case out there, imo.. but if you are on a budget, you really cannot do much better than the Antec P180.. I like my Akasa case, but damn, the P180 is sweet!

For write off purposes.. you need to place the system into service.. no.. the IRS will not know if you did or didn't.. but that is what you are supposed to do.. so..

this kind of makes it tough to get a conroe..

now in regards to amd.. Gigagbye S5 motherboard is going to be out.. Asus and others will not compare and it will be quiet.. but expensive.

same memory... if you want a nice operating system hard drive.. the new revised raptors are my choice..

In regards to the cpu.. I would go really cheap.. not more than X2 4000's.. because when Greyhound comes out within a year or so.. you will want to replace your cpu anyway.

Not an easy call.. superior cpu/superior future platform..

There will always be something better..

vitaminc · Post by **vitaminc** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:22 am

1. AMD's platform announcement (4x4) is still a long way off.
2. AM2 right now doesn't offer much performance improvement vs. socket 939.
3. Conroe is still 2 months off.

I am going to get M2N32-WS when it comes out, and slam a cheap Athlon 64 3000+ AM2 on it. I will change to K8L when it comes out middle of next year.

And I am going to get Conroe when it comes out in July.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:28 am

Greetings,

Some info is emerging about the K8L 4x4 platform:

http://www.lostcircuits.com/

The first significant disclosures regarding the K8L had to do with the cache hierarchy within a single core. Despite an erroneous rumor to the contrary at Daily Tech, the L1D and L1I caches remain at 64KB each, according to a senior architect at AMD. The floor plan of the K8L also tends to confirm that the L1 caches have not decreased in size. The K8L did experience some L2 cache shrinkage and initial parts will feature a 2MB shared L3 cache. Based on the cache sizes, the L2 cache is still exclusive of the L1 contents, and the L3 cache is certainly not inclusive (although this does not mean it is exclusive). Additionally, it is easy to deduce, based on information about the load/store units that the bus between the L1 and L2 caches has been widened to 256 bits. The L3 cache is extensible, and it seems likely that 4MB parts will come out, perhaps as a way to differentiate between low-end parts intended for 1-2 sockets, and the higher-end parts for 4-8 sockets. (David Kanter, RWT).

SoftLanding · Post by **SoftLanding** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 2:36 pm

It's good to read all your comments - thanks all for posting.

I'm starting to wonder whether it's worth waiting for Conroe. I'm not going to be using this machine for gaming at all. It's going to be a combined server/workstation. I'll be running at least 2 virtual machines using XEN (both using Linux).

As a server, it won't have to do much at all - I need a small low-traffic web server for clients to test development in-progress.

As a workstation it will be my main development machine and it would need to be powerfull. However, it won't have a screen of its own - I'll be working on it from my laptop using an X-server, VNC & remote desktop.

Given those requirements, is Conroe still the best option?

highlandsun · Post by **highlandsun** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:40 pm

From the looks of it, the Conroe is aimed at single-thread performance. If you need it for server/dev work, I would avoid the Conroe. I've been using an AMD X2 3800+ for about a year now, it's an excellent development platform. When (if, really) the time comes to upgrade, I'll probably look for another AMD X2. That may mean an AM2 platform... When I'm not compiling, just editing code, there's no need for multiple cores. But it's great to be able to kick off a parallel "make" and have all my source tree build lickety-split. The new chips with split power planes will be even better for this scenario - leave the unneeded cores halted until there's actually work to do.

Howard · Post by **Howard** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:06 pm

highlandsun wrote:From the looks of it, the Conroe is aimed at single-thread performance.

How do you figure?

Felger Carbon · Post by **Felger Carbon** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:07 pm

highlandsun wrote:From the looks of it, the Conroe is aimed at single-thread performance.

Which means there's a CPU core burning power uselessly. What's the unicore version of Conroe? I keep forgetting. Conroe = Core 2 duo, XXX = Core 2 solo. Less power, presumably less money. Win-win.

Felger Carbon · Post by **Felger Carbon** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:41 pm

Single core = Conroe-L. Google is a wonderful tool, got the answer here. Looks like competition for AMD's Sempron 64s. Right up my alley!

highlandsun · Post by **highlandsun** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:34 am

Howard wrote:
highlandsun wrote:From the looks of it, the Conroe is aimed at single-thread performance.
How do you figure?

Its benchmark scores in single-threaded games are faster than anything else out there, but it loses more than 50% of its speed in multi-tasking benchmarks. This says to me that the shared L2 cache will probably get thrashed in many common multi-tasking workloads. At worst it ought to only lose at most 50% of its speed when running two CPU-bound jobs; the fact that it loses more than 50% is a problem. (Notice that the Pentium-4 chips don't even lose that much performance in the same situation.)

A good single-tasking chip, but a weak multi-tasker. Seems like a bit of an anachronism, but there it is.

accord1999 · Post by **accord1999** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:52 am

highlandsun wrote: Its benchmark scores in single-threaded games are faster than anything else out there, but it loses more than 50% of its speed in multi-tasking benchmarks. This says to me that the shared L2 cache will probably get thrashed in many common multi-tasking workloads. At worst it ought to only lose at most 50% of its speed when running two CPU-bound jobs; the fact that it loses more than 50% is a problem.

Conroe's behavior is not much different than an AMD X2. From http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... hp?t=97609

vitaminc · Post by **vitaminc** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:10 am

highlandsun wrote:
Howard wrote:
highlandsun wrote:From the looks of it, the Conroe is aimed at single-thread performance.
How do you figure?
Its benchmark scores in single-threaded games are faster than anything else out there, but it loses more than 50% of its speed in multi-tasking benchmarks. This says to me that the shared L2 cache will probably get thrashed in many common multi-tasking workloads. At worst it ought to only lose at most 50% of its speed when running two CPU-bound jobs; the fact that it loses more than 50% is a problem. (Notice that the Pentium-4 chips don't even lose that much performance in the same situation.)

A good single-tasking chip, but a weak multi-tasker. Seems like a bit of an anachronism, but there it is.

Exactly the opposite.

Conroe was not designed for single thread applications and its multi-thread capabilities exceeds that of Athlon 64 X2 by around 20-25%.

SoftLanding · Post by **SoftLanding** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:27 pm

I've learnt a lot more about this, but I'm still confused!

It looks like Conroe will be about 20% faster. On the other hand, AM2 chips are available now, and I won't be buying the fastest chip anyway.

At the moment my gut feeling is to buy the X2 3800+, as was suggested by someone on this thread. I suppose even if I do buy that, prices will go down when Conroe is released.

Thanks all for replying.

vitaminc · Post by **vitaminc** » Thu Jun 08, 2006 4:09 pm

SoftLanding wrote:I've learnt a lot more about this, but I'm still confused!

It looks like Conroe will be about 20% faster. On the other hand, AM2 chips are available now, and I won't be buying the fastest chip anyway.

At the moment my gut feeling is to buy the X2 3800+, as was suggested by someone on this thread. I suppose even if I do buy that, prices will go down when Conroe is released.

Thanks all for replying.

Dont even buy that thing at the current price...

$300 USD.

Unless you have a deep pocket and wouldn't care about price/performance/wattage...

And look at what AMD has done just today

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32304

More AMD price cuts will follow, and AM2 lowest end dual core CPUs will be around $200.

SoftLanding · Post by **SoftLanding** » Thu Jun 08, 2006 4:21 pm

Thanks vitaminc.

I'd like to buy before July 1 for tax reasons, so I guess I should order in late June - hopefully prices will be lower by then.

vitaminc · Post by **vitaminc** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:40 am

SoftLanding wrote:Thanks vitaminc.

I'd like to buy before July 1 for tax reasons, so I guess I should order in late June - hopefully prices will be lower by then.

AMD slashed AM2 Athlon 64 single core prices last week. Athlon 3800+ drop from high $200s down to mid $100s. The best would be Athlon 64 3200+. 10x multiplier, good for overclocking, and cost only around $110 on Newegg or MWave.

Dual core athlon 64s are going to drop price by 30% to 50% late July, after Conroe launch. But your time constrained.

Oh and btw, the AM2 athlons all have virtualization AFAIK.

SoftLanding · Post by **SoftLanding** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 4:21 pm

AMD slashed AM2 Athlon 64 single core prices last week. Athlon 3800+ drop from high $200s down to mid $100s. The best would be Athlon 64 3200+. 10x multiplier, good for overclocking, and cost only around $110 on Newegg or MWave.

Dual core athlon 64s are going to drop price by 30% to 50% late July, after Conroe launch. But your time constrained.

Oh and btw, the AM2 athlons all have virtualization AFAIK.

That's good to know. Do you think prices will be slashed further before the end of the month? If not, I'd like to buy now. I'm keen to buy a dual core. I live in Australia btw - price drops might be delayed here, though I've never checked.

Pgh · Post by **Pgh** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:36 pm

SoftLanding wrote:It's good to read all your comments - thanks all for posting.

I'm starting to wonder whether it's worth waiting for Conroe. I'm not going to be using this machine for gaming at all. It's going to be a combined server/workstation. I'll be running at least 2 virtual machines using XEN (both using Linux).

As a server, it won't have to do much at all - I need a small low-traffic web server for clients to test development in-progress.

As a workstation it will be my main development machine and it would need to be powerfull. However, it won't have a screen of its own - I'll be working on it from my laptop using an X-server, VNC & remote desktop.

Given those requirements, is Conroe still the best option?

I was also wondering how Conroe will perform relative to an AMD chip with the Pacifica extensions.

Charlie D(something impossible to spell) wrote a couple of articles awhile ago at the Inquirer about why AMD's Pacifica virtualization technology was better than Intel's Vanderpool virtualization technology. But this was in pre-Conroe days.

I couldn't care less about gaming benchmarks, which get all the publicity, but does anyone have any info on the relative performance of AM2 vs Conroe with respect to Xen and VMware?

Firetech · Post by **Firetech** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:47 pm

SoftLanding wrote: That's good to know. Do you think prices will be slashed further before the end of the month? If not, I'd like to buy now. I'm keen to buy a dual core. I live in Australia btw - price drops might be delayed here, though I've never checked.

The AMD dual cores are due to drop on 24th July, the day after Core 2 Duo launches. Both Intels and AMD's dual cores will have been slashed at that time. When/if it filters to here is anyones guess, as you know we seem to be last on the list in Oz.

The Pentium D's aren't a bad price as it is.
Keep an eye on the WP & OCAU forums which have lot's of threads currently running and retailers who also post info. You'll hear it there first re:Oz prices.

Poodle · Post by **Poodle** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:30 am

I've preordered a E6600 as the price is really nice.

I have some of thoughts though...

* Am2 is a bit rough on ram but delivers mad memory bandwidth (some get like 12000Mb/s)

* What will the K8L be like, and will it be AM2 (probably)?

* Intel's multiplier and vcore software seem to suck big time compared to CnQ. Thanks to the A8N32's small overvolt I could overklock as much as 240*11= 2,64Ghz using CnQ with my old (in sign.) system. Which was very satisfying.

How does CrystalCpuid work with Intel?

vitaminc · Post by **vitaminc** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:29 pm

Poodle wrote:* Am2 is a bit rough on ram but delivers mad memory bandwidth (some get like 12000Mb/s)

Bandwidth, Latency, or Throughput? DDR2 has inherent higher latency and higher bandwidth compare to DDR1.

It's the proper of memory, not AM2. AMD bought the DDR2 controller design from Rambus btw.

* What will the K8L be like, and will it be AM2 (probably)?

It *should* use socket F2 (servers) and AM2 (desktops). K8L is basically a quad core single die K8 with some minor improvements in prefatching.

AMD will release the server version of K8L first, then desktops. They will use a different CPU design for volume desktop/notebooks.

* Intel's multiplier and vcore software seem to suck big time compared to CnQ. Thanks to the A8N32's small overvolt I could overklock as much as 240*11= 2,64Ghz using CnQ with my old (in sign.) system. Which was very satisfying.

Not exactly sure, but 2.2ghz to 2.6ghz isn't that big of an improvement.

P4 can usually overclock quite well due to their architectural flaw/advantage. Thus you can see 3.6-3.8ghz 805 on air quite easily.

TomZ · Post by **TomZ** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:43 pm

I don't mean to be blunt, but if you have a June 30th tax deadline, then you don't really have a choice between AM2 and Conroe. Neither is available. You can debate all day long between the two, but at the end of the day, you will have to either settle with today's technologies, or else give up your tax benefit.

Today's dual-core chips are pretty much X2 and Intel Pentium D 9x0 (Presler). The strengths of the X2 are pretty well known. The strengths of Intel 920, 930, 940, 950 are good performance/price since Intel is being very agressive with price cuts (940 is $220 at newegg). These are good performing chips with Intel's 65nm technology, and they have good overclocking capability. Downside is of course that they are Netburst, so they run a little hotter than the X2. Many folks prefer X2 over Intel 9x0 at the moment, but both are pretty good, and I would suggest to see where you can get the best deal. I think you will be happy with either choice; in other words, you can't go wrong!

My final thought: if you decide on the Intel, I would highly suggest an Intel motherboard (e.g., Bad Axe) if you are interested in stability and reliability. They are the best, IMO. Intel motherboards are the main reason I am still buying Intel processors. I built my current system with Bad Axe in late January - still not a single crash or any other problem - it has been on 24x7 continuous since then.

ronnylov · Post by **ronnylov** » Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:58 am

AMD is also releasing a new low power series of CPU.
The Energy Effecient CPU's will have a TDP of 35W on some models like X2 3800+ and other models will have 65 W TDP.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/displa ... 12457.html

According to this (on Swedish):
http://www.nordichardware.se/nyhet,10354.html

"De imponerande TDP-vÃ¤rdena till trots hÃ¤vdar AMD att deras processorer ska fÃ¥ svÃ¥rt att ens konsumera dessa mÃ¤ngder strÃ¶m. I vanliga arbetsbelastning (SYSmark 2004 SE) ska deras 35W X2-processor dra blott 14W."

Which means: "Despite the impressing TDP-values AMD claims that their CPU's hardly will consume that much power. At normal load (SYSmark 2004 SE) their 35 W X2-CPU will consume only 14 W."

AM2/Conroe dilemma

AM2/Conroe dilemma

You are right, it is a tough call.