http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=130290

*source: vr-forum

Nice results. But which one is more OC able? And whats the price differences.

go go go AMD, finally they did something

So this proves that the X2 5600 beats e6600?
Hmm...

Thinking of getting C2D, but after seeing this, hmm... hmm...

Bleh!
I'm a hardcore fan of intel!

I won't go for AMD eventhough it's proven that it's beaten by AMD!

AMD hardcores, don't be mad at me...

I think X2 5600+ is more expensive E6600

watever.....i just only afford pentium D/althon64 T.T

5600 stil 65 or 90?

if can beat mean amd 65 will kaw kaw pawn intel

hehe,i same as you.until now day i haven try amd yet.

beat but not by far. and FYI guys, AMD has all the while been doing something, the X2s are never too far off from the C2Ds to begin with.

Meaning?

#1 - based on the picture shown, it just has higher score on various benchies but it's not by far.

#2 - we have not considered the price factor

#3 - title stated "finally AMD is doing something" is total crap. the statement was as if AMD was doing nothing. fact is that if you compare X2 with C2D of a same price point, X2 lose out only by a bit (ok not so "a bit in certain cases) but it certainly is not like how a VIA 800 - 1ghz processor doing only as good as an Intel's 500 - 700mhz processor.

At least AMD is not resting on their laurels and have tried to close the gap with Intel's E6600. From the benchmarks, AMD only lost out a bit to Intel for the 3DMark06 benchmark and it will be more attractive if AMD could price it cheaper than Intel's E6600. It shows that AMD can still push their X2 architecture further.

3dmark doesn't mean a thing. they use their proprietary engine which i've not seen other games use.

max-fx engine on 3dmark01 was used by max payne. after that, i don't remember hearing of any game that uses 3dmark engine, especially the popular games.

is that china or taiwan?, why so geng can do street demo like pasar malam?
how much is 5600+?

hehee.. im also about to ask the same question
hope the price not really creating deep hole into pocket

I will wait on the pricing before saying who will win this. AMD might just price it a little lower, but by that time, Intel might slash the price for the E6600 too. with the performance that little, this is too hard to call. but I'd say it's still an Intel lead for this

Its in Japan. Its nice to see AMD is not totally losing.

@ newegg.

Intel C2D E6600 is USD315,
AMD X2 5600+ is USD325.

other new from vr-zone(forum)

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showpost.php?p=3...58&postcount=15

Also note that the x2 5600+ is 90W while the 6600 is 65W.

If thats the case might as well i stick with C2D. Furthermore C2D has proven to be very ocable compared to X2 in general.

is it 90 or 65 nanotech?and how bout its L2 catch?

i'm still on intel side even though currently using amd. amd OC like crap compare to intel, period. btw, that amd still on 90nm? seem like it due to its TDP...

Like that I'll still stick to C2D. 5600+, whats the clockspeed of it?

w0ot?! what a surprise.. amd's 90w still can compete with intel's 65w
amd rock!

ps: ive found some review where amd still leading intel in multimedia benchmark

This post has been edited by gengstapo: Feb 20 2007, 10:12 AM

What the... it rocks because a 90W chip performs about the same as a 65W chip? It means the performance/watt of the 90W chip is a lot lower. That doesn't rock at all.

But doesnt this mean that the E6600 will still be better for overclocking as it will uses less power and produce less heat? and I thought 'w' stand for watt and if it's the architecture, we would have used 'nm' or nanometre instead

*ADDED*
ikanayam had clarified the matter above.

This post has been edited by linkinstreet: Feb 20 2007, 10:39 AM

nice demo siaz i will still stick 2 C2D though while 5600 comes 2 the market the e6600 price sure drop like hell one

Wow, nice...AMD is coming back.

X2 5600 price should be cheaper than e6600 right ??

looking back at the 1st page, you can see that another forumer (ahpaul82) mentioned that the E6600 is cheaper by 10 bucks.

then we hope some bundle or great stock cooling from this price right?

Meaning? for this price you will get the standard things. Proc, heatsink, etc..

what he really mean is, intel used 65nm tech, improved from previous 90nm tech (smaller the size, can put more transistor means more performance) which is way better in power consumption and heat. but AMD not yet using 65nm tech and the performance is on par or lost a bit to intel. just wait and see when AMD come out with their 65nm tech proc. must be rock...

p/s:but i'm a fan of intel...

This post has been edited by rainingzero: Feb 20 2007, 09:23 PM

i saw this review on hardwarezone

http://www.hardwarezone.com.my/articles/vi...p?cid=2&id=2193

how bout the cache size, i think intel hv bigger tehn amd... multitasking: intel still win...

with 2.8ghz and 89 TDP.. amd should improve more...
i doubt can oc higher...
for the price better go for C2D..

http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/de...n=ADA5400IAA5CZ

someone is selling 5600+ at garage sale for RM 1.5 k ++...

hello you guys....

5600+ is not a new thing... it's just the same old 90nm AM2

haha.. old tech 4 more than 1k..
mybe the price should be more lower..

baik beli E6600

anyway, those benchmark score are useless

should pair up with an Allendale with the same clockspeed to compare

no need the same clock speed la, in fact those clock speed are useless nowdays, clockspeed can't be use to compare different proc... if u said is true, then i think Pentium D is the best la, even beat the performance king Core2 Duo, the lowest clockspeed for Pentium D is 2.8, which equals to Core2 Extreme, so??? the clockspeed is useless nowdays

u wanna a real benchmark??? that ppl test it using the real thing, not those stupid benchmark score, visit Tom's Hardware i'll post some of the test result, let see if AMD is finally doing something

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html








This post has been edited by E-J@1: Feb 22 2007, 11:52 AM

AMD is not doing something because there's nothing new with 5600+

AMD will find ways beat Intel... altough C2D is winning Dell still buying & AMD market share still growing...

intel still make alot new changes recently , amd so far slower.. but based on wat i know E6600 cheaper and lots of us sure go for 6600.. although i didnt use amd b4, i know they hav potential to make better 1 lately.

if its cheap and energy efficient it wins. 100+ benchmark points doesn't mean anything when it idles most of the time torrenting

This is just some short solution for AMD. Nothing spectacular. Plus C2D is a cooler chip to begin with. IMO, best AMD chip to buy are still 3800 X2 and 3600 X2, anything from mid to high all goes to C2D.

New stuff from AMD should be in Q3 2007. Wait and see.

AMD should improve on the overclocking of their new chips too

Well, now Intel is conquering the market and later the AMD will conquer the market for a time, it's like a stable process.

it will teeter and tooter between the both of them, but I agree, the 5600 is just a short time answer and cannot compare to the 6600

The x2 need around 400mhz more to compete same with a c2d right?

what is "w' for energy consumption?

W = Watts.

I don't think I wanna hear the news that AMD firing millions of workers due to lost of money just like Intel last time

AMD DON'T have "millions of workers" in the first place.



btw, gwei-loh company all like that one....the moment lose some money, start chopping heads even if the previous year made a bundle....

AMD don't have millions of workers? my bad though

ya ya, lose money->chopping heads->start over->make a whole lots of profit

lol should've just include that in the question ..

better buy e6600
the oc is awesome
but need to pair with gud hardware
world record for oc e6600 is 5410.57mhz
Here is the link e6600 OC

wow 5410.57mhz???!!!! can't imagine how fast the cpu do the works...

i'd say AMD's doing pretty well, considering that they're not as equipped (financially and manpower) as Intel.

You do realize that record was done with a ridiculously high Vcore on LN2, which is wonderfully practical for everyday use?

---

Added on February 27, 2007, 2:18 amI'd say they're not doing too good at the moment. Market share wise, at the moment, best they have been. But financially, nope, not very good. They recently posted a loss, they are one process generation behind intel now, the R600 is extremely late (nvidia has shipped >400k G80s).

K8L has pwn, as does R600.

This post has been edited by ikanayam: Feb 27 2007, 02:18 AM

That one i know lah
of cos cant use for daily practical usage
and the cooling method also extreme

This post has been edited by epul: Feb 27 2007, 08:06 AM

Yeah, Intel is one processing generation ahead, and so is nvidia.

I don't want them to fall though, seeing that they were the first to stood up a chance against Intel (which pushed intel to the max and released core 2 duo for us ).

Well, they are doing something, not like last time on September 12, 2006, the top of the line (of amd) was pwned by Intel's 3rd most powerful processor.

By the way, I think they need to act quickly, Intel's probably close in making a bigger leap.

Er... nvidia is not one process generation ahead. In fact, it seems like AMD will be first to market with 65nm GPUs.

in term of manufacturing process ..... AMD's 90nm still can do better than Intel's 65nm .... I'm saying about power efficiency.

How do you make this comparison?

Yeah.. Myself too wanna know how u compare it, soulfly.
About this thread topic, surely will go for C2D, nice to OC.

if gv me choose between these 2 processor, of coz i get both....hahaha .

seriously, of coz C2D lor....AMD current is pathetic compare to intel's C2D. just like how AMD k8 vs intel netburst.

sorry. when i was posting, i was thinking of how AMD has progressed thus far despite not being that strong compared to Intel. smaller but they did came out with great chips time and time again.

and yes, i do agree that they're not doing too good at the moment but considering they're a smaller company i'd say they're doing fairly well.

however.... when the amd64 arrived...its supprising us ... n its totally beat the intel until they need to come out the PentiumD n now the C2D... but im sure that amd will supprising us again with a new n better chip that can beat the C2D ... as we know tat PD n C2D is after the AMDx64....so what is the next for AMD?... i think it will be come out soon .... something that will totally beat intel ...

the cycle goes on. just like NV / ATI war.

prior to the launch of Athlons (K6 time) AMD looked like it was doomed.

yes ... u r right ... it is a cycle ... there is no ending for this two company ... cuz its a technology item... all will only better n better ... n its depending on the users...

This statement is only true when you compare with Intel's netbus architecture CPUs.

with all the technology advancement n the speed of development.....the company will gain the benefit...n the user will end up with a piece of history in one year time....

y cant just 1 of the stronger compeny buy another company so tat we no need to decide buy which one ..... SIEN ~
Hope ATi CLOSE AND AMD ALSO GONE
then the world will b peace LOL~
j/k

y not intel or nvidia gone le ........jk....=.="

k k i know u j/k la but really when there's no price competition, then you're going to pay through your nose.

and how? if they come out with suxor products you also have no choice to use.

competition is good.

you must know that AMD is great, they help keep Intel at their toes.

AMD is in the lead according to the benchmarks. If you are considering about price/performance and overclockability go ahead with the E6600

Where u find the benchmarks which is AMD leading ? Athlon X2 5600 vs E6600?

C2D E6600 still win in my opinion

1) Overclockability of E6600, mine can easily reach 3.2GHz
2) Price wise, E6600 will be slightly cheaper (as quoted by newegg)
3) Power Consumption, C2D 65W TDP while AMD 90W

Its nice to see AMD came up close to E6600 but the X2 architecture is going old and it is already reaching its limit.