Spring RTS Engine

I like AMD but I cant afford the AMD big boys or the Intel conroe cpu's, so for now I'm sticking with cheap AMD cpu's.

Ideally if I had the money to splash out on a new system I probably would get a conroe cpu, but economics dictates that i cant afford it.

The next system I buy will probably be a laptop with an AMD turion cpu.

Vassago wrote:"AMD fanboys....

wont accept that conroe does steamroll over amd."

STEAMROLLS? No.
Is a bit better? Yes.

I've seen the comparisons. Absolutely, Intel wins in (almost) every category. What do you think is going to happen when AMD releases it's new chip? It will also be a bit better.

That is where you are wrong. Conroe is made using specialised bacteria, and this process is pateneted by Intel, so AMD cannot make a direct competeter without putting in the year of reasearch and millions of dollars. Which by then, Intel shall be supreme.

Also, the cheapest conroe is about 250$ Not that much by processor standards, or compared to an AMD of the same spec.

If you take a step back and look at it in a different way.
Intel has more money and resources to expand R&D then
AMD. Intel can make it own CPUs ... They are in the process
of building 2 new factories as I speak.

AMD has good designers and engineers working for them. They
don't have the cash resouces like Intel does. They don't have
as many factories as Intel.


Bottom line is every 12 months AMD or Intel we release a better CPU
to the world. As long as the CPUs stay under $600 ... I'll upgrade ...

genblood wrote:As long as the CPUs stay under $600 ... I'll upgrade ...

My computer's motherboard just toasted out, and I'm going to wait for the Conroe, but not because I want one, I just want the prices on existing processors to go down.

Seriously thinking about a Pentium D 805 on water at 4ghz.

Vassago wrote:"AMD fanboys....

wont accept that conroe does steamroll over amd."

STEAMROLLS? No.
Is a bit better? Yes.

I've seen the comparisons. Absolutely, Intel wins in (almost) every category. What do you think is going to happen when AMD releases it's new chip? It will also be a bit better.
No cpu has every dwarfed the competition's. Ever. Each one has had features that made it a little better than the other. That's normal. That's competition.
I've owned both Intel and AMD, and I find they are both suited to differant things. Intel is absolutely amazing for applications and development, hands down. For games, I don't see anything better than AMD.

Intel broke what was basicly an AMD monopoly with the conroe. The conroe is the chipset Intel released to compeate with the AMD X2 series using the new socket AM. This is the first generation in nearly 10 years that intel can legitimately claim better preformace per dollar spent in gaming applications. Not that anyone cares but the energy consumption of the conroe core chips is also nearly half what it was for the pentiums, meaning it's less then AMD's flagship models that were advertized intensively as more energy effecient then pentiums. Frankly this generation of intel chip DOES steamroll AMD. Do I think AMD can compete in the future? Sure, they were just getting lazy because it used to be easy to beat intel. But make no mistake, they have quite solidly lost the battle, and they will be working from the underdog spot in the war as the next generations approach. Just as it looked like intel was conceading defeat as well

i'll get one...but i think i'll wait until they're widely adopted (CHEAP FTW!!!1)
more than anything i just want an Antec P180 now to make my comp silent

unpossible wrote:i'll get one...but i think i'll wait until they're widely adopted (CHEAP FTW!!!1)
more than anything i just want an Antec P180 now to make my comp silent

P180 cases ftw. My Antec power supply should complimet that nicely \o/

Cabbage wrote:

I have an AMD x2 already >.<

For somereason i think my x2 is to blame for my horrible FPS in spring. Some times i 10-13 FPS, And in even more extreme cases, i get 2. All setttings on max, 1280x1024.
Gay.

I've got a 4.4ghz X-2 - your low FPS isn't due to your processor, in some cases i get over 200fps, but the average is around 70 with all settings on full and a couple of hundred units/structures. Your low FPS is probably due to your graphics card, i use a 7800GTX, but when i installed the lastest drivers my FPS dropped right down to around 15FPS no matter what was happening, and even on low settings. Once i reinstalled some older drivers, it worked fine again. (using 84.xx now i think)

This is interesting. Maybe one should capitalize on your observation. Can you give the exact GC reference and the driver number ? It might interest other people and go to the wiki (or a bug report) if this is confirmed.

Drone_Fragger wrote:

Vassago wrote: That is where you are wrong. Conroe is made using specialised bacteria, and this process is pateneted by Intel, so AMD cannot make a direct competeter without putting in the year of reasearch and millions of dollars. Which by then, Intel shall be supreme.

Also, the cheapest conroe is about 250$ Not that much by processor standards, or compared to an AMD of the same spec.

AMD will have to lower its prices, and in the end, the winner is the consumer.

el_muchacho wrote:

Cabbage wrote:

I have an AMD x2 already >.<

For somereason i think my x2 is to blame for my horrible FPS in spring. Some times i 10-13 FPS, And in even more extreme cases, i get 2. All setttings on max, 1280x1024.
Gay.

I've got a 4.4ghz X-2 - your low FPS isn't due to your processor, in some cases i get over 200fps, but the average is around 70 with all settings on full and a couple of hundred units/structures. Your low FPS is probably due to your graphics card, i use a 7800GTX, but when i installed the lastest drivers my FPS dropped right down to around 15FPS no matter what was happening, and even on low settings. Once i reinstalled some older drivers, it worked fine again. (using 84.xx now i think)

This is interesting. Maybe one should capitalize on your observation. Can you give the exact GC reference and the driver number ? It might interest other people and go to the wiki (or a bug report) if this is confirmed.

GC ref? 91.31 driver is the slow one. I am on a 7800 GTX as well.
My FPS skyrocketed when i got the old drivers.
An observation by me: My CPU was at 48/52% almost all the time while playing spring. With the old drivers its almost always 100/100%

Maybe because there isnt as mutch time wasted with graphics allowing more procesing to be done in a shorter time without the cpu waiting for the gpu. Afterall, a higher framerate will allow for the full speed of the game which means more processing...

Anyway, wait and see.

I won't change my hardware before the release of Supreme Commander, which undoubtly will need maximum processing power. That's another 9 months, so there is plenty of time for hardware and price evolution in between.

Have GPG not said anything about minimum requirements?

Conroe is going to be a great series of chips, I think.

Basically what they're doing is taking the optimizations they've made for M processors and putting them in desktop machines. No, really - that's pretty much the full extent of the changes. They're just not being lazy anymore. For instance, you will find that if you have an Asus P4P800SE motherboard like me, Asus has released an adapter that allows it to accept Pentium M's. A 1.8 ghz pentium M performs at roughly the same speed as a 3.5 Ghz P4, or better.

So you can imagine what will happen when they make those chips run at 4 ghz and give them a real cooling system, not just a passive/low-power one like you'd find in a laptop.

If that's the case then what is merom? Googling for it tells me it is the laptop version of conroe

Just another incremental upgrade, probably. What Pentium M is pretty far advanced already, I'd be surprised if they can come up with something to really steal its thunder already.

Well, the biggest improvements over the Pentium M are the price point, the fact that the chip is dual core, the energy consumption, and the manufacturing methods.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6153900/p-2.html

Look at those performance numbers. And I'm NOT talking about the crappy 1024x768 tests. Look at the high resolution 1600x1200 tests. The Intel chip barely holds it's own (by anywhere from 10-30fps). And they aren't even comparing it to the AMD FX-62. Intel's Conroe is defineatly better. But I think you guys are going to extreme by saying it's stomping the crap out of AMD. That statement couldn't be farther from the truth.

Perhaps Intel's Conroe smacks down AMD when it comes to stuff like video encoding, code compiling and application stuff - BIG WHOOPIE.

Prilim benchmarks show that for stuff like video encoding the conroe performance is about the same as AMD chips. It's the game performance that is the real selling point. Any performance advantage over an AMD in the same price range for Intel is a stomping. AMD has been known to out perform Intel in the gaming market since forever, this is the first generation that has changed.