SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: AK2004 who wrote (188894)3/7/2006 6:14:53 PM
From: eracerRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
Re: you have a good point, why would Intel need to run modified for Conroe driver on AMD system

ATI recently introduced dual-core support for their video card drivers. It might need to check the CPU ID to determine whether to optimize for dual-core mode and would need to be updated for Conroe support. Or it could have been a compatibility issue with the motherboard/chipset/BIOS.

the other thing is that bios is not updated for AMD as per screen message "AMD processor model unknown"

Because the FX-60 was overclocked to 2.8GHz to better match what Athlon 64 X2 will perform like at the Conroe launch.

I could not find any fx-60 benchmarks that would be consistent with intel's, can anyone confirm that?

Message 22238354



To: AK2004 who wrote (188894)3/7/2006 7:01:14 PM
From: dougSF30Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 275872
 
I think the other clue is the choice of a dual graphics card system. Sure, you want to make the cpu the bottleneck, but this also is going to place a higher premium on *bandwidth*. I suspect that AM2/Rev F, with DDR2-800, is going to boost the AMD crossfire scores by a decent amount, just from the DDR2-800 aspect.



To: AK2004 who wrote (188894)3/7/2006 10:15:29 PM
From: DineshRespond to of 275872
 
<deleted> already posted