View Single Post
Old 13-03-2006, 12:34   #5
handyman
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Nr Carnforth
Age: 51
Services: M6 Keele
Posts: 5,462
handyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny star
handyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny starhandyman has a nice shiny star
Send a message via MSN to handyman
Re: Intel Next Gen "Conroe" Performance...

Quote:
Originally Posted by zinglebarb
This chip promises to be everything the Prescott was ment to be.Personally I see the enthusiast sticking with AMD.
AMD I was reading in micromart this week are tabling a a 4 core cpu for the M2 as soon as early next year.Intel will not be anywhere near this by then.Theres no doubt the Conroes will be good cpus but I see them being expensive.
James have you noted how pretty much all main plans from both cpu companies are based on multi core cpus.Just look at the FX60.Think I said quite a while ago multi core would be the gamers choice
they are probably multi core as they are reaching the limits of current cpu manufacturing technology. Its easier to make lower spec chips and whack 2 together. Less strain on each chip too.
handyman is offline   Reply With Quote