| #8. Posted at 08:39 AM on Nov 17th 2005 | Edit Reply |
|
PerfectCr |
So what's the deal here. Intel's new chips have no disernable improvement in performance? Are they ever going to show a huge leap in performance vs. the A64?
 |
#14, O RLY? :P
:
PerfectCr
(#17)
«
| Edit Reply |
|
Welch |
What sorta crap is that putting the proccessors ontop of the heat-sink fan... Watch someone fire that sucker up and them go flying across a room like shirkens, killing intels lead engineer and screwing their chance up of ever recovering from the AMD vs Intel wars :D.
Sorry, just had to say something as they just where sitting there like they belonged. As though it was Intel's new idea for CPU cooling :P "OF COURSE, why didnt we think of this before... put the proccessor ONTOP of the heatsink fan :O" |
| Edit Reply |
|
Usacomp2k3 |
I must say that cooling solution looks pretty sweet. That would look really nice with a huge copper coller on the CPU w/ blue LED's.
|
| Edit Reply |
|
tfp |
So much more intel's 65 nano process being in trouble, that was a pretty good temp decrease for a prescott core.
|
| Edit Reply |
|
kvndoom |
Hey, the dual flashlights on the motherboard look COOL! Do they take "C" or "D" cells?
|
| Edit Reply |
|
samadhi |
Those latter results are particularly interesting, as they show generally lower temperatures and power consumption for the 65-nano chips.
Isn't that to be expected with shorther pathways etc? The only exception I can think to this rule was with the P4 shrink to 90nm however I believe they also modified the chip during the shrink and this is likely to have cancelled out any gains that may otherwise have witnessed. |
| Edit Reply |
|
FireGryphon |
geeze, that's a colorful board. looks like it's straight out of an anime cartoon. ugly as hell.
|