Intel Dual Core article up! [Archive]

sxs112

04-04-2005, 09:23 AM

ExtremeTech:Performance Sneak Preview: Intel Dual Core Pentium (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1781879,00.asp)

FiringSquad:Intel's Dual-Core Pentium Extreme Edition 840 Performance Pre-Preview (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_pentium_extreme_edition_840/)

ComputerBase:Intel Dual-Core Benchmarks Pentium D 840 und Extreme Edition 840 „Technology "review" (http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/2005/intel_dual-core_benchmarks/)

HEXUS:Intel's Pentium Extreme Edition 840 and 955X Express chipset (http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD0xMDg1)

HARDWARELUXX:Dual Core Sneak Preview - Intel Pentium Extreme Edition (http://www.hardwareluxx.de/story.php?id=2266)

Legitreviews:Intel Dual Core: Pentium EE 840 Arrives (http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=184)

boban10

04-04-2005, 09:40 AM

nice... :slobber:

caater

04-04-2005, 09:47 AM

14-60 mults.. lol..
japanese and the finns start to make 60x100 benches? :)

Chr0n1c

04-04-2005, 10:51 AM

What a crazy name. Pentium D EE 840.

freecableguy

04-04-2005, 01:26 PM

HOLY :banana::banana::banana::banana:! Did anyone see this!!!!!

Much like this preview sample, all retail models will be fully multiplier-unlocked.

enzoR

04-04-2005, 02:16 PM

not exaclty.... the lowest multiplyer seems to be 14. that way noone will hit 500mhz FSB

saaya

04-04-2005, 02:21 PM

the smithfield cpus OBVIOUSLY use an arbiter...

i cant believe they didnt realize that :lol:
what else explains the low memory bandwidth and the pentium d beating the xe in benches that rely on high memory throughput?

PytonOrm

04-04-2005, 02:26 PM

HOLY :banana::banana::banana::banana:! Did anyone see this!!!!!

Much like this preview sample, all retail models will be fully multiplier-unlocked.

:eek: totaly unlocked cpu... what nice from intel :) gotta love this madness :toast: :banana: :slobber:

Kunaak

04-04-2005, 02:57 PM

if the upper multipliers are unlocked too, thats pretty much a kick in the nads to AMD.

AMD will really then need to rethink this whole, FX only unlocked for upper multipliers thing. more competition is only a good thing as far as I am concerned, no more "anti overclocking" from intel :D

skate2snow

04-04-2005, 03:16 PM

Actually, we dont know FOR SURE yet,,, But I sure hope so:).

Esmein

04-04-2005, 07:23 PM

Donnie27

04-04-2005, 08:03 PM

Man, do I really see what im just looking at ? 66 celsius idle in bios with stock cooler ? And is that really a dual northbridge cooled by that long sink on the 955 ? Intel just grabbed 2 prescotts and 2 of those nb chips and soldered together. Don't make me laugh, its really primitive. Anyway, that sandra fpu is impressive(though everes memtest gives rather low score hmm )

Processors have always ran hot while in the BIOS, was that supposed to change?

Here's another.

From Hexus talking about Dual Cores.

"However, when apps. are single-threaded, performance is rarely better than an equivalent speed single-core model's. The latter is especially true in present-day gaming, so enthusiasts looking for massive hikes in system-bound gaming performance will be somewhat disappointed.

Anyone looking for "massive hikes" from Dual Core or even Dual Processors using single threads better not be calling him or herself an enthusiast=P Only a Newbie would think of something that stupid.

Donnie27

uclajd

04-04-2005, 08:31 PM

I think we should all wait for optimized OS's and apps before judging these babies.

Jeff

04-04-2005, 08:35 PM

Thanks for all the links. :toast:

Very interesting that 3DMark05 benefits from HT and dual CPUs. (maybe that was already common knowledge but I'm a noob with 05)

Esmein

04-05-2005, 03:27 AM

Processors have always ran hot while in the BIOS, was that supposed to change?

Here's another.

From Hexus talking about Dual Cores.

On the legitreviews the staff reported crashes under load with stock heatsink and fan. It _must_ be hotter than 66 celsius.

Donnie27

04-05-2005, 06:08 AM

Processors have always ran hot while in the BIOS, was that supposed to change?

Here's another.

From Hexus talking about Dual Cores.

On the legitrewievs the staff reported crashes under load with stock heatsink and fan. It _must_ be hotter than 66 celsius.

Yes they did, not disputing that. It's still a simple fact that cool down routines don't work in the BIOS and most folks didn't even comment on that. As a rule, you do what you need to do in the BIOS and get the hell out! When overclocking, this is Xtreme Systems afterall, this is an absolute must. I saw folks burn up Overclocked TBirds by staying the BIOS too long. I'm sure a few Pentiums died this way as well.

Donnie

Donnie27

04-05-2005, 06:15 AM

Thanks for all the links. :toast:

Very interesting that 3DMark05 benefits from HT and dual CPUs. (maybe that was already common knowledge but I'm a noob with 05)

Would you call those benefits "Massive Hikes"? :slobber: I didn't say there would be no benefits. Just not the same as if it were multi-threaded and SSE2/3 optimized. As long as you've been around Jeff, I know that you know that already.

Donnie27

Esmein

04-06-2005, 10:06 AM

Yes they did, not disputing that. It's still a simple fact that cool down routines don't work in the BIOS and most folks didn't even comment on that. As a rule, you do what you need to do in the BIOS and get the hell out! When overclocking, this is Xtreme Systems afterall, this is an absolute must. I saw folks burn up Overclocked TBirds by staying the BIOS too long. I'm sure a few Pentiums died this way as well.

Donnie

I dont argue against xtreme cooling at all, bring it on :D
If intel fails to release a decent cooler for this little guy we have to wait some more and pay more to get a proc like this. Anyway, nice stuff and all but if I had one, i'd put it right under a phase changer, no hsf no water, -30 at sight :)

(and I feel shame for writing "wiev")

Donnie27

04-06-2005, 07:39 PM

I dont argue against xtreme cooling at all, bring it on :D
If intel fails to release a decent cooler for this little guy we have to wait some more and pay more to get a proc like this. Anyway, nice stuff and all but if I had one, i'd put it right under a phase changer, no hsf no water, -30 at sight :)
(and I feel shame for writing "wiev")

:slobber: I can only Dream buddy! It's not in my plans at all though. :(

Donnie

Esmein

04-08-2005, 07:36 PM

:slobber: I can only Dream buddy! It's not in my plans at all though. :(

Donnie
First I have to build my s939 setup, and phasechange that. If anyone comes and yells 'Hey dude heres' a p4 8xx put it under that fridge' I'd do so :D

Donnie27

04-09-2005, 07:46 AM

First I have to build my s939 setup, and phasechange that. If anyone comes and yells 'Hey dude heres' a p4 8xx put it under that fridge' I'd do so :D

I'am in the middle of building another Rig! When it starts to take shape, I post about it in the AMD section, I don't think it belongs here. That's how crap starts.

Donnie

100

04-09-2005, 03:20 PM

I hope this doesn't leave AMD in the gutter. I used to be a big AMD fan.

I wonder when the first quad core CPU samples will be available :D

matt9669

04-09-2005, 03:29 PM

I hope this doesn't leave AMD in the gutter. I used to be a big AMD fan.I'd highly doubt that, remember these are just demo chips for the press, Intel isn't selling them yet - also remember the design is less elegant than the dual core Hammer, it's basically two chips slapped together ;)

Esmein

04-09-2005, 05:48 PM

I'd highly doubt that, remember these are just demo chips for the press, Intel isn't selling them yet - also remember the design is less elegant than the dual core Hammer, it's basically two chips slapped together ;)
And if you're looking at the stuff, its two 925's or 915's slapping together(by looking and the chipset hs)

Donnie27

04-09-2005, 06:14 PM

I'd highly doubt that, remember these are just demo chips for the press, Intel isn't selling them yet - also remember the design is less elegant than the dual core Hammer, it's basically two chips slapped together ;)

Geesh! That's what the hell both Intel and AMD's Dual Cores are, two procs on one package. It's nice to cheer for AMD, just cheer for a real reason.

Donnie

Donnie27

04-09-2005, 06:21 PM

And if you're looking at the stuff, its two 925's or 915's slapping together(by looking and the chipset hs)

Erum, those are chipsets, not processors. This is two 6xx's that so far are@2.8, 3.0 and 3.2GHz with HTT turned off. They're given an Arbiter and a few other tweaks. This is NOT much different than AMD's CrossBar Interface for their Dual Core Processors.

With that said, the AMD vs. Intel thing will look similar to Dual Opterons vs. Dual Xeons. Each will still have advantages and disadvantages=P

Donnie

lutjens

04-09-2005, 06:35 PM

Much like this preview sample, all retail models will be fully multiplier-unlocked.

I'll believe these chips are unlocked when I see it. Call me a "doubting Thomas" if you will, but Intel's track record on supporting us enthusiasts isn't exactly stellar.

Let's not forget who we're dealing with here...especially after refusing to unlock the Gallatin EE.:mad:

alpha0ne

04-09-2005, 07:36 PM

Geesh! That's what the hell both Intel and AMD's Dual Cores are, two procs on one package. It's nice to cheer for AMD, just cheer for a real reason.

Donnie

this is just more fanboy generalising trash that in no way tells the whole story

the Hammer was designed from the ground up to be DC wereas the smithfield is just two preschots hacked together -- nothing more, nothing less

the two preschots will be competing for bandwidth on a VERY limited bus originally designed for a SC (single core) and lets face it - without huge bandwidth the preschott is even worse than it is now

this is NOT the case with Hammer and Hypertransport

another VERY important aspect to consider is power requirements with the smithfield package drawing ~ 250 Watts :slobber: (this is the whole rig, NOT just the CPU) with the Hammer close to half that obscene amount

yes lets cheer for the REAL reasons :rolleyes:

Donnie27

04-09-2005, 08:11 PM

this is just more fanboy generalising trash that in no way tells the whole story

the Hammer was designed from the ground up to be DC wereas the smithfield is just two preschots hacked together -- nothing more, nothing less

the two preschots will be competing for bandwidth on a VERY limited bus originally designed for a SC (single core) and lets face it - without huge bandwidth the preschott is even worse than it is now

this is NOT the case with Hammer and Hypertransport

another VERY important aspect to consider is power requirements with the smithfield package drawing ~ 250 Watts :slobber: (this is the whole rig, NOT just the CPU) with the Hammer close to half that obscene amount

yes lets cheer for the REAL reasons :rolleyes:

I honestly don't think you know what you're talking about.

This is just more fanboy generalising trash that in no way tells the whole story :stick: . The Hammer is just two A64 Processors on one DIE, just like Intel's=P Anything else is Fanboy Crap-Ola! :banana:

Two Prescotts, just like Two Prescott Xeons share the same FSB. One of these 840XE's has that same FSB, Memory and etc. as a system with Dual Xeons. Two Cores and two Virtual Cores in one box. Meanwhile, One Dual Core A64 is not like Dual Opterons because it looses one of its 128bit Memory controllers. That's not a Fanboyisum, that simple damned common sense and a fact! :rolleyes:

Another thing you AMD drones seem to be quiet about, it's friggen PRICE! I don't many will be able to afford DC A64 or want the lower speed 1.6 to 1.8 with different sized L2. The better are *RUMORed to only ship as Opterons and sold for over $1100 each, not more LOL. :slobber:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21929
$240 for 2.8GHz DC,
$315 for 3.0GHz DC
$530 for 3.2GHz DC
$999 for 3.2GHz DC with HTT.

Only the 3.2GHz DC or Pentium D XE 840 is a rip-off.

You might want to look at Anandtech's Part II on Dual Core before you start throwing Fanboy tags around?

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2389

For encoding performance, you still can't beat the Pentium D. Even a dual core Athlon 64 isn't going to help enough in that area.

Oh and that's 244W compared to one of these running at 214, that's only 30 more Watts!

BTW, my next rig will have a Venice 3200+. :slap:

Donnie27

alpha0ne

04-09-2005, 08:28 PM

again you fail to take into account that the AMD DC offering was originally designed to be DC - NOT the hack job that is smithfield

as far as pricing - intel deserve all praise by trying to make DC the norm at an affordable price ASAP but i am sure AMD will be priced competetively too when released for the desktop

the ONLY reason we are seeing intel DC first (apart from intel having 10 to 1 AMD's resources) is because they have NOTHING that can now compete with the A64 that is STILL increasing the performance gap

as for your next rig-at least you are going where the performance is, for myself, i will stick to my 2.8c M0 @ 3.8 until DC is more mature and a LOT more software is optimised for DC, this will not be until late '06

lutjens

04-09-2005, 08:42 PM

<Puts on flameproof suit>

As I see it, yes, both AMD and Intel's dual core chips are simply two cores on one die...I do think, however, that AMD has the advantage during the transition for a number of reasons:

1) AMD knew they were going to do this back when they designed the A64/Opteron and incorporated the future need for dual core into the reference chipset design. This will allow very easy upgrades of existing machines with likely nothing more than a BIOS update (and a validation of the motherboards ability to provide the necessary power). On the other hand, Intel requires new chipsets and new motherboards to support the dual core processors.

2) Intel was caught flatfooted by AMD on this issue...and abruptly shifted gears a year ago, moving away from clock speed and concentrating on dual core. The fact that the Pentium D will be using a shared bus won't be the end of the world in a uniprocessor setup, but it does cast the HyperTransport technology of the Athlon 64 in a better light. IMHO, apps that require a great deal of bandwidth and benefit from it will perform better on an AMD dual core solution. The HyperTransport technology that the Athlon 64/Opteron uses will really become much more important in workstation scenarios, when the dual core Xeon and the dual core Opteron compete. The dual core Opteron will really be a potent solution on the workstation front and I feel it will really shine over the Xeon. On the server front, the case is the same, with AMD gaining more and more advantage as the number of CPUs in the system increases.

3) The new 0.09 micron process that AMD is using seems to be working well and is looking far more favorable heat-wise than the infamous Intel 0.09 micron process. The new AMD chips are consuming far less power and producing far less heat than Intel's Nocona/Prescott. Definitely an advantage when moving to dual core, where this important issue becomes even more important (especially if SLI is being considered).

4) The new NForce 4 chipset, while new, looks to be an excellent match for the dual core Opteron (especially when scaled up, as in the Tyan S2895 K8WE). The NForce 4 for Intel's processors is still very new and I haven't heard anything definitive regarding whether or not it will work with Intel's dual core processors.

My $0.02...

PetNorth

04-10-2005, 04:04 PM

Another thing you AMD drones seem to be quiet about, it's friggen PRICE! I don't many will be able to afford DC A64 or want the lower speed 1.6 to 1.8 with different sized L2. The better are *RUMORed to only ship as Opterons and sold for over $1100 each, not more LOL. :slobber:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21929
$240 for 2.8GHz DC,
$315 for 3.0GHz DC
$530 for 3.2GHz DC
$999 for 3.2GHz DC with HTT.

Only the 3.2GHz DC or Pentium D XE 840 is a rip-off.

You are comparing Server/Workstation Dual Core CPUs estimated prices with Dual Core desktop CPUs estimated prices. It doesn't make sense.

You might want to look at Anandtech's Part II on Dual Core before you start throwing Fanboy tags around?

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2389

For encoding performance, you still can't beat the Pentium D. Even a dual core Athlon 64 isn't going to help enough in that area.

I think Anand hasn't analyzed his own results properly.

Let's see: It seems AMD will release a top A64 DC at 2,4 (to fight with PXE 3,2). And I think AMD will release A64s DC 2,2, 2,0 and 1,8 (to fight with PD 3,2, 3,0 and 2,8).

Well, we have:

Part I Anand article:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2388&p=9
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2388&p=10

Part II Anad article:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2389&p=4
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2389&p=5

I've made some numbers taking these Anand two parts articles results with encoding and rendering benches:

1. Pentium D 3,2 results (part I article).

2. Pentium XE 3,2 results (part I article).

3. A64 3500+ 2,2 results (part II article).

4. Pentium 4 XE 3,73 HT OFF (part I article, to calculate P4 3,2 HT OFF results. P4 3.73 has a 16,5% more clock than 3,2 so I've calculated a3,2 is about 15-15,5% slower than this 3,73).This is necesary to know impact DC perfomance between PD 3,2 (remember, it hasn't HT) and a P4 3,2 without HT.

5. Keeping in mind this impact DC perfomance, I've applied it exactly to an hypothetical A64 DC at 2,2 (taking A64 3500+ 2,2 results).

6. And I've calculated, keeping in mind A64 DC 2,2 results, a A64 DC at 2,4 (9,09% more clock than 2,2, so about 8% faster than a 2,2).

Well here we go. First, table results between them (positive %, first CPU is faster than second; negative %, first CPU is slower than second):

http://img118.echo.cx/img118/487/dualcore2wv.png (http://www.imageshack.us)

And now, in graphs ;-)

http://img90.echo.cx/img90/1379/itunes3im.png (http://www.imageshack.us) http://img90.echo.cx/img90/7999/agkdivx6ca.png (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img90.echo.cx/img90/7626/agkxvid4tr.png (http://www.imageshack.us) http://img90.echo.cx/img90/8080/wme9gq.png (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img90.echo.cx/img90/3514/3dsrays6ev.png (http://www.imageshack.us) http://img90.echo.cx/img90/3271/3dscballs4cr.png (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img90.echo.cx/img90/728/3dsspipe5rv.png (http://www.imageshack.us) http://img90.echo.cx/img90/6065/3dsuwater5eq.png (http://www.imageshack.us)

Well, I hope there aren't mistakes in my calculations, not many at least hehe ;-)

Esmein

04-10-2005, 06:59 PM

OMG Man, I yell for Pwnage ! :woot:

alpha0ne

04-10-2005, 10:39 PM

thanks for the detailed analysis PetNorth, i had come to similar conclusions myself but in no way with you excellent presentation :woot:

were are the intel fanboys now, anyway ANY "fanboy" is a fool, sticking to one brand because of some irrational loyalty even when their current product (preschot) is deemed to be a dud by 80% of the world is just plain stupid :slapass:

ingentingmendeg

04-11-2005, 02:39 AM

:slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: HOLY :banana::banana::banana::banana:! Did anyone see this!!!!!

Much like this preview sample, all retail models will be fully multiplier-unlocked.

Donnie27

04-11-2005, 03:25 PM

You are comparing Server/Workstation Dual Core CPUs estimated prices with Dual Core desktop CPUs estimated prices. It doesn't make sense.

I think Anand hasn't analyzed his own results properly.

Let's see: It seems AMD will release a top A64 DC at 2,4 (to fight with PXE 3,2). And I think AMD will release A64s DC 2,2, 2,0 and 1,8 (to fight with PD 3,2, 3,0 and 2,8).

Well, we have:

I've made some numbers taking these Anand two parts articles results with encoding and rendering benches:

1. Pentium D 3,2 results (part I article).

2. Pentium XE 3,2 results (part I article).

3. A64 3500+ 2,2 results (part II article).

4. Pentium 4 XE 3,73 HT OFF (part I article, to calculate P4 3,2 HT OFF results. P4 3.73 has a 16,5% more clock than 3,2 so I've calculated a3,2 is about 15-15,5% slower than this 3,73).This is necesary to know impact DC perfomance between PD 3,2 (remember, it hasn't HT) and a P4 3,2 without HT.

5. Keeping in mind this impact DC perfomance, I've applied it exactly to an hypothetical A64 DC at 2,2 (taking A64 3500+ 2,2 results).

6. And I've calculated, keeping in mind A64 DC 2,2 results, a A64 DC at 2,4 (9,09% more clock than 2,2, so about 8% faster than a 2,2).

Table omitted to save space!
Well, I hope there aren't mistakes in my calculations, not many at least hehe ;-)

Believe or not, I hope for AMD's sake you're right ;-)

First of all, I wasn't trying to make a mix-match of comparing Opteron to PDXE 840, Intel shipps Xeons for that. The point on that was Intel released prices, AMD didn't. I have very negative view of the whole with and without HTT crap-o-la. The point was, that's the only thing AMD has announced a price for. I don't doubt your AMD 2.4GHz DC Estimates but since gains can be had from the Core speed and BUS following that core speed, you might* be slightly overestimating the lower speed processor's performance/s. Like the old saying goes, "What's gained with speed, is lost when things are slowed down". Very nice work though still!

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=x36o252&page=1

There's another thing missed here as well. I'm told by someone that the Desktop versions of AMD's DC will be much slower than the ones meant for Servers, not the same speed. The lady seemed pissed and said you could blame HP for that. So far, she said look for 1.6, 1.8 and 2GHz Desktop versions with 2.2 saved for the 3.4GHz Intel Dual Core model. I had already thought it would be 1.8 to 2.2GHz. Of course AMD will try to price match.

So you might end up with;
1.6 VS 2.8GHz
1.8 vs. 3.0GHz
2.0 vs. 3.2GHz, not the 2.4.

Let's be fair about this? The non-XE 3.2GHz Pentium D has a $625 MSPR and you saw the rest. That puts it's current price somewhere between the 4000+ and FX-53.

The $240 proved it's point very well at Anandtech. Price will matter more than performance in the long run. If it shipps for it's MSRP, that puts it at a Cheaper price than the 3500+ was looking at $268 at Newegg and no, I'm not buying anyone's OEM for that much.

IMHO, it's absolutely wrong and Sleezy for Intel to now make Hyperthreading a Value Added Feature. How or if it works or not, is moot. This comes on the hills of the terrible move of NOT moving to 1066MHz FSB for the whole line and then charging for it as well. Sorry AMD fans, but this sounds more like something AMD would do LOL! I wish there were someone else besides VIA and Apple to buy from.

Donnie27

PetNorth

04-11-2005, 04:08 PM

Donnie27

04-11-2005, 04:50 PM

Opteron DC will be initially released at 1.8, 2.0 and 2.2 (x65, x70 and x75 models). This is confirmed.

Since the begining top A64 has been 200mhz up respect to Opteron (FX-51 before x48, FX-53 before x50, FX-55 before x52. And FX-57 will be here before x54). I don't see any reason to think top A64 at launch (june, it seems) won't be a 2,4. Remember that Cinebench 2003 benchi was, casually?, with a DC 2,4 system. And if I'm correct in this point, "affordable" DC at 2.2, 2.0 and 1.8 (perhaps, with 512Kb L2 per core). So: 2,4 1MB L2 per core top DC (with unattainable price, like PXE); "regular" DC these models I've mentioned.

We will see ;-)

We'll see, but I have to go with what she said first. She was NOT talking about Opterons but the Athlon64 DCs at those speeds. She said that the only one showed so far was an Opteron DC, NOT the desktop version, its 1MB per core gave this away. Yes, I heard about the Desktop shipping in both 512K and 1MB but later for the 1MB version, I don't see them going that route.

Now I disagree 100% about AMD's Dual Cores being affordable. The best estimates say lower yields mean higher prices. AMD's Single cores at these speeds aren't exactly cheap or affordable. Two of them damn sure don't have a snowball's chance hell of being affordable. Here again though, I hope like hell you're right! Because even if I were to buy Intel, I don't want to see the 1.5 X price structure I already talked about. These things are cheaper for Intel to make right now!

Now we can yell about Pentium D XE 840 until the Cows come home. If AMD is doing like you and many others here, they're making an even bigger mistake than Intel for trying to sell it. Too many folks buying Intel Dual Cores will not give a peep to XE IMHO. Just as many think EE is a bigger joke than most AMD fans. While the none XE is almost $400 less, AMD would be almost as stupid as Intel if their Top Desktop Dual Core is priced anywhere near it! The other side affect of this will be Intel will have almost no reason to cut prices. Then they both laugh all the way to the bank while Fans continue to fight.

One more time, the $240 2.8GHz Pentium D is what AMD will have to deal with first. Picking out few apps its good at will not cut it either ;-) AMD is shooting for the Server market first because that's where the money is. They don't have to build as many for that sector.

Donnie27

Donnie27

04-11-2005, 04:51 PM

Donnie27

04-11-2005, 05:00 PM

OMG Man, I yell for Pwnage ! :woot:

Did you even read Anandtech 2.8GHz Pentium D/Duak Core Part II review? :slapass:

Donnie27

Donnie27

04-11-2005, 05:24 PM

I think Anand hasn't analyzed his own results properly.

Let's see: It seems AMD will release a top A64 DC at 2,4 (to fight with PXE 3,2). And I think AMD will release A64s DC 2,2, 2,0 and 1,8 (to fight with PD 3,2, 3,0 and 2,8).
[QUOTE]

I wanted to reply to the other before I replied to this so you wouldn't get the wrong idea. I think Anand looked at all of his Data, not just a few tests where AMD did better at. He didn't estimate anything. He Ran the tests that BOTH are good at, weak at and so so at. Now I can't say the same for the ones you picked.

I've seen Anand as BIASed for AMD, and his constant AMD cheerleading gets old after the second page. I don't know how you came up with him not being able to read his own Data, hell the 3GHz beat the 3500+ in too many tests considering their price differences. Than goodness game Man!

[QUOTE=Anand]The workstation and server markets will be serviced by AMD first, and we will have a look at workstation/server dual core performance as soon as AMD launches those parts. It's looking like, at least on the desktop, if you want dual core at a reasonable price point, your only option will be Intel. But the prospect of more affordable dual core chips out of AMD in 2006 is quite exciting as well.

I'm told the end of the 3rd Quarter.

Donnie

alpha0ne

04-11-2005, 06:49 PM

Well, we know they aren't on the AMD side of the forum :slap:

Donnie27

well Donnie27, you can only blind ppl with BS for so long

posts that are continually drawn out and generally continue to say the same things over and over with always more pluses to the one manufacturer - she said this - she said that :fact: , tend to devalue any input you contribute

this whole thread is now degenerating into an intel PR exersise :nono:

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 03:20 AM

well Donnie27, you can only blind ppl with BS for so long

posts that are continually drawn out and generally continue to say the same things over and over with always more pluses to the one manufacturer - she said this - she said that :fact: , tend to devalue any input you contribute

this whole thread is now degenerating into an intel PR exersise :nono:

Right!

Donnie

PetNorth

04-12-2005, 03:37 AM

You quoted this Anand statement:

For encoding performance, you still can't beat the Pentium D. Even a dual core Athlon 64 isn't going to help enough in that area.

With this statement, it's clear Anand has not analyzed this question at all. I did. And not only estimating it. You can see any Dual Opteron Vs Dual Nocona encoding review (DC perfomance will be equal), where Opteron basically outperform Nocona in all (or nearly all) audio/video encoding tasks (and many times by a big margin). That's all ;-) About A64 DC speeds and prices, it's prudent to wait and see ;-)

death metal

04-12-2005, 03:46 AM

donnie 0\/\/n3d yet again!!!

PetNorth

04-12-2005, 04:16 AM

About A64 DC speed, Xbit-Labs expects the same situation I mentioned:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20050410210218.html

AMD will launch AMD Opteron 200- and 800-series dual-core processors at 1.80GHz, 2.0GHz and 2.20GHz in the second quarter of 2005. The operating frequencies of AMD’s desktop dual-core chips are unclear, but usually the company’s desktop processors operate at a bit higher clock-speed compared to the company’s server products.

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 05:18 AM

You quoted this Anand statement:

With this statement, it's clear Anand has not analyzed this question at all. I did. And not only estimating it. You can see any Dual Opteron Vs Dual Nocona encoding review (DC perfomance will be equal), where Opteron basically outperform Nocona in all (or nearly all) audio/video encoding tasks (and many times by a big margin). That's all ;-) About A64 DC speeds and prices, it's prudent to wait and see ;-)

Again, there's too many things that changes when going from two 128bit controllers to one. Then there's ECC and non EEC RAM playing a role or even NCQ or not. Some numbers may be better, some worse. Yes, I know NUMA isn't enabled.

Excuse me, are we talking about the same reveiws here? Nacona was damned there faster is almost all of those encoding tests. You'd pick XBits over GamePC and 2CPU.com? I also linked to GamePC showing the same thing (Nocona vs Opteron 252). Even the 2CPU site that you discounted posted similar info, what gives? Again, picking a few apps that the Opterons or Athlons are good at then using that to base your view on is a bit flawed.

Personally I don't care if the A64DC can grow wings and fly, AMD hasn't announced prices and that's a bad sign, that's something AMD has always done when they're hiding greed or need.

Anand's review of is between a processor with an MSRP of $240 vs. ONE that costs $268. here's (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2389&p=4)
the Encode times.

Now we can Guesstime, Aproximate, Formulate and even Speculate, but please don't try to use that has hard facts. Yes, we will know what the deal is when they ship, if you're right, I'll be back to say nice call you're right! But please don't forget to do the same when you're not.

Stop for just one minute and think? If the new Venice 3200+ is going on sale for $227 (already up for preorder on many sites) a 3500+ lists for $268, what are you calling affordable Dual Cores? This is agianst the backdrop of a $240 Dual Core 2.8GHz P4 that handed it is ass in every thing but none multi-tasking and gaming. Or was that missed somewhere?

This one (http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=x36o252&page=8)

PetNorth

04-12-2005, 06:27 AM

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 07:34 AM

I ask me why the hell AMD have to announce price in this moment for a CPU that will be released in two or three months. I don't see the reason. Opteron 8xx DC will be released in days, and only since two days ago, we know estimated prices for these server CPUs.

Affordable is affordable. Do you really think A64 DC that will compete with, for example PD 2.8, will cost a lot more? :confused: :confused: :confused: Do I miss something?

There's nothing to be confused about :p: I only asked what's your Idea of affordable? Well, at least I asked you what you thought or just YOUR personal view?

Here's why, to answer your question. AMD has always announced prices, performance, sockets, compatability and etc... The times they haven't, they've launched Bank Busters or something that turned folks off.

A64DC is just like their Intel counterparts and are two Athlon Cores on one package, not even a true Dual Core Engine on one Die. If it was planned that way or not is moot. It will still come down to what's Ran and how the systems are setup=P They better cost less than two A64s since one of the cores looses a memory controller and other trannies.

Affordable is not just a affordable. Damned straight I think A64DC will cost more, a lot more! Many will be priced out or over most folks here budget.

Before launch, before August price cuts, 2.8DC is already $28 cheaper than 3500+ and only $12 more than 3200+ Venice, what's to be confused about? Now let's see, like magic, AMD is supposed to ship two cores cheaper than these processors they're already shipping? Man, talk about unfair expectations put on AMD by folks, sheesh.

I said I hope you're right because I'm right in the middle of Building an AMD rig as my Gaming Rig. My current system will go to the Den for Multi-Media work use downstairs. It would be nice to add an affordable A64DC 8 to 10 months from now :)

Donnie27

saaya

04-12-2005, 09:37 AM

There's nothing to be confused about :p: I only asked what's your Idea of affordable? Well, at least I asked you what you thought or just YOUR personal view?

Here's why, to answer your question. AMD has always announced prices, performance, sockets, compatability and etc... The times they haven't, they've launched Bank Busters or something that turned folks off.

A64DC is just like their Intel counterparts and are two Athlon Cores on one package, not even a true Dual Core Engine on one Die. If it was planned that way or not is moot. It will still come down to what's Ran and how the systems are setup=P They better cost less than two A64s since one of the cores looses a memory controller and other trannies.

Affordable is not just a affordable. Damned straight I think A64DC will cost more, a lot more! Many will be priced out or over most folks here budget.

Before launch, before August price cuts, 2.8DC is already $28 cheaper than 3500+ and only $12 more than 3200+ Venice, what's to be confused about? Now let's see, like magic, AMD is supposed to ship two cores cheaper than these processors they're already shipping? Man, talk about unfair expectations put on AMD by folks, sheesh.

I said I hope you're right because I'm right in the middle of Building an AMD rig as my Gaming Rig. My current system will go to the Den for Multi-Media work use downstairs. It would be nice to add an affordable A64DC 8 to 10 months from now :)

Donnie27

so your saying amds dual core chips are not really two cores on one die but two dies in one package? what makes you think so?

PetNorth

04-12-2005, 09:44 AM

Here's why, to answer your question. AMD has always announced prices, performance, sockets, compatability and etc...

hmmm AMD has always announced some time before to release a CPU, the socket, compatibility... yes right, like now with DC; but price... hey! this is first notice for me, not with this anticipation you are demanding hehe.

A64DC is just like their Intel counterparts and are two Athlon Cores on one package, not even a true Dual Core Engine on one Die.

I don't know very much about CPU architecture but what is this?

http://img165.echo.cx/img165/2508/dcopty6qy.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Affordable is not just a affordable. Damned straight I think A64DC will cost more, a lot more!

I don't think it lol

Before launch, before August price cuts, 2.8DC is already $28 cheaper than 3500+ and only $12 more than 3200+ Venice, what's to be confused about?

And only about $10 more than P4 630 3.0; And about $50 cheaper than P4 640 3.2; and about $180 cheaper than 650 3.4...
what's your point? :confused:

AMD is supposed to ship two cores cheaper than these processors they're already shipping?

Intel yes but AMD not?
because you say it? ;-)

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 09:57 AM

so your saying amds dual core chips are not really two cores on one die but two dies in one package? what makes you think so?

No, they're two Dies within one larger Die Package. Xrays don't lie!

It's the same as folks used to Call Pentium Pro's L2 that was linked to the rest of the core, sat next to it, not melded into the Core as they are today. AMD and Intel have two cores linked by either a Crossbar Interface or Arbiter Logic + HT or a FSB respectively=P There's no greater technology from either company except what they each have already. Same goes for Yonah, Conroe, Monty and the rest.

On another note, please give me the link to the nForce4 Ultra D SLI hack? That looks like it will be in my next upgrade.

Donnie27

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 10:49 AM

Intel yes but AMD not?
because you say it? ;-)

Intel has RAMPED up, AMD hasn't, hehehehehe!

Donnie27

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 11:32 AM

One more time, the $240 2.8GHz Pentium D is what AMD will have to deal with first. Picking out few apps its good at will not cut it either ;-) AMD is shooting for the Server market first because that's where the money is. They don't have to build as many for that sector. Donnie27

How any of this stuff performs depends on what App (software and the config). Any fanboy can find friendly software. But then to pretend that only that software that runs good on company A or B is silly and the mark of foolishness.

Back on the Hexus Site, they used both Optimized and non Optimized LAME here (http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD0xMDg1JnVybF9wYWdlPTk =). Then this same thing can be seen with many apps the carry SSE3, Hyperthreading and or Multi-threaded as well. Premiere Pro 7 is Hyperthreaded and has SSE3, it's 8 months old. Wonder why folks are still using version 6.5?

Donnie27

grimREEFER

04-12-2005, 11:38 AM

bah, the more important questions are the ones that deal with overclocking. how far can a pentium d 2.8ghz overclock on a msi intel nforce 4 board? if 4ghz is atainable, screw toledo and the penium xe, im sticking with the dual core 4ghz processor!

Donnie27

04-12-2005, 02:29 PM

PetNorth

04-13-2005, 11:18 AM

Donnie27

04-13-2005, 11:44 AM

hmmmm...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59344&page=1&pp=25

Interesting... isn't it? ;)

Thanks for the Link, there's still that thing about Price.

And if I'm correct in this point, "affordable" DC at 2.2, 2.0 and 1.8 (perhaps, with 512Kb L2 per core). So: 2,4 1MB L2 per core top DC (with unattainable price, like PXE); "regular" DC these models I've mentioned.

You honestly don't see where that is sounding like an AMD Fan? You act as if the P4XE is the only dual core Intel will ship, hehehehe!

Donnie27,

waiting for better prices

PetNorth

04-13-2005, 01:36 PM

hello?

from my "analyst" post

Let's see: It seems AMD will release a top A64 DC at 2,4 (to fight with PXE 3,2). And I think AMD will release A64s DC 2,2, 2,0 and 1,8 (to fight with PD 3,2, 3,0 and 2,8).

Donnie27

04-13-2005, 04:35 PM

hello?

from my "analyst" post

Originally Posted by PetNorth
Let's see: It seems AMD will release a top A64 DC at 2,4 (to fight with PXE 3,2). And I think AMD will release A64s DC 2,2, 2,0 and 1,8 (to fight with PD 3,2, 3,0 and 2,8).

Please note, I said sounded like, not jumping anyone or anything. You got the speeds right, 200MHz faster than I thought they would ship but 512K L2 as was already talked about. I just don't agree with that "affordable" line.

With current prices as they are, there's no way that these things will be affordable. One 2.4GHz Athlon64 costs what? On the 2.8GHz Pentium D, Intel added $80. Let’s see where AMD starts, not how high they can go or how they price rate or match Intel, that’s stupid! Intel shipping to Dell, HP and Gateway/Emachines as we speak! Trying to price match Intel risky and stupid.

Donnie27

PetNorth

04-14-2005, 04:08 AM

Donnie27

04-14-2005, 06:21 AM

Well let's make numbers ;)

A64 3000+ (1,8GHz) --> around $145
A64 x2 1,8GHz --> around $240-250. Is it impossible? no way will be affordable?

A64 3200+ (2,0ghz) --> around $190
A64 x2 2,0GHz ----> around $325 for example. Is it impossible? And IMO this price is affordable yet (remember, we are talking about dual core).

A64 3500+ (2,2GHz) ---> around $275
A64 x2 2,2GHz ------> $525-550. Of course, this isn't affordable generally speaking.

So we are talking about prices at the same level PD equivalent.

A64 4000+ (2,4GHz) ----> around $640
Top A64 x2 2,4GHz (1MB L2 per core) ----> around $1000 why not? (same price PXE).

$275=1.8
$365=2.0
$695=2.2
+ or - $20 for each.
2.4GHz=$1,100 512K. All 1MB L2 models will ship as Opterons. AMD isn't making enough to ship as lower priced Desktop models.

I hope the prices are lower than what either of us listed. ;)

I don't disagree that much first two price points but disagree with the 3rd, I think it will ship at about $700. Now you can save that and throw it back at me later. It will surely ship above the $675 price point. This is NOT high volume AMD needs to get healthy. Too many more Quarters of AMD making crumbs and we'll be able to get them ALL real cheap LOL!

Now why not? If you are an AMD employee, it's fine. If you are an AMD user, it sucks to pay that much=P If you're an AMD Fan and would never buy an Intel processor, why in the hell would you worry about its price? So it's OK for AMD to act slimy like Intel? Sorry, I pull for consumers, not business'. Intel don't have to sell many PD-XE's, AMD doesn't have the option. AMD should be worrying more about AMD and less about Intel.

Donnie

PetNorth

04-14-2005, 07:26 AM

2.4GHz=$1,100 512K. All 1MB L2 models will ship as Opterons.

I'm not sure about it. Remember Italian page previewing an A64 DC 2,4GHz with 1MB per core. Perhaps there will be these two variants. Anyway, it isn't very important from a perfomance point of view. 512 to 1 MB L2 hasn't a great impact (a merely ~2-3% overall gain).

$695=2.2

wow! what exaggeration! lol! I don't see the reason it will cost much more double than a regular 3500+ (2,2ghz).

Personally and from an user point of view, an A64 x2 1,8GHz or A64 x2 2,0GHz would be the way to go ;-) Very good price expected (affordable lol) and excellent perfomance.

Donnie27

04-14-2005, 07:37 AM

I'm not sure about it. Remember Italian page previewing an A64 DC 2,4GHz with 1MB per core. Perhaps there will be these two variants. Anyway, it isn't very important from a perfomance point of view. 512 to 1 MB L2 hasn't a great impact (a merely ~2-3% overall gain).

wow! what exaggeration! lol! I don't see the reason it will cost much more double than a regular 3500+ (2,2ghz).

Personally and from an user point of view, an A64 x2 1,8GHz or A64 x2 2,0GHz would be the way to go ;-) Very good price expected (affordable lol) and excellent perfomance.

Hey, hehehehe, don't blame me, they always exaggerate their so called top models, Intel and AMD does this all the time. I agree that the 1.8 and 2.0 models will be the models bought in any kind of Volume.

AMD Reports 1st Quarter Results:
AMD today reported sales of $1.227 billion and an operating loss of $46 million for the quarter ended March 27, 2005. The first quarter net loss of $17 million amounted to $0.04 per share. First quarter sales decreased one percent compared to the first quarter of 2004 and decreased three percent from the fourth quarter of 2004. In the first quarter of 2004, AMD reported sales of $1.236 billion and net income of $45 million, or $0.12 per diluted share. In the fourth quarter of 2004, AMD reported sales of $1.264 billion and a net loss of $30 million, or $0.08 per share.

AMD can't copy what Intel does with Processor sales because Intel is just flat more Diverse than AMD. Intel can also push much more volume than AMD. AMD should be spending its time and brainpower on AMD. As they worry about Intel, it makes them loose focus on themselves. AMD has always been at its best when they're worrying about AMD first. Now that's just IMHO!

Donnie27

PetNorth

04-14-2005, 08:16 AM

It seems CPU sales were up

Record Computation Products Group (CPG) sales of $750 million were up 31 percent from the first quarter of 2004 and increased three percent from $730 million in the fourth quarter of 2004. CPG generated record operating income of $92 million in the first quarter, up from $89 million in the fourth quarter of 2004. CPG’s first quarter sales growth was driven by record server and mobile processor sales, and strong overall penetration in high-growth regions, particularly greater China. AMD64 processor sales grew a record 30 percent sequentially and represented 63 percent of CPG sales.

Overall decrease is for Memory.

Anyway, who cares? we are customers, not business here ;-)

Donnie27

04-14-2005, 09:34 AM

Now that I can agree with 100%. Now guess who'll make up that short fall? Then even if AMD is fair about it, what's to stop the VAR's from screwing us hehehe. Here's an example;

$299 Dollar Force4 IE mobo. (http://www.computerhq.com/ASUS_P5ND2-SLI_Deluxe_LGA775_nForce4/P5ND2-SLI_Deluxe/hardware/partinfo-id-544974.html)

You have to spend a lot to be first :slobber: Now as sure as I'm here posting to you, someone will post; "All Intel nForce4 boards will cost close to $300" or something similar. I suspect prices will be 15 to 20 dollars more than their AMD counterparts. Non-SLI would interest me more.

It might ship later, but I'm still hearing rumors of a $200 1.6GHz with 512K L2 DC Athlon.

Donnie27

PetNorth

04-14-2005, 10:42 AM

$299 for a desktop board is a joke. They are crazy :slapass:

Now that you are talking about boards. A very important question about DC upgrade cost is precisely this one. We know any owner s939 board will upgrade without additional cost, only BIOS update. Contrary, a current owner ultimate s775 925-915 board will not :( This is odd :stick:

It might ship later, but I'm still hearing rumors of a $200 1.6GHz with 512K L2 DC Athlon.

It would be great! :toast:

Lastest news around the web are talking about 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 models at launch (June). Hopefully they launch 1.8 model too from the beggining. If not, let's hope before end of the year at least (1.8 and 1.6).

Donnie27

04-14-2005, 11:23 AM

When they say the early bird gets the worm, I think there's a different spin here. Sub the word *Shaft for "worm", hehehe! The reason I liked to this mobo is that nForce4 IE is most certainly Intel Dual Core Ready. There's someone on this very forum running/Testing 830/3GHz DC on an nForce4 IE already.MSI nForce4 IE (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=812975#post812975)

This VAR knows there are Fans that will stop at nothing on getting most Hardware First. They make these kind of crazy sales to AMD and Intel fans. If AMD can't RAMP large enough Volumes of DC Chips, this same thing will happen. It might take months before we see the real MSRP.

That's why I posted the link.

Donnie27

Esmein

04-15-2005, 05:07 PM

Did you even read Anandtech 2.8GHz Pentium D/Duak Core Part II review? :slapass:

Donnie27
Umm... You got me...

Donnie27

04-15-2005, 06:06 PM

Umm... You got me...

Hehehe, I meant Dual Core Part 2.

Donnie27

Esmein

04-16-2005, 02:17 PM

Hehehe, I meant Dual Core Part 2.

Donnie27
K, I'm done. In my reading, this chip(p4d 2.8) works fine, and comes up with some nice results in multiple task tests, but as for now, my needings are limited to single thread jobs therefore I say Hi to A64 and nice try to p4d.

Donnie27

04-16-2005, 02:35 PM

K, I'm done. In my reading, this chip(p4d 2.8) works fine, and comes up with some nice results in multiple task tests, but as for now, my needings are limites to single thread jobs therefore I say Hi to A64 and nice try to p4d.

Why are you Done? I'm building an Athlon64 for the very same reason. I already have a P4 so I don't plan on missing much on either front. As the thread stated, reasons for going Intel, well, like it or not, 2.8GHz Pentium 820 is a damned good reason for Going Intel. Many power users do use their computers that way.

I'm not on the AMD side of the forum posting about why I like Intel, hehehehe!
Look at Anand's review a little closer? The much cheaper Non-Dual Core P4 didn't do to damned badly either.

I spent part of the Day tucking away wiring my New Case. All the Drives are painted (Silver)and mounted. Its looking very nice indeed, even my non Geek wife likes it.

Donnie27

Esmein

04-16-2005, 02:41 PM

Why are you Done? I'm building an Athlon64 for the very same reason. I already have a P4 so I don't plan on missing much on either front. As the thread stated, reasons for going Intel, well, like it or not, 2.8GHz Pentium 820 is a damned good reason for Going Intel. Many power users do use their computers that way.

I'm not on the AMD side of the forum posting about why I like Intel, hehehehe!
Look at Anand's review a little closer? The much cheaper Non-Dual Core P4 didn't do to damned badly either.

I spent part of the Day tucking away wiring my New Case. All the Drives are painted (Silver)and mounted. Its looking very nice indeed, even my non Geek wife likes it.

Donnie27
Me speaks english bad okok :D
I meant to say I'm done with reading :) I even can't afford my new rig, not to run two :) ( and if my father thinks about me when he needs somebody to buy my little bro a new 6600gt, cuz' its artifacting like hell I wont have a new rig in this century... hm)