Phenomenal Bust

[akaBruno]

Looks like they're pretty good running as servers. AMD quad... that is. The only saving grace.

How are they at folding?

It's obvious this batch aint gonna overclock.

Sucks don't it?

[Ugly n Grey]

http://fahinfo.org/index.php?avgscores=true

folding database for comparison. They are exactly what you'd expect ... about the same per GHZ as an Intel quad but not as many GHz so overall slower..

[Omastar]

Barcelonas have been outperforming some of the Clovers. There's a review on Anandtech comparing one of the new Opteron HEs to an X5355, I believe, and it's not a total Intel win as you might expect it to be.

[akaBruno]

I was thinkin this to be true.

It's just not what the OC gaming community want's to see.

[jonspd]

on a single instance of winsmp you will get around 2K ppd at stock speeds folding the 2653 work units.

[HeamothoraxUK]

Hi akaBrno,
I would say they are pretty good @ folding, not as good as the massively overclocked intel quads but comparable to a standard Q6600 both @ stock using optimised apps. Here is my Phenom 9600 BE @ stock using SSE2 optimised app in Seti the other is a Q6600 clocked at 3.1Ghz running SSE3 optimised app in Seti.Not much in it to say he has 800Mhz advantage and SSE3.
At present i'm trying 2700Mhz Multi only as the Geil doesn't overclock so my results should increase a bit.

[akaBruno]

Me thinks HeamothoraxUK...

Knows his sh*t.

Starting to look UP?

[NuCkInFuTz]

Here is a snippet from my log file. It was run while I was sleeping, so the only other programs running would of been Azureus, Avast antivirus, and a few windows and tabs opened in Firefox, in addition to some background processes.

CPU = 2420 core, 2200 NB, 1980HTT


[06:17:43] Project: 2653 (Run 12, Clone 64, Gen 43)
[14:46:53] Completed 450000 out of 500000 steps (90 percent)
[15:01:04] Writing local files
[15:01:04] Completed 455000 out of 500000 steps (91 percent)
[15:15:16] Writing local files
[15:15:16] Completed 460000 out of 500000 steps (92 percent)
[15:29:28] Writing local files
[15:29:29] Completed 465000 out of 500000 steps (93 percent)
[15:43:40] Writing local files
[15:43:40] Completed 470000 out of 500000 steps (94 percent)
[15:57:51] Writing local files
[15:57:51] Completed 475000 out of 500000 steps (95 percent)
[16:12:02] Writing local files
[16:12:03] Completed 480000 out of 500000 steps (96 percent)
[16:26:13] Writing local files
[16:26:13] Completed 485000 out of 500000 steps (97 percent)
[16:40:23] Writing local files
[16:40:23] Completed 490000 out of 500000 steps (98 percent)
[16:54:33] Writing local files
[16:54:33] Completed 495000 out of 500000 steps (99 percent)
[17:08:44] Writing local files
[17:08:44] Completed 500000 out of 500000 steps (100 percent)

[jonspd]

http://www.jonspd.com/jonspd_uploads/screenies/2398%20fah.GIF

should have posted that earlier for the OPer to see.

[HeamothoraxUK]

So far so good. 2700Mhz 2 Hours Seti stable.

[chew*]

I would have to say at this point in time while playing with both the q6600 and phenom 9600, i'm more in favor over the intel chip stability/performance wise.........I love amd but sometimes you just want to fire a rig up and go..........intel does it.

Amd has always been like a top fuel dragster with a holley carb, tune it just right and it smokes anything, problem is the slightest change in weather, humidity,temps and it gets pissy and needs to be retuned........

fwiw intel always had better motherboards, support, and options.......amd boards always got the short end of the stick.......

[JumpingJack]

Barcelonas have been outperforming some of the Clovers. There's a review on Anandtech comparing one of the new Opteron HEs to an X5355, I believe, and it's not a total Intel win as you might expect it to be.

There is certainly application/work load specifics where Barcelona can shine (specifically, high throughput with high BW demands).

[KTE]

WCG perf @ 2.42G for the 9500 is near the Q6600 2.40G.

Not had time to account for the hours, but I ran it for a week or so and the results weren't far off, maybe a little better than expected.

[Corsa]

Originally posted by: chew*

Amd has always been like a top fuel dragster with a holley carb, tune it just right and it smokes anything, problem is the slightest change in weather, humidity,temps and it gets pissy and needs to be retuned........
Nice analogy there chew* :D

[Ace123]

Lmao I can totally relate to that.
Specially when im out at the track with my 67 chevy tunning both my carter carbs on my tunnel ram :rofl:

[chew*]

fwiw i just ran pc mark 05 on both an amd quad rig and an intel quad rig.

Specs AMD
Stock speeds
M3A 32 MVP deluxe
Phenom 9600
2 gig kingston ddr2 800 5-5-5-12
X1800xt > flashed to xtx ( yes i know they didn't make an XTX, I used to bug report for ATI it has its perks )

Specs Intel
Stock speeds
Asus Maxximus Formula
Q6600
2 gig corsair ddr2 800 5-5-5-12 ( Imho this is a crippled test since this board supports jedec standard of ddr 2 1066 )
X1900xt > flashed XTX

Now for the record I have used AMD since us old schoolers were OCing pentiums slot cpu's with a lead pencil......I used to avoid intel like it was the plague......that said onto the results.

Intel Platform
6286

Amd Platform
5273

Now some thoughts.......The board for AMD is really new, as well as the bios and chipset drivers........The intel has been out a bit longer..and is clocked 100mhz higher.

Unfortunately for AMD even giving them the benefit of the doubt that they have not harnessed the cpu/chipset all the way there is no way in hell that they can make up 1000 pts even if i did clock the q6600 down another 100 mhz........

That said the days of amd making a chip at lower speeds but still on par with performance of a higher clocked intel are gone........I really hope AMD steps up its game as i've always prefered them but if you ask me when intel first came out with dual cores and AMD challenged them publicly I think they pissed the guys in blue off.........and this is the result of pissing off intel.

[Sparky]

fwiw intel always had better motherboards, support, and options.......amd boards always got the short end of the stick.......

I dunno, didn't really compare the intel boards during AMD's reign but boards like mine seem to be quite well appointed. (aside from a thermal shutdown option in the BIOS that is... stupid asus).

[chew*]

I dunno, didn't really compare the intel boards during AMD's reign but boards like mine seem to be quite well appointed. (aside from a thermal shutdown option in the BIOS that is... stupid asus).

well an example.......one point in amd's prime was when itel had presshot, amd had the athlon xp 3200...... 2.2g 400fsb etc etc.

For intel a very popular board with a large array of options was the abit ic7g max 2 advance.........

The best board out for amd at that time was the abit nforce 2 rev2.0, it was an awsome board but in features options and bios/bios support the intel board was better. So much better that tic tac actually had to fix the bios for nforce 2 since abit didn't..........

I had both, the intel board was nicer, the amd platform was faster with a 2.2g cpu versus the 3.0g presshot luckily back then all i was using the intel for was to host a game server which it did reliably.

[chew*]

another example would be in the a64 era.......take a look at both abit fatality motherboards, the intel trumped the amd board by far and I had the amd board....Bios updates were few and far between, I think the ratio was 3 to 1 in favor over the intel getting bios updates, sadly the amd needed them desperately as it was a piss poor ram performer.......

Now lets look today.......

Asus's best offering for AMD

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=117&l3=0&l4=0&model=1283&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=101&l3=300&l4=0&model=1163&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=149&l3=591&l4=0&model=1751&modelmenu=1

Hmm for intel we have more options as far as motherboards with more features.........

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=572&l4=0&model=1872&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=572&l4=0&model=1862&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=572&l4=0&model=1850&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=117&l3=0&l4=0&model=1889&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=117&l3=0&l4=0&model=1739&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=117&l3=0&l4=0&model=1657&modelmenu=1

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=117&l3=0&l4=0&model=1439&modelmenu=1

[KTE]

Can't agree with you there with "more features for Intel boards" chew*, all comes at a grand price IME, but I do agree Intel CPUs have better MB and BIOS support since quite a long while as well as more product offerings for them. You have MFGs making up to 16 boards on the same chipset for their chips but the Intel chips aren't exactly new either, they're over 18 months old.

[chew*]

Well on the price point of things i agree with you....Intel translates to $$$......but there's no reason why they can't build a board with all the features and support for amd either..It also seems as if they play favorites....