So,this is the follow-up of the first thread regarding the new Phenom II processor series review that we did @ hwbox.gr.
here is again the link
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=3189
More 3d tests and 3d rendering added
As i had mentioned at the locked thread, there is a clock to clock comparison in progress, on deneb vs agena@3000 and deneb vs bloomfield vs yorkfield vs kentsfield @ 3700mhz.
Stay tuned for more :)
Plz keep it clean :)
Yes, do keep it clean and on topic.
Thanks for the CAD and gaming tests.Now it looks much better :up:
I have a question regarding some bars in the charts.Is there maybe any mistake since some scores are weird: ie. Core i7 940 being slower than i7 920 model in some tests and Phenom II 920 being faster than Phenom II 940 in a one test if I'm not mistaken?
edit:first chart on this page;also first and second chart on this page(phenom II and core 940/940 results are flipped it seems.respectively with lower clocked models);second chart on this page (core i7 940 with turbo is slower than 920 with turbo-again maybe the labeling on the chart colors was wrong?);
Are you saying at the charts for the 3d render apps??
Thanks for the update
was C&Q active when you bench or not?
Phenom1 lost 10% with active C&Q, maybe its the same with P2 and without that it will look better for P2,
And like informal says, some benches really look strange with a p2 940 slower than a p2 920
sry,for bad english;)
Yep look at my edit in previous post,seems some labels/names of the chips used and associated with color bars, are flipped.Quote:
Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr
Thanks for updating the review OverClocker_gr :up:
In game benchmarks score are so closed...
May be interesting for future review to see minimum fps ;)
no,power saving mods disabled for all the cpus :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AffenJack
for the far cry i ll check it out :)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
about 3d render apps, as they informed ,cause the nature of these tests there is a possibility of a delta about 1-1.5fps because they are more gpu related :)
Ahh the error of measurement,it's possible.But still at those fps numbers the error margin is still a bit large(10%,as opposed to expected 3-5%).
Thanks for the update again.Phenom II looks good in 3D render. and games.
Well, I still don't see that much of a difference as it was previously. The competition is still faster and even the low-end Quad puts up a good fight.
Now, if someone is gonna quote me and say: Oh well, the competition is $500 more, blah, blah, blah.........Well, perhaps they misread the tittle of the site and it does not read: XtremeBudgetsystems.
Seems like this tech it reaching its end, sort of like 5.1 Dolby Digital, no matter how much that is changed? Still remains as 5.1. On both camps that is.
OverClocker_gr; any way that you can personally post some benchmarks while all CPUs are overclocked? That I'd really like to see. And I bet others as well.
10percent?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
where?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr
be patient :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nasgul
Deneb looks not to shabby in the latest tests, But to be fair the q6600 also looked better, Are the rendering tests hdd bottlenecked because the q6600 at 2.4 hangs with deneb,penryn and i7 better than it should?
in high res nehalem sucks phenom rules lol at least closes the gap dramatically
no they are just more gpu related than cpu :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Not bad for a range $250 CPU :) Good jobs :up:
Is Q9550 a low end core 2 quad?? Only there are two faster.... I think Low end are q9300, q9400 6mb cache. The results look good for me..and waiting for the oc scalability.
... so 3.7 GHz for the all CPUs are next step ? :) can not wait :)
Nice job mate :) Thanks one more time!
thanks for the additional tests for Deneb
The title is not XtremeIsellmykidneysystems too :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Nasgul
Moreover if the review it's embarassing for PII like you seem to state it may be more for Yorkfield or i7 which also barely edge Q6600 in a lots of benchmarks :rolleyes:
Some will comes and speak about the advantages of Yorfield over Kentsfield : lower power consumption and temperature and overclockability. Problems it's that Phenom II may have the same advantage :rolleyes:
Thank you for the additional tests.
Thanks man for the update!
Updated (and extended) my previous summary too :P
Well this is very helpful...Quote:
Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr
I have to say, that I am very impressed with the Phenom II 3DSMax rendering marks against the competition. Especially considering it seems to trail(or match) a Core i7 940 in some spots :eek:
Any chance at all you will do some POVRay rendering tests?
Also... what are the chances that we will see some benchmarks to show scaling(OC"ing).
Thanks very much for your efforts.
I've been contemplating picking up a Phenom 940 and I think this just did it for me :)
BTW can you do a cinebench x64 quick run with Q9450 and PhII 920 to complete the summary?
Thanks!