Well the scores are done at 800Mhz or whatever clock idle is in Zambezi's case. 4x800Mhz or 4x2.86pts fits perfectly with almost 11pts for top end X8 leaked by Donanimhaber 2 months ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Printable View
Well the scores are done at 800Mhz or whatever clock idle is in Zambezi's case. 4x800Mhz or 4x2.86pts fits perfectly with almost 11pts for top end X8 leaked by Donanimhaber 2 months ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
it did not work for me, when i tried the same thing. 3dmarks started giving me errors without scores ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
That's because application (3dmark)lost focus :). You cannot run anything else (graphical)with 3dmark in parallel.
yep, that's the one :) I doubt if we could run any other 3d apps at once. unless we have two gpus or something, though never tries it myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
But anyways, I will take that ~11points anyday :D I only score 6.87 with phenom x6@3.9ghz
Where do you get 2.86pts from? I'm staring at the pic here.. dunno much about Cinebench, TBH.:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
lower left corner in a picture taken by camera.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
It's here. Lower left corner(CB11.5 CPU score).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
i wouldnt say its running idle.But i can say that uncorrectly working turbocore plus cnq can lower scores A LOT, from my own testing, the score was somewhere inbetween idle and what it should be.
This makes me however happy, because if the guy is going to set his cpu manually.We should at last get some decent leaks :-)
Ooh, thanks. I was looking at the wrong pic..:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
Core 1Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
2x128b AVX or 2x128b un-recompiled SSE
or
128-bit FP command
Only one legacy 128-bit FP FMAC per Thread
Again, from the article:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aten-Ra
Quote:
With each cycle, either core can operate on 256 bits of parallel data via two 128-bit instructions or one 256-bit instruction, OR each of the integer cores can execute 128-bit commands simultaneously
LOL I haven't heard that name for a long time!! :D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by informal
BD Terrace ES Edition? "IPC the more he posted about it the more it decreased"
LMFAO
That Cinebench score can't be true. 2.86 is pretty awful. Like slower than a 4 core propos clock for clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
--Matt
Repost police alert: Already posted on the last page and discussed :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by kl0012
Guys, think just for a moment:
Does anyone seriously believe that AMD's new flagship CPU they are working on would seriously perform WORSE than their current chip lineup? Do you think they would do that? :wth:
Of course, not :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
Exactly, if the BD design was THAT bad then they could just shrink the X6 instead,Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
which would be a piece of cake and a lot less expensive compared to developing the BD.
I stand firm on my decision. weeks ago sold 2600k sys to get BDQuote:
Originally Posted by Mats
990FX :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
LOL Wut? Are they benching outside?
i just did the math for cb10 scores
if its at 800mhz and scored 2340pts, thats really insane and translates to 11992 pts single threaded at 4.1ghz, lol
i somehow doubt we can expect that though.
It's not 800Mhz, it's not 2800Mhz
Is that a stock intel heatsink I see on there?
Edit:
That looks like intel stuff everywhere except the single picture of the 990FX silk screen
the right side of the second picture shows the same stuff in the top picture
theres afermarket cooling on the amd system
this statement makes little sense, please elaborate.Quote:
Originally Posted by mAJORD
so its neither one, so what is it?