AMD Phenom II Review Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmke

those CPUs compared by multiple sites, each benchmark separately ranked in % compared to PIIX4-940, and then average from all of those:)

---

Great work! Thank you very much, jmke. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

No! How creating an account on Steam and buy games is a skill :ROTF:
It's like install Itunes and buy songs for Ipod, everyone can do that!
Steam Hardware Survey is far from represent gamers hardware. 10% of Steam play solely CS since more than 5 years!

---

In a discussion about average gaming resolutions, you knock-down the data from a gaming vendor in favor of a general tech site? Sorry Abel, but that's retarded! :down:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmke

i went through a nice collection of reviews yesterday, put all the scores in one big pile and came up with this result chart, compared to the Phenom II X4 940


Full review list[/URL]

---

nice wrap-up jmke, more or less the same final conclusion anandtech has except for the fact that they rate the 940 above the q9400. Perhaps a bit depending on reviewers and tests.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3492&p=20

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by naokaji

They always had the means to wipe them out, but they chose not to and even allowed them to sell x86 cpu's..

It was always by their choice that they let AMD live, same goes for Nvidia, Via, Sis, Ati (before it became amd).
Remember, Intel has one of the biggest R&d Budgets in the IT Industry, they could get rid of any Company they see as a Competition at any time they want with only a slight temporary financial set back, then just jack up the prices once the competition is gone to make up for it.

Anyway, Phenom 2 is going to give Intel some competition in the midrange market and once the cut down phenom 2's come out (dual / tri cores) also in the budget market, but don't forget that Intel does have a ace up it's sleeve, it's the I5 and will be much cheaper than I7.

---

huh.. listen to urself.. what about FTC and all the antitrust lawsuits that would follow.. ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

You gave the answer to yourself why i7 is mentioned all the time -> i5 is the exact same cpu and gives the exact same performance on desktops apps, hell some preliminary test show its sometimes faster then a i7.

As it stands now AMD would need a 3.2-3,4ghz deneb to match a i7/i5 @ 2,66ghz.

---

How many times were we told not to follow so blindly those ES numbers? So why would those i5 numbers be correct?

I dont know whether it's true AMD needs a 3.2~3.4Ghz CPU to match a 2.66Ghz i5, but do we already know what speeds Intel is going to release anyway? Cause if it's that 'fast', they might only compete with their own line if they release the same frequency i5's.

As Ive already said as well, AMD has 9 months to improve Deneb before i5 hits, and this could be done various ways. Time will tell though, way too early to predict those things anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

HT is not inefficient

---

I didnt say HT is inefficient:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Explain Pay for that as in the i7 940 selling for less than the 3800+ in its prime.

---

Back in the day AMD was better, and you paid for that back then. But that was CPU only, now we've an entire platform needing expensive motherboards and not to forget, special DDR3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

I'm glad Ph2 920 has a common sense price because those mentioned would have made it an even worse deal. Never mind that though as Q9550 is less as well. Tell that Pay for it BS to folks who bought not only Intel X6800 but many here who both $669 4400+ and $850 FX-55. The whole system cost might be legit but trying to single just i7 is nothing but Fanboi Banter.

---

Oh, here we go again. Carefull you dont put too much effort into growing up:shakes:

That pay BS isnt stupid. In this case you pay a lot for every part of the platform, special DDR3 and the motherboards ain't very cheap either. You didnt have to pay that for either 775 or 939. And yes, unless there's a clear advantage to pay more I dont think people getting XE/FX CPU's or high-end CPU's is a smart thing to do if you can OC. Back in the 939 days a HTT of 300Mhz+ was pretty average, so having a 9x multiplier was often about the max you had to get, if you had a good stepping of course but that was often not much of a problem either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Some folks think AMD could benefit from Hyperthreading. Dirk might have worked with it while at DEC:up:

---

Sure they can, as long as it's needed. And certainly in the server market for the time being.

AMD is coming back, but still not good enough for me to purchase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duploxxx

nice wrap-up jmke, more or less the same final conclusion anandtech has except for the fact that they rate the 940 above the q9400. Perhaps a bit depending on reviewers and tests.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3492&p=20

---

yes, depending on applications used the outcome can be slightly different;
thing to get from this I think is that Phenom II for the pricing is real competition for Intel CPUs ( as long as you don't overclock); especially the cheaper motherboards will drive down total ownership

if you already have an Intel Core 2 Duo, there is no reason to change, better upgrade the CPU, that's always cheaper than a complete system upgrade:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeBar

U can't expect DDR3 to change the whole picture, can u...? ;)

---

well it atleast levels the playing field.. both have IMC, both are DDR3 ?? phenom will probably still be slower than an i7 but the performance compared to the current performance should definitely improve.

Is there a review that looked into if C'n'Q is still broken and detrimental for performance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by largon

Is there a review that looked into if C'n'Q is still broken and detrimental for performance?

---

Anandtech tested it. There's a ~1% performance drop instead of 15%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by largon

Is there a review that looked into if C'n'Q is still broken and detrimental for performance?

---

Anadtech did quick and dirty test and C'n'Q 3.0 is fixed. They increased p-states from 2 on Ph I to 4 on Ph II and also now multi changes on all cores simultaneously (like on Intel). On top of that there is SmartFetch or whatever they call it copying L1 and L2 to L3 allowing cores to halt clock when not in use (BIOS support required). BTW new lowest p-State on desktop Phenoms II is now 800MHz 1.0V and together with SmartSomething enabled they measured just 8W idle power draw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

How many times were we told not to follow so blindly those ES numbers? So why would those i5 numbers be correct?

---

Plain and simple, the i5 numbers come from the same person that showed off the i7 numbers and the number from the retail parts where same/better then the ES shown by that person. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

I dont know whether it's true AMD needs a 3.2~3.4Ghz CPU to match a 2.66Ghz i5, but do we already know what speeds Intel is going to release anyway? Cause if it's that 'fast', they might only compete with their own line if they release the same frequency i5's.

---

i5 is the replacement for S775, i7 is just a byproduct from Serverparts (Xeons). I expect them to have the exact same frequenzy as the i7s, maybe one notch lower (no 3,2ghz part).

I see will still have our abundance of Die Hard Intel Fan Boy Trolls trying to take down this AMD Thread too huh:mad: When are you Moderators gonna get rid of these Jerks? They ruin every single AMD Thread that gets started! Its obvious that they absolutely dislike AMD and hold nothing but reverence and hatred towards them........So why are they in the AMD Threads all of the time?

C'mon Rocket Scientists pull the hooks out of your asses and get rid of these Creatons it's obvious they only come to start and instigate trouble! :down:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lightman

On top of that there is SmartFetch or whatever they call it copying L1 and L2 to L3 allowing cores to halt clock when not in use (BIOS support required).

---

cache flush on halt

Maybe not ban the intel boys, just block them from posting in this topic if their proven flamers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

I didnt say HT is inefficient:rolleyes:

Back in the day AMD was better, and you paid for that back then. But that was CPU only, now we've an entire platform needing expensive motherboards and not to forget, special DDR3.


Oh, here we go again. Carefull you dont put too much effort into growing up:shakes:

---

So you're incable of answering a simple question or expressing your views on that question beyond that of a 10 year old? I feel kind of sorry for ya, I know you're hurt, disappointed and maybe suffering from depression over the results of the Ph2 spanking. So I'll not lash out back at you:up:

When 939 + 4400+ + 1GB of DDR1 sold for about $975. There's a thread here talking about the $644 4400+, $180 DDR1 RAM and $146 board. If you can't do it by hand, use a calculator? Then if AM3 is going to show an improvement, you'll buy another board and DDR3 anyway. Extra costs you left out or phailed to mention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Explain Pay for that as in the i7 940 selling for less than the 3800+ in its prime. I'm glad Ph2 920 has a common sense price because those mentioned would have made it an even worse deal. Never mind that though as Q9550 is less as well. Tell that Pay for it BS to folks who bought not only Intel X6800 but many here who both $669 4400+ and $850 FX-55. The whole system cost might be legit but trying to single just i7 is nothing but Fanboi Banter.

---

Please explain how you got "stupid" and "Grow up" out of that? Is an i7 940 not worth its price while 3800+ or 4400+ was? Is the Ph2 940 Worth its price relevant to the others? Performance to price of the Ph2 was why that came up.

Then since you repeated what I'd already said, maybe you didn't understand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

That pay BS isnt stupid. In this case you pay a lot for every part of the platform, special DDR3 and the motherboards ain't very cheap either. You didnt have to pay that for either 775 or 939. And yes, unless there's a clear advantage to pay more I dont think people getting XE/FX CPU's or high-end CPU's is a smart thing to do if you can OC. Back in the 939 days a HTT of 300Mhz+ was pretty average, so having a 9x multiplier was often about the max you had to get, if you had a good stepping of course but that was often not much of a problem either.

Sure they can, as long as it's needed. And certainly in the server market for the time being.

---

Under lined is the Fanboi banter I mentioned. Back in the 939 days one FX55 and or FX62 sold for more than the i7 940, 6GB of DDR3 1333 RAM and the motherboard all combind. It's like you're posting while drunk or something. Phenom 2 is over priced when compared to Core 2Q and ain't even in the same class as i7 as even Kyle pointed out. It should be cheaper since it doesn't perform as well. Yes, as Pet North and others pointed out almost 4 years ago, you do get what you pay for. Compared to those bad old days when X2 ruled, you get a great deal either way:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

Plain and simple, the i5 numbers come from the same person that showed off the i7 numbers and the number from the retail parts where same/better then the ES shown by that person. ;)

---

Will see

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

i5 is the replacement for S775, i7 is just a byproduct from Serverparts (Xeons). I expect them to have the exact same frequenzy as the i7s, maybe one notch lower (no 3,2ghz part).

---

i7 isnt just a byproduct, it's the product.

Anyway, I know i7 is for servers, but it's at this point desktop/WS aimed, I dont see them dropping that for i5:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brother Esau

I see will still have our abundance of Die Hard Intel Fan Boy Trolls trying to take down this AMD Thread too huh:mad: When are you Moderators gonna get rid of these Jerks? They ruin every single AMD Thread that gets started! Its obvious that they absolutely dislike AMD and hold nothing but reverence and hatred towards them........So why are they in the AMD Threads all of the time?

C'mon Rocket Scientists pull the hooks out of your asses and get rid of these Creatons it's obvious they only come to start and instigate trouble! :down:

---

No one's a Troll like you. Pointing out Phenom 2 didn't do so well or talking how benchmarks results weren't good doesn't equal hate for AMD. That's not flamebait to any normal sane person. If folks are saying what ALL of the benchmarks combined are saying, then that hurts your feelings or personally insults you, its time for you to get some help, please!!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

Will see


i7 isnt just a byproduct, it's the product.

Anyway, I know i7 is for servers, but it's at this point desktop/WS aimed, I dont see them dropping that for i5:rolleyes:

---

i5 is in core terms exactly as i7. Just 1 lower bin as max (3066 or 2933). They all got HT, turbomode, ondie PCIe instead of X58 chipset and dualchannel instead of tripple. i5 should bring very heavy pricedrops to both Core 2 Quad and Phenom 2. Platform cost for i5 will also be much cheaper than Core 2/Phenom 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

No one's a Troll like you. Pointing out Phenom 2 didn't do so well or talking how benchmarks results weren't good doesn't equal hate for AMD. That's not flamebait to any normal sane person. If folks are saying what ALL of the benchmarks combined are saying, then that hurts your feelings or personally insults you, its time for you to get some help, please!!?

---

I don't know, there were a few users who were obsessing on the negatives, and to me that appeared less conductive to discussion, and more to rile up other users. The new CPUs performed at a predictable level, they didn't get spanked, or owned any more than they should have. Some people also seem to be disregarding reviewers conclusions, where they are typically positive about a return to competitiveness for AMD.

Some folks are just focussing on the negative, and some have gotten a bit to excited about some positive results. Both parties seem to be quick to justify, or prove the other wrong, it's not everyone, but certain users. I just mean to say you can't only blame those loyal to one side, both are accountable for the deterioration of the discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shintai

i5 is in core terms exactly as i7. Just 1 lower bin as max (3066 or 2933). They all got HT, turbomode, ondie PCIe instead of X58 chipset and dualchannel instead of tripple. i5 should bring very heavy pricedrops to both Core 2 Quad and Phenom 2. Platform cost for i5 will also be much cheaper than Core 2/Phenom 2.

---

what is the difference between them? cache? or was it quick path/IMC related?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

what is the difference between them? cache? or was it quick path/IMC related?

---

Difference is basicly i7=tripplechannel+QPI, i5=dualchannel+ondie PCIe. Rest is exactly the same.

Don't wanna de rail the thread more (not like its possible it's now an i5 discussion...).

But is ondie pcie better or worse then qpi or will it not make much of a difference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

I don't know, there were a few users who were obsessing on the negatives, and to me that appeared less conductive to discussion, and more to rile up other users. The new CPUs performed at a predictable level, they didn't get spanked, or owned any more than they should have. Some people also seem to be disregarding reviewers conclusions, where they are typically positive about a return to competitiveness for AMD.

Some folks are just focussing on the negative, and some have gotten a bit to excited about some positive results. Both parties seem to be quick to justify, or prove the other wrong, it's not everyone, but certain users. I just mean to say you can't only blame those loyal to one side, both are accountable for the deterioration of the discussion.

---

Phenom 2 doesn't suck. QFT, it performed about as expected. The problem is that some of us expected this to happen and were flamed for trying to downplay Phenom2 before it launches. We didn't have any problems like that when Conroe was upgraded. Folks learned nothing from being wrong about Barcelona as well. Back in the day I didn't think X2 would kick as much booty and said so. When it came out and rocked Intel's world, I started a whole danged I blew it thread:rofl: I was happy it kicked butt but was sad I couldn't afford it.

I think non-Geeks will look at this whole current war as much to do about nothing and more Geeks nit-picking or obsessing over nothing. Many think Geeks are the ones who don't get it. They see much of what WE'RE agreeing and disagreeing over as obsessive compulsive or something far more insidious. I thought Phenom was soundly beaten, but NOT pwned.

I'll say it til I'm blue, I was hoping for a better showing from AMD. Saying AMD didn't do so well shouldn't be seen or read as AMD sucks type hate mongering.

Proved wrong? Many said Phenom 2 would be faster the benchmarks have spoken. Folks calling them out in a thread about benchmark results shouldn't have others calling for Censorship and only allowing Propaganda.

Would you guys recommend reading this thread? Or is it a battle zone? Oh saw the word suck in previous post. gotta go. ;)