Maybe. But original article states this explicitelly:Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inq
Printable View
Maybe. But original article states this explicitelly:Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inq
I find this extremely unlikely, but would like to be proven wrong :)
PCI-E 2.0 would add nothing - r600 is only pci-e x16 so no additional bandwidth is made avaliable to the cards.
It's possible (though doubtful) that x2900 crossfire has been platform limited all along as you either have to go for pcie x8/x8 on i975 or resort to the rd600's hit and miss overclocking in order to pair it with the fastest processors. Of course someone with a x38 board could test this possibility by comparing dual x16 to dual x8.
Isn't stock frequency for PCIe 2.0 175mhz, so it would infact increase 3dmark score, but I don't think it'll do 30k on air.
I'm sure someone, somewhere is reading this thread and laughing because they have a Phenom in their possession and know what the results are either way.
Roughly it would add enough that K10 would be around C2Q speeds +/- 10-20%. Ofcourse we need tripple CF numbers to know precisely.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunge100
But its all guesswork ofcourse.
In addition: I think that the difference 23k and 30k in 06marks is for sum of processor, video and onboard memory, and PCI-E 2.0 of course.
I mean 23k for 2.5GHz CPU, default GPU/VidMem, default DDR2
30k for all OC-ed, including DDR2 @ 1066 MHz.
Khm. Don't forget single die 4 cores, granting better scalability for 4 cores.
I will only make one comment on this.
Intel crossfire = 8x8 PCI-E 1.0 + DDR2/3 MemoryControl on Northbridge.
RD790 Crossfire = 16x16 PCI-E 2.0 + DDR2 IMC.
Now, most comments about HD2900XT performance don't have the cards. I do.
Nobody has posted RD580(16x16 SKT 939/AM2) 2900XT Crossfire numbers.
BUT....
@ 3ghz K8 SKT939, RD580, DDR1 @ 250mhz 3-3-3-8, X1900Crossfire =10.5k '06.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=376335
@ 3ghz Core2, SKT 775, D975X, DDR2 @ 833mhz 4-4-4-8, X1900Crossfire =10.2k '06.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=639467
Now, although these numbers are NOT R600, they illustrate how limits imposed by PCI-E bandwidth @ 8x8 afect Intel's 3dmark scores.
Like it or lump it, clock for clock AMD really isn't that far behind Intel in '06. The only thing currently holding AMD back in benching is lack of high clockspeeds on K8. Add in IPC improvements on the new AMD core, higher PCI-e Speed, and greater overall bandwidth, even without the extra PCI-E speed...things don't seem too "fake" to me....they seem right where I expected, actually.
You are not right, The 2900Xt have been designed at start for PCI ex 2.0, (but no mobo was available).. ask overlclockers, the card begin just fly with 150mhz on PCI express. More you increase the PCI ex frequencies, more the performance are.. (and this without the bandwith gain of a 16x 16x platform)
Second thing, i don't know if we can trust 30K with this K10 but the first result with 23.7K look for me totally possible.. Now, the only thing we don't know, is how the K10 scale with overclocking, A64 was scale with low increase of frequencies.. from 2.8 -> 3ghz -> 3.2 etc.. totally invert of old Intel and CD2, who scale from 2.66-2.93 -> 4ghz -> 5ghz... More the architecture of K10 with a 4 in one QUad ( vs the 2x dual core side by side of the QX intel) scale perhaps better of the increase of frequencies.. don't forget the Intel was the first Quad architecture and we have in real no idea of the real efficacity of the architecture, like we know only this one, and we have no other point of comparaison... Look like 4x CPU (or 2 x dual core) on professional platftorm, they have a better render of efficacity in multithreaded appliccation compared to the Quad Intel... and better performance too
Anyway i don't say it's true, i just say not impossible at all.
Theo doesn't got any reason to gamble with his reputation and to make up some fake figures!Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
nothing, 3 graphics card are physic crossfire, 4 graphics card are normal crossfire. don't thing they used more than 2. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by grunge100
Right, particularly just 10 days before K10 launch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
It is difficult to know how RD790 crossfire, bios and most of the settings were configured as how it works, Shamino and Kinc got 27000 with a pair of ASUS Radeon HD 2900 XT overclocked to 1175/950MHz and with a Kentsfield at 5.1 GHz.
Total Points: 27039
SM 2.0 Score 11273 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 12088 Marks
CPU Score 7619 Marks
If Phenom is far superior than Kentsfied it is clearly possible. CPU score was 7619 marks, maybe a fast IMC and some advantages combined would result in this outcome. It is hard to believe and I doubt that a Phenon clocked at 3.0 GHz is faster than a 5.1 GHz kentsfield.
Maybe the fault in your thinking is that the increase in score is due to cpu alone...and I'll tell ya something...it's not.:fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
System 1:Quote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire
1GB (512MBx2) DDR2 800 4-4-4-4-12
2.66GHz Core 2 Duo
Intel D975XBX "BadAxe"
Maxtor 6L300SO HD
Antec 550w PSU
System 2:
Windows XP SP2
ATI Catalyst v6.6 Beta System 2:
Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire
1GB (512MBx2) DDR 400 2-2-2-5
A64 FX-60 @ 2.8GHz
Asus A8R32-MVP Deluxe
Maxtor 6L300SO HD
Antec 550w PSU
Windows XP SP2
ATI Catalyst v6.6 Beta
http://www.hothardware.com/articleim...tem832/3d2.png
i thought the Asus A8R32-MVP Deluxe use dual 16x slot ,,, i think you forgot the card clocks on the C2D run
I emailed Theo about 3-Fire question.I will post his response as soon as i get it :).
PS I believe Theo is telling the truth(ie. K10 scored 30K+ with 2 CF cards)
anyone with a x38 board to test?Quote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
that is correct when dealing with extreme frequencies, not with normal air clocks (~850/1000)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lane-k
I believe that too. So are 2 believers along.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
i want to believe ,,,,,,,,, but still i cant :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
What does C2Q at 3GHz and 2900XTs (OC'd similarly) get at 640x480, 800x600, and 1024x768?
At least then we'll get some baselines (and yeah...might as well throw in default 1280x1024 in for kicks, though I SERIOUSLY doubt 30k was achieved at 1280x1024).
My one and only comment.
Its the Inq. Ill believe it when i see it from a more reputable source.
End of.
now i believe :ROTF: :ROTF: :ROTF: :ROTF: 640x480Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I hope it is not 3 graphics cards, because then benchmarking has become even more expensive...
lol. Well when people make benchmarks without even state its resolution, meaning as default at 1280 x 1024, but who really knows :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
Quite the opposite from what I've found. I can crank my PCI-E speeds up quite easily below 900MHz core. Around 1000MHz things get significantly harder. The gains are always pretty decent, though they sometimes get blown out of proportion.Quote:
Originally Posted by biohead
This is all CrossFire mind you, I haven't done much single card testing TBH.
first official benches I see, K10 is coming in the mail on release day.
make it 3 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
30K is a 2K5 score :rofl:
Theo is mistaken
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
Nope, modded bioses, thanks. I WILL say, however, that i used DFI 3200, so far better timing tweaking for me.
I was intensively supporting Intel when they launched Conroe and bought my CPU at launch and now my support goes to AMD for the hard working they made with K10(4 cores on one die is not easy). I want Phenom as a successful CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
Intel is good for decoding
AMD used to be good for 3D'ing
Strange when people found it was totally possible when C2D results appeared showing 21s PI 1M @ stock when an AMD record was about 22 or 23s....
But now people find it impossible for a CLOCKED new AMD to beat a clocked c2q in 3dmarks...
Just a thought.... can't say that those numbers are true or not... no fanboyism here...
You are believing what exactly then? Your own self concocted belief that somehow they are going to revise how scores are evaluated when Barcelona launches? Stop being an ignorant fool and try to learn when someone points you in the right direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Take that 3Dmark calculator and enter the SM2, SM3 and CPU scores of ANY 06 project you want AMD or Intel, it will not matter. It will match what is reported in the link as the final score. Why? Because the calculations used to deliver your final score are INDEPENDENT of what hardware is used.
Here, go ahead
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectsearch.jsp
do a search for ANY project you want with ANY hardware configuration, and take the SM2, SM3 and CPU scores and enter them into the calculator. See for yourself. It will match what is posted.
Still your C2D score is not where it should be , ie 16x shouldn't beat 8x with lower CPU power in apples to apples comparisonQuote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
Beat yes it is higly possible but can not be certain ,,, 30K is totally different leagueQuote:
Originally Posted by Gothic
E6600 @4968MHz on BlackBox -100 casc8 - Commando - OCZ FlexXLC - 2xHD2900XT @874/837 on AirQuote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
got 30015 Points @ 05er
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=3262124
Woot. No DDR3 for me. No way Im paying that much. Good news just in there if the Inq makes this :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Inq
I dont hope those 7.5GB/sec is memory on the kentsfield. No way it gonna reach that on a 1066FSB. It should be arounf 5.5-6GB/sec.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
Come on man, post something decent will you?
Right. People just seem to want to think that AMD sucks horribly, will never catch up with intel, who rules all and is god of CPU tech and can never be dethroned again, etc... I don't get it. Intel got kicked off its high horse for 3 years, finally gathered its pride and rose to the top again. No reason why they can't get kicked again, and really it would do the market good for them to get kicked - keeps both companies on their toes, don't want just one dominating the market (tho some ppl around here seem to want it that way for some strange reason...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gothic
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
Did YOU make those benches?:stick: the ones i posted I DID.
:shrug:
Please also note drivers used and dates of my benches, pls. I play no favorites, except performance. I work for noone in IT, have no website, just like to overclock and play videogames.
lol, I'm not the one who refuses to believe that the 3Dmark calculator is correct. :rolleyes: Stop being an ignorant fool, everyone knows you are wrong and in fact I've got several PMs of people laughing at you....Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Your better than this guys...c'mon.
Phenom FTW???
That is the question...
I think Phenom is going to be good (at least it better be or AMD is done) but I highly doubt it at 3Ghz is going to out do a 5Ghz Kentsfield with the same hardware. I do hope in fact that is is faster because competition is good for everyone. It drives prices down and forces the competitors to develop even faster hardware. And in the end, it's us the consumers who will reap the rewards :)Quote:
Originally Posted by thebeast
Even that would be something Charles...I need around 4.6 on Conroe to break 30 in 05, single stage cooling all around, cards included. Doing so on air is pretty impressive if that's true. It's still out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Good I know I am funny.:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
I do not know really why I am still replying to your posts, if that makes you happy I will continue.
Like Gautam and some others said, the change in SM2 and SM3 scores has to be factored in. Does this calculater know what those scores will be on a new platform? I guess not. These are INDEPENDANT factors. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
Now that leaves the question if the 2900XT 3d score can really change that much in a new platform. Probably not but I'm not sure either.
Let's all wait and see in about ten days.
One more thing, if this personal account by the Inq is untrue - let's never post anything from them again here shall we?
No i didn't ,, sorry no offense ,, all i meant is that you keep tweaking , testing so results may vary a lot so it is not apples to apples ,,, we are not talking about a "run 3D mark 06 test " guyQuote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
I know what he's saying and I agree with Guatam, but I also know that when it is released that the same version of the calculator will be able to calculate it's scores as well. Yes the SM2 and SM3 scores will go up, but I seriously doubt that they are going to go up that much with a 3Ghz Barcelona. I'm really think that the person who made the "claim" or what have you made a typo and is referring to a 05 score not an 06 tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by v0dka
I agree, it would be hilarious if they switched 05 for 06 though. I will then methodically hunt down the Inq and ignore every new posting from them. As a good hardware forum, we should do that together. :cord:Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
But untilll, then, let's wait and see. Only 10 more days.
Stop acting like idiots. It's 3DMark05 score, not 3DMark06 like Fugger already said.
I'll be right behind you....Quote:
Originally Posted by v0dka
Well, unfortuantely, that's just what I did, install new driver, run tests. That's why i modded the vid bioses..to ensure clockspeeds and the like weren't a contributing factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
Now, currently, yes, dependant on chipset, 3ghz Core2 will score MORE...but we are talking a mere 400-500 points only, which, in turn, means that the Core2 system pulls ahead, albeit marginally(assuming that clockspeeds and overall bandwidth remain similar, as they are in the benches i posted).
But i chose those benches for a reason...the driver used for Core2 is one edition higher than A64.
So, like-wise thinking...Theo is running a pre-release driver, vs the quoted Core2 scores that use current. big deal.
The fact remains that K8, clock for clock, is not far behind Core2, in 3Dmark. Keeping this in mind, to not expect signifigant leaps in perforamnce from a new AMD platform is a little bit close-minded. I think peopel are just far to used to seeing 5ghz Core2 3Dmarks...but noone has posted 5ghz A64 3DMarks, so no real comparison can be made.
5ghz kentfield is not 100% faster that a 2.5ghz kentfield. It's false. More you increase, less the the cpu is faster/mhz.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
...
Sampsa, can you verify that it's an 05 score? I've done a bunch of runs in the mid/low 4.6 gig range that I wish I could show for a direct comparison. If it's a true 05 score done at 1024x768 and default settings then K10 is still sounding very strong clock for clock. Unfortunately the lowest score I have on hand right now is this one :p:...but I'll see if I can dig up some screenies of 30.6k runs I've got at 4.7GHz. Either way we're looking at a large difference in clock for clock power, as, at 3 GHz, the best I can muster is in the ~20k range....
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~gautamb/31123.JPG
Even if itīs 2k5, k10 is much faster than core2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
Thank you Captain Obvious! :toast:......Where did you see anything about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by madcho
30k in 05 at 3GHz is almost harder than in 06, no?
If either are true, this CPU is a beast beyond what any rumor said.
Quoted for emphasis.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
30k on air though is still really impressive.
Lets not also forget the weight that ATI cards pull in the 05 benchmark either, I have a pair of X1950XTX's that can almost keep up with my 8800s in 05 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Surprisingly i am still on K8 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: coz they are not far behind like you saidQuote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
PS: Theo is not running anything
i wont use this word till real benches come outQuote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
We would need a quad core for comparison, not a dual core like what you got on that screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
That's actually a pretty reasonable statement. I would say between 3-3.5 with a Kentsfield, you could get 05 and 06 each scoring around 20k, but with heavy enough card clocks (subzero for sure) to feed the 06 well....whereas they would do jack for the 05 at such speeds. Even at stock you'd be pretty close to being CPU bottlenecked. But then again, that wouldn't be the case if this CPU is as powerful as it is being made out to be here...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
05 is not multi threaded so it doesn't matter how may cores you have :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
Quads don't help in 05 more than a few % (if that).Quote:
Originally Posted by periander6
30k in 05 or 06 on all-air is INSANE.
QFT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
True or not, this article sure is drawing quite a crowd to the News section. :D
Well everybody loves a good run though the hay...lol :banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
Hey everyone, this could be true, this could be false. What does it mean? Who knows. Let's just wait and see (not that long of a wait) because after all this article was written by the same person who reported this:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32589
I suggest a mod locks this thread, as we have no other data apart from the inq,
which is not a reputable source; and the situation here is getting a bit messy.
Ah, I see. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
LMAO @ reverse hyperthreading.....this whloe thread is basically :spam:Quote:
Originally Posted by HopJokey
Sorry I can't verify but lets do quick math:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=3266193
When you change graphics card clocks from 743/828 to 830/900, switch old Asus P5W64 WS motherboard to AMD RD790 reference board with PCI Express 2.0 support and 2 x PCI Express X16 slots and K10 architecture @ 3 GHz, I think the score will be pretty close to 30k in 3DMark05. (edit: or 25k :P)
30k in 3DMark06 would require insane CPU score.
And remember, the source is The Inq.
4GHZ? Dude, pass some of that stuff around.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
What, we can't dissect what it takes to get 30k and what that means for (potential) CPU power?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank M
There may very well be more to it though....triple/quad R600 and lowered resolutions come to mind first.
Ahh, good point about the more than 2 GPUs....I remember them touting that a while back....hmmm maybe with 4 R600s......:rolleyes: never the less, it is a possibility ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
can't wait to see the truth behind all this. 30k in 05 is really pretty much just as hard though... i think there is more to this, cause no matter how good k10 is, its really hard to imagine it being that much faster, the difference would be greater than k8 vs p4...
You're a sly dog Sampsa diggin' up my score like that. :D I can say this much, there's no way I could see 30k happening on either P35 (w/ 8x/8x of course) or 975X at anything below ~4.4GHz. Regardless of card clocks. (Even at 4.6GHz+ '05 is very very CPU biased, even stock card clocks perform decently) On that platform it takes me past 4.6. I have no idea how X38 will fare.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
30K in 05 under any circumstances at 3 GHz impresses me. Whether it's true or not remains to be seen.
Fun thread this is, quite a curveball this threw at XS. :p:
Hi, I just wanna quote myself :
Ofcourse it's nothing more than a rumor and that's how it should be treated from the first place. (especially when it comes from the Inq).Quote:
(Inq alert) Don't shoot me if it turns out to be wrong!
Sorry that it really turned brutal, but in any case I figured it would end up in here somehow anyways, so I thought it should be put up for discussion.(That's why I wrote the above and mentioned the Inq in the title).
Guess it should have been Inq Alert in the topic after all! P :
Indeed it seems very unlikely. I mean here's hoping but.. little chance for that I guess.
Anyways the case is pretty simple :
If it's true, props.
If not, easy! Inq should clearly be flushed away from here once and for all.
IAC, please don't shoot the messenger. :D
Thanks for listening.
(Ofcourse if there won't be new info and the thread won't lead anywhere, Please feel free to do with whatever it needs :D )
Theo responded to my mail and he says he watched the mark06 runs and he is sure it was mark06.He said he was mesmerized while it run so fast.
And he said he didn't know if it was 3-fire . Oh well,i do believe him for once :).
Shoot? No, no, we have something much better in mind :D :wierd:Quote:
Originally Posted by Face
more like 4 of them...lolQuote:
Originally Posted by informal
That's one huge pandor's box, i'm tellin' ya. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CraptacularOne
Hmm. I wonder if he didn't knew, why did he specifically wrote "two HD 2900XT cards" couple of times :shrug: .. Changes the whole picture..Quote:
And he said he didn't know if it was 3-fire .
touche, and I still think is BS....lol unless there were four R600's......Quote:
Originally Posted by Face
14 days to find out :).Nda is over for both Barcelona and Phenom on Sept. 10.
what i dont understand that is in the inq article, he says amd would not let him run a mem bench on a k10, they he goes on to say that he has a k10 and has ran 3dmark2k6...
if he had a k10, why wouldnt he have just ran the mem bench for himself? if i had my hands on a k10, i know i would not have left the house until i ran every bench known to man.Quote:
Leipzig my kit was nicked, but before that happened we asked AMD if it would let us run memory benchmark scores on a system there. The reps gave us the company line and declined, so we decided to disclose the benchmark scores of our own K10 benchmarking here and now.
this sort of reminds me of a while back when ati (i think thats right) didnt allow a certain site to have a videocard for benching. the site went on to post fake scores of the cards, and were the first ones out of the gate with those benchmarks. in that case the benchmarks were low compared to the actual hardware.
as much as i would like to see this happen, i find it very hard to believe. this is why amd should have just posted benchmarks beforehand. now people will be exspecting 30k 06 scores with little effort.
if anything, this just creates more confusion.
4000 views in less than 5 hours.... I would say he did his job rather well :rofl:
I like to think it is true but deep down i feel it isnt, unless there new arch have some fandangled new way of dealing with huge thoughput, who knows, we will know for sure on sept 10th (might be wrong here). Im still holding an AMD system but am so close to going to intel it isnt funny, bring it on AMD for us fanbois :P
maybe its those new fasn8 mobo with crossfire with 3 card and 2 quad cpu that could make sense?
well I honestly hope its true. we need AMD on top. Intel will still be profitable as hell even if they're on bottom and AMD needs to cut the bloodloss.
I say K8 Vs P4 all over again.
I have no idea whether this is true or not, but it does bring to mind what Rahul Sood (VoodooPC) said about a week ago:
And for the record, if you were to benchmark Phenom at 3GHz you would see that it kicks the living crap out of any current AMD or Intel processor—it is a stone cold killer (at 3GHz, now imagine how it would perform if they could squeek some more juice out of it?).
He was probably fed the same scores as Theo, without being told exactly how many GPUs and CPUs were in the system. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by oldblue
AMD's Barcelona is a monster ::fact:
Some people here should stop trolling this thread. We have got many trolls today.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...5&d=1178868425
This speculation is funny for a couple of pages ;) We'll know all about it in a not so distant future, and I sure do hope this is true so I can sell this current system quickly for a _true_ Quad Core CPU by AMD and be done with Intel for a bit.
Possibly, but as the Chief Technology Officer for HP's gaming business (VoodooPC) I suspect he has a fairly good idea of exactly how fast Phenom is.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrace215
I believe !
/sarcasm on
Letz vote for all nay sayers and intel fanbois are not allowed to purchase the new AMD CPUs to make sure they learn their lesson and not being able to think out of the box. But yeah this is after the Intel tech brainwash for years.
/sarcasm off:up:
Its kinda same comparsion when years ago people thought humans will never be able to fly....
They did!
If anything its going to be good marketing and getting ppl to have a look anyway.
No joke....even though I don't believe it did 30k straight up, this has gotten me excited for Phenom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenetixx
Two weeks from yesterday and we'll know! :D
If true, I can't wait to pick up cheap Intel quad core in the For Sale forums :yepp: to add to my World Grid farm.
Or maybe it is a 2k3 score :D.
And about the Calculator, its 101%, i said 101%, because the 3dMark is rounding from 0.7 or not, and the calculator is rounding from 0.5 :).
The calculator calculate a score from the 3 scores ( SM2, SM3, CPU ) and dont have any relation with the new technologies and the rest..
with the price points I saw a while ago... not happening. They wouldn't charge that little for that MUCH.
Ryan
Quote:
Originally Posted by FghtinIrshNvrDi
You must not be aware of the QUADCORES for $300:rofl:
First of all.. The Inquirer doesn't know :banana2::banana2::banana2::banana2: About AMD's K10 3dm06 score. Im sure it will be near 30k overclocked, but when they actually gave an approximate digit of it, it sounded pretty stupid and hilarious :ROTF:
I'm pretty sure even if AMD releases the K10. Intel will make a much better chip later on :yepp: