Printable View
Because I do not wish to open a dialog with you I am all "bluster" and "exposed".Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
You do realize that you are starting to look pathetic don't you?
It would be hard to review this thread and NOT come to the conclusion that you are a helpless Intel fanhat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
They have feed back from HP, and others that say the are very happy with Shanghai. They even moved up the launch, so I think it is a good sign. AMD hasn't been into talking alot lately about there products..and like the 4000 series GPU's..they just came out swinging..there was a lot of sites saying what the GPU's were supose to have in shaders etc..but no one new the real power the chips would have until they hit. As stated on here many time, no ones really knows for sure...but it is still pretty much known it is going to be a better product. Pat Patla seems pretty excited about how thing have come with the 45nm chips.. So here's to hoping we can be as excited when they come out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GenTarkin
Keithlm why do you even bother with that "genius".Leave him be and he can argue with himself(i imagine he does that often).
I don't think it is a big stretch to suggest that Deneb will not get the kind of performance gains one would only see with the introduction of a new architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Do you really find it so odd that I would seek to call into question way over the top optimism for Deneb?
If it was Bulldozer coming out and the same IPC improvements were spouted for it, that would be very believable, but for a shrink and some extra cache, that is la la land stuff.
Do you think it odd that I am sceptical that Deneb will get a greater IPC boost than has been achieved at any time in the last 12+ years from just a shrink and more cache?Quote:
Originally Posted by malice85
What is the precedent for the crazy optimism that some have for Deneb's improvement over Phenom?
i doubt it will come out with gains as good as a new architecture will. but since the original k10 architecture was very rough and needed a lot of tweaking (which has been done now) i think it will have a considerable performance enhancement over current phenoms.
It is not just a die shrink and more cache...it has improved instructions per clock and other enhancements that were not done with the agena core..the agena core was passed off as "finished" before it was finished...they had a big problem with the roll out of agena...if it would have went as planned it would have been a better contender to Intel's 65nm chips...but it had a lot of mistakes...so, that said, there is a chance to see a bigger boost for this 45nm, considering that if 65nm came out as it was supose too, the 45nm would be a meare die shrink and cache increase as you say and just a marginal boost in speed per clock, as expected from this type of transition. Maybe I am being a little more hopeful. But I am, as others, are aloud to be. And if we are let down, oh well no harm no foul. And as I stated earlier, AMD did not intend Deneb to be a Perfrormance crowned processor. So it will fall right where they expect it to. They "plan" (hope) to bring the FX brand back with AM3 in 2009 sometime. I also hope that happens also. But we'll have to see how things go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
exactly because agena didn't work out so well i think they can do everything agena should have and more because of this change. it might not be as big of a change as a whole new architecture will but it will be very close because it is doing more changes than just a die shrink and they have had the first round of quad cores to test to see what they need to do differently.Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
If Deneb comes with a significant IPC boost, great, everybody wins.
But I remember all the talk about how great Thunderbird was going to be too back in the day and it was what, 4 to 5% improvement.
So colour me doubtful about any statements emanating from AMD PR, I wanna see the benchmarks.
Dude, calm down and try using the edit button instead of posting 3 post back to back. I don't think AMD will come to your house and make you buy a Deneb. As far as your Thunderbird comments...Well, the T-Birds were not that bad during their life cycle and the Bartons that followed were very impressive for the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
They definatly competed well with Intels offering during that time and at a cheaper price too. If you want to give us a history lesson about CPU's, then give us one about the beggining of the whole 64Bit CPU era. The Athlon 64 performed great for years until Intel released Conroe. P4's/Pentium D's weren't worth much for gaming and AMD had the better chips for a long time. Remember that before going out on a limb like this.
At the moment AMD has been struggling. Especially after purchasing ATI. Things will level out at their camp soon. Besides the performance crown always shift between AMD and Intel anyway. Same goes for Nvidia/ATI(AMD). So, overall I don't know what you are ranting about. FYI, AMD hasn't said much of anything reguarding the performance of Denebs. Exactly what PR are you referring to?
I won't say Denebs will be the best thing since sliced bread, but I'm sure they will outperform all of AMD's current line up. No disrespect, but you are coming off very negative and rude. Maybe you should try the XS Intel boards and follow age old advice......."If you don't have anything nice to say then say nothing at all".
If you want to gripe about Denebs atleast wait until they are released.
I second that.. I wanna see the benches also...I am going mostly off the fact AMD "knows" they can't have any mistakes. But since this change is more so to help the multi socket server areana, the Opteron's will benifit the most of course. The desktop will have higher stock clock speeds + they should over clock well to. At least this time AMD hasn't been blabbing how good they will be and not bringing it. They have been very brief as of late, and this NDA or what ever.. won't lift, so we can see what is going to be of this new desktop version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
werent there some deneb benches out there a month or so back on a chinese site or something? I remember in almost everything it was like 10-15% faster than current Phenoms clock for clock...and it was an earlier revision of the chip too....so, hopefully those numbers can only get better.
If it was true benches.
PS. isnt 10-20% or so all AMD needs to even the gap between that and say a penryn clock for clock and a bit of clock scaling?
Not to mention if the above is the case and AMD meets that with the deneb then the i7 wont be much worth anything to gamers and single threaded stuff, since clock for clock at least in games for sure its slower then penryn benches.
ZeroQuote:
Originally Posted by Klarko
i have a good feeling that amd is not going to release any benchmarks until around the week it is released. or maybe even after it is released. they have waited so long to say anything so far and there is the possibility of them coming out in 2-3 weeks. plus they were originally slated for late q4/early q1 and the day intel released a pile of nehalem benchmarks suddenly deneb was bumped up to November. i have a good feeling that amd is confident in their chip and thats why they pushed it ahead. with barcelona they obviously were not confident in it and delayed it for what 8 months? they finally just released it because they had to and not because they wanted to.
yea i don't think amd can go out of business because then intel will not have anyone to compete with and they will become a monopoly.Quote:
Originally Posted by nanohead
I am calm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
Thank goodness for that, I was worried there for a while. ;)Quote:
I don't think AMD will come to your house and make you buy a Deneb.
My Thunderbird comments were only made because that was the last time AMD or their supporters were claiming great things were going to happen with a shrink and cache increase and I believe it serves as a cautionary tale.Quote:
As far as your Thunderbird comments...Well, the T-Birds were not that bad during their life cycle and the Bartons that followed were very impressive for the price.
I don't know why you think I am unaware of the K7 & K8's moments in the sun.Quote:
They definatly competed well with Intels offering during that time and at a cheaper price too. If you want to give us a history lesson about CPU's, then give us one about the beggining of the whole 64Bit CPU era. The Athlon 64 performed great for years until Intel released Conroe. P4's/Pentium D's weren't worth much for gaming and AMD had the better chips for a long time.
What limb have I gone out on? All I have done is be doubtful about how big an IPC increase a shrink and extra cache can bring.Quote:
Remember that before going out on a limb like this.
I never said AMD haven't ever made good processors, which is the only way your "limb" comment would make any sense.
If AMD PR isn't hyping Deneb, then where are the Deneb boosters in this thread getting their information from which suggests there will be a far greater than usual IPC boost from a shrink and more cache?Quote:
AMD hasn't said much of anything reguarding the performance of Denebs. Exactly what PR are you referring to?
If people want to make over the top optimistic performance predictions for Deneb, there is nothing wrong with me questioning those claims and pointing to historical precedents which show those kind of gains just have not been achieved before from a shrink and more cache.Quote:
If you want to gripe about Denebs atleast wait until they are released.
Agreed. I don't know why people think you have to hold the performance crown to stay in business.Quote:
Originally Posted by nanohead
The desktop retail market for CPU's is so small.
BTW, this is the link to the older Deneb article.....
http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=3721
If these numbers are true then I am going Deneb. Especially if priced right and with the cheaper 45nm process you can bet AMD will price them right instead of being greedy like Intel.
Chad Boga, I am not going to let you dumb me down to your level with pointless non-sense that will end up in a endless cycle of bickering.
You must not have been around when AMD were pricing their CPU's against Prescott.Quote:
Originally Posted by Throwed
Actually I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
I shall attempt to put this in simple words that even someone with your diminished level of intelligence can understand: If you are NOT an Intel fanboy then you are something worse; you are someone trolling only for the purpose of causing negative responses and having no other purpose.
(Which you are increasingly proving to be true with each every one of your posts.)
Oh and BTW: Welcome to my ignore list. You do not have anything to contribute... therefore begone pest.
amd stated themselves that there will be a 15-20% ipc boost. as far as i have seen no one here has said of any boost greater than that.Quote:
If AMD PR isn't hyping Deneb, then where are the Deneb boosters in this thread getting their information from which suggests there will be a far greater than usual IPC boost from a shrink and more cache?
no one here has made over the top performance predictions. people are just hoping for it to be better than the current ones and to be on par if not better than current core 2 cpus. if you ask me thats not over the top. and its more than just a shrink and more cache.Quote:
If people want to make over the top optimistic performance predictions for Deneb, there is nothing wrong with me questioning those claims and pointing to historical precedents which show those kind of gains just have not been achieved before from a shrink and more cache.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...s_Shanghai.jpg
What an atrocious understanding you have of discussion forums and debates in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by keithlm
Due to your AMD Fanaticism you are demanding that no scrutiny ever be applied to outrageously optimistic predictions about AMD products, that this forum should only be about praising AMD.
Well I maintain that is an unrealistic expectation for across the board performance increases.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Claiming 15 to 20% is over the top in my view.Quote:
no one here has made over the top performance predictions.
Everytime a company shrinks and adds cache they will do some tidy up of the existing design and it never results in major improvements, so I am sticking with my description of it just being a shrink and cache addage.Quote:
and its more than just a shrink and more cache.
BTW, If I am wrong about how much Deneb improves, I will come on here and readily concede that.
ok so you believe that 15-20% is excessive. amd has stated that thats what it is and i have spoken with amd employees about it and they say the same. because you have no proof that 15-20% is excessive then i don't believe you can say that others are wrong when they claim this. we all accept that you believe that the ipc will not increase by 15-20% but what we don't understand is how u can say we are all wrong without having any proof stating otherwise when everyone else here is getting all their numbers and performance predictions from facts and what amd has stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
But, they were usually a few bucks cheaper then an Intel priced the same. A FX for 999.00 and a Extreme for 1099.00. I find it more trouble some that the Intel chips could not (even OC'd like mad) compete against the AMD parts overall and were still priced high. Like Intel, back then they could charge that for them. At least AMD is pricing there chips where they need to now (they really have no choice). And any company will do this as they see fit too. And both company's know, that the sales are in the low - mid range chips anyhow. Intel does have thier current mid ranged chips priced right..And if AMD had a FX out that was worthy, they would be pricier no doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
I never really looked into it, but what was the improvement overall for 65nm Core2 - 45nm core2? I thought I heard it was around 15%...I might look it up..But should expect nothing less then what Intel had..and at least some more given that of the higher priced chips showing more speed per clock with the larger cahce siaze in the Intel line up, true?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
I am casting my doubts for two reasons, and if you would care to address those reasons that would be good, and if you don't want to, that's okay too.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
1. In all previous shrink + Cache increases by either side in the last 12 to 15 years at least, we haven't even come close to seeing a 15 to 20% IPC increase, what is going to make Deneb so different?
2. AMD have little to no credibility in respect of projected CPU performances for at least 18 months now.
I think Penryn across the board was about 5 to 8%.Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
OK, well add 4mb cache and we should see a more apps see more improvement. maybe 12 - 18 in some case... I am to lazy to figure this out...but my Phenom @ 3.5ghz had a Pi 1m run in 22.5ish area with 2400mhz NB and 240 HT ref clock and a little better timings on the ram. And the Deneb C0 stepping a while back hit just over 22secs in Pi 1m with a 3.2ghz clock and a lot less NB etc. In the particular bench mark it show it does have improvements and it wasn't tweaked like mine. I should probably do a same clock comparison to it and figure the actual % improvement. I know, Pi 1m is not a favored bench to some, but in same compay archtecture comparison, it can show some hint of performane gain, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
wow how many times do we have to say its not just a shrink + cache change? deneb is different because it is more than just that. there have been modifications to the cpu that are made that should of been made with agena and are new modifications that they have made based on the last cpu. at the time amd started making the first phenom they were already ahead of intel with their X2 cpus. amd was obviously careless and were determined to make a native quad core. it took them a lot of time to do so and when they finally got it done it was a mess but they were so far behind already that they just had to release the chip because of the huge delay. deneb is supposed to be the first real k10. they have had a lot more time to do what they needed to do and they have done it now. and this time there is no tlb bug. they can actually release the chip without knowing it has a handful of problems. i have always considered the first phenoms to be a prototype. even the day they were released and i still believe them to be the same today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
ok and your second statement is just asking for trouble. you obviously don't know a thing about amd. and they have lived up to the performance they have told people. really i have no idea why you have come in here and posted. you have no facts. you refuse to believe anyone's opinion and deny all facts presented to you. it sounds like you are just trolling and trying to start something because you will not be satisfied until everyone in here says amd sucks. you have nothing constructive to say.
This dude needs attention why do you even bother responding he doesnt believe its going to be 10-15% increase....... great we heard him why does he keep sayng the same thing over:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
So what if this guy doesnt believe what AMD says or that he thinks we are wrong who really cares?......hope he leaves soon:ROTF:
OMG how do you ignore a user?
So AMD is going to tidy up some things as well, but that is often if not always done when shrinks occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
I believe you are placing too much emphasis on this.
You mean like their claim that Barcelona would be 40% faster than Core 2, when that only applied to bandwidth?Quote:
ok and your second statement is just asking for trouble. you obviously don't know a thing about amd. and they have lived up to the performance they have told people.
What are the actual facts presented to me that I am refusing to believe?Quote:
really i have no idea why you have come in here and posted. you have no facts. you refuse to believe anyone's opinion and deny all facts presented to you.
Why is it fine for you and others to refuse to believe my opinion, but not for me to disagree with other people's opinion?
One hell of a double standard you have there.
if you read this post then you will see that i am accepting your opinion but wondering why you are denying everyone else's. this is the last time i will respond to one of your posts as you obviously do not care what others think, are trolling, aren't using common sense, have no knowledge of the topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
How am I denying everyone else's opinion?Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
What would you have me do differently when I think Deneb will come in around 10% IPC improvements and others think 15 to 20%?
What makes you think I have no knowledge of the topic?Quote:
have no knowledge of the topic
Do you not think previous shrinks offer any sort of valid guide as to what we can expect for Deneb?
Well go and look at them then, everyone else here has seen them, that's why we know about the improvements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Google is your friend. Hint; try hardspell and coolaler.
It would also help if you tried to educate yourself a little.
Official benchmarks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie FX
Oh come on Chad, people are trying to be nice but you're coming across now as being childish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
In the long run everyone will just ignore you. What if one day you need some help? I did just the other day with a flashing problem and I got helpful replies almost instantly.
It pays to be friendly and enjoy each other around here, starting silly arguments will get you nowhere.
Others here have attempted to steer you just as i'm attempting to now, but you will only get so many chances.
I really can't see how your previous post was being nice. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie FX
Fair enough, I shouldn't have said it and I apologise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
I will remove the offending line.
gee I'm of for one day and this thread explodes on 6 pages thanks to Chad Boga's rambling :D
In my own book the biggest thing that I'm looking for with arrival of Deneb is significant boost in games that I'm (re)playing most often... and yes improved O'Cing capabilities will come quite handy ;)
In light of Nehalems price and game performance I think that Deneb will become the most reasonable choice of gamers looking for balanced systems that have sufficient power in GPU and CPU part of the system.
If AMD are able to fix the clock rate issues with Deneb, and there certainly seems to be some strong indication that they have, then I wonder if the Battle Royale will be between Deneb and E8500?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
That's what I'm looking for. A dual-core that is ~15% better in games than the current C2D's, sold at a competitive price. Of course, it will have to overclock just as well as the C2D's, so that the ~15% improvement can stay as a ~15% improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
guys this guy has been saying the same thing for 4 pages now
only reason i can see what he sais is in your quotes, please ignore him, please
This Thread has now been escalated to a higher Risk
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/k...ood/severe.jpg
for use in future when an Intel Fanboy invades the forum,
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/k...lert-small.jpg
That's the killer for AMD.
They appeared to have dropped the ball with dualcore for some reason.
How many are there that are based around K10, is it 2? Then you can't get them anyway.
Tricore seems to be AMD's new dualcore but they're only a way of selling otherwise dud quads.
soundood: You and I finally agree on something!!
Who woulda thought... :D
Soundud,
I love your warning system. LOL!!!!
You are twisting the facts here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Barcelona is actually 40% faster than the equivalent clocked Xeon in Specfp_rate which is exactly what AMD said in the first place.
This claim of 40% over C2D is completely false and the rumour came from the web with people having no understanding of what they are talkibg about. I hope that clears it up for you , so you to can now stop posting that falsehood.
The IPC is one thing, congestion in some ”sub system” is another. I truly believe that AMD have taken the opportunity to optimize cache and memory handling.
Better IPC can give a boost in certain areas (computational intensive), while yielding less in other (heavy data shuffling). I believe AMD have addressed both problem in Deneb.
In other words, even if IPC gets the 15-20% boost (which for certain IS possible), if the rest of the “chain” are unable to handle these are numbers we will only see in synthetic benchmarks *coughIntelcough* and not in our everyday computer experience…
I would like to know if also the AM2+ Deneb are going to have higher NB/HT frequencies, or if this is only for the HT3.1 ready motherboards? :shrug: In theory the HT2 allows for up to 2600 MHz. I can feel, on my computer, how much better everything flows with NB/HT at 2440 MHz compared to 1800/2000 MHz, so I am certain that this will be an important point!
So, my uneducated guess, supported by some (dubious) benchmarks shown on internet is this:
1. Bigger cache
2. Optimized cache handling
3. (hopefully) Some SSE and possibly INT optimizations
4. Faster NB/HT frequencies
5. All this at lower power draw…
With most of these whishes fulfilled, there should be no problem reaching a clock for clock boost of 12-15% on an average. Weighing in substantial headroom for higher clocks, AMD have in my book a CPU that is equally fast, or faster :cool: , than Intels offering for real life computer experience. Maybe not for all synthetic SSE4 optimized benchmarks, but that is another story…
And Chad Boga, I understand your standpoint and you bring up some valid questions. However when a discussion morphs into a “meta discussion” (a discussion about the discussion…) everyone have to try to let that stop after the first round because all that is left after that is name calling :slapass: (which leads to nothing good…)
You have made some good points but on this one I will have to say you're wrong. This was a quote from Randy Allen back in 2007.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie FX
"We expect across a wide variety of workloads for Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent," Allen said.
He used this broad term that got everyone really excited when in reallity barcelona was 40% faster but only in specfp_rate.
http://news.cnet.com/AMD-Go-to-Barce...3-6152645.html
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5863
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06...arcelona_2ghz/
oh and of course: http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2007/04...e-running.html ;)
the horses mouth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_n3wvsfq4Y
BTW I don't think Mr. Allen works for AMD anymore, I wonder why...
This is probably a difficult balancing act because quite clearly in this thread there have been people determined to shut down anything other than complimentary talk about AMD, so they would always turn things into a meta discussion due to their unreasonableness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Pepper
qurious63ss
Thank you very much for saving me the leg work. :clap:
Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
They did not enable all features in K10 which were originally planned. IMHO the Shanghai/Deneb will be the real K10.
Chad Boga: When are you going to get back to your home section? Your stupid and empty posts are going to be so boring for everybody. :rolleyes:
I know that im going to butcher his name but Coolaler has made several posts on his website showing C1 Deneb samples. So far it appears that C0 had the standard 1800/2000 HTT whereas the retail C1 stepping's HT was 2600 by defaultQuote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Pepper
C0 was getting iirc rougly 3.6 but he had a screenie of a C1 Deneb @ 4.3 on a scythe orochai heatsink (air) on MSI's 790GX (SB750)
Most importantly was that the SuperPI times he showed with the C1 Deneb were on-par with Yorkfield chips of the same speed hence the hope we have for Deneb. Shortly after this made its way to several sites on the net:
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,8195.html
I don't have a home section and I suggest you stop carrying on like AMD is your wife, it is really sad and immature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
Super pi between AMD and intel should never be compared.
Scientia disassembled superpi around 6 months ago to see why intel could run it so much faster than an otherwise equivalent AMD processor.
It turns out that it uses mainly x87 instructions so it has nothing (or very little) to do with cache at all.
It shouldn't be used as a benchmark comparison and neither should cinebench. They are both toys.
After saying that, those runs that coolaler did showed that Shanghai was a little over 20% faster than Barcelona at the same clock.
qurious63ss Thanks for those links my old memory was recalling the actual launch.
Thank god the old marketing team are now sweeping floors at the local supermarket. (hopefully) :shrug:
First ignorance, then trolling and now personal insult. You will probably find yourself unable to access the forums if you don't back off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Your interpretation is ludicrous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eson
Did you read the post I was addressing?
Were you able to comprehend it?
Look here for server benchmark results(AMD's highest clocked QC chip works at 2.5Ghz).There is really a variety of workloads where Barcelona beats higher clocked Xeons(specWeb is one,another is VM,Fluent,LS Dyna,Star CD,SPECompMbase2001).Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
As for Randy Allen comment,please don't talk about things you don't know.He is a senior VP now at AMD.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/A..._15089,00.html
Forgive my ignorance :confused: , but does that imply (which I believe it does...) that also the NorthBridge/L3 will be at 2600 MHz, because that is in my view more important than the HT speed?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentential
And then the HT 3.1 comes and gives another boost with its 2.8-3.2 GHz HT. In other words, here we have one "sub system" (NB/L3 Cache) that recieve a healthy 50% boost (2GHz -> 3GHz) :clap: , which will give a substantial lift on overall performance of the CPU and the whole system. OK, I'm just speculating here, but it looks good so far...
---------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eson
Oh, and please :brick: stop the :shoot: :CTF: :lsfight: :frag: :horse:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Instead: :party: :banana3: :toast:
:D :D :D :D :D
I might not have English as my native language and i had to look up interpretation and ludicrous to be sure of its meaning. However you will not win any Nobel Peace Prize by continuing this sort of pointless discussion (trolling).Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
And if you had even the slightest thought of making a stupid comment about winning the Nobel Peace Prize was not your intention then it just proves that you are trolling.
I'll stop posting off topic now.
I'll save everyones breath , Chad Boga, argumentative runt, please :banana::banana::banana::banana: off.
Great contribution. :ROTF::ROTF::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gener_AL (UK)
What did I post that you objected to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eson
Did you take offence at me thinking Deneb would have only a 10% IPC improvement rather than the 15 to 20% AMD are claiming?
This forum is not AMDZone, it is not meant to be a place where one must be constantly declare their undying love for AMD, as you appear to think should be the case.
equal and exact opposite?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
there must always be both, to justify the others excistence
god i even made up with Nedjo in the last few days, what is the world coming too?
This is for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
http://hugarfro.com/blogg/wp-content...e_internet.jpg
Enough of this petty bullsh*t. Let's get back to facts and figures.
Can someone please post the link to coolaler's benchmark? I had found the forum but the closest I got so far is only power consumption. Did he post any benchmark?:confused:
No he didn't.He is under NDA.IIRC he works for MSI as an engineer.
Thanks for the clarification. :D No wonder I couldn't find it hehe.
Now thats funny.....Quote:
Originally Posted by soundood
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
thats what I was thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Pepper
I think you are right on the money there. The slow NB in Barcelona was holding it back a bit, I've been hearing AMD will increase the IMC/NB frequency for Deneb, but not sure by how much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Pepper
Tests show that for every 200MHz speed increase on the NB speed, you gain about 1-2% performance. If for example we take a Deneb with the NB running at 3GHz, then that alone can give it between 5-10% performance (over the same CPU running the NB @ 2Ghz).
Increasing the L3 cache size can give another 5-10% boost, that's why I won't be surprised to see Deneb perform anywhere between 10-20% faster than a similarly clocked Barcelona. Which puts Deneb's performance in the same league as Intel's Yorkfield.
I guess there are a few other marginal tweaks that AMD did for Deneb (faster L1/L2 cache maybe :)), but probably only adding a few percent more to performance.
Can't wait to see the actual numbers now :)
I don't really think that the L1 needs to be made much faster, the L2 on the other hand was a tad slow. I'm not sure about actual numbers, I will be at home from college this weekend to grab a few screens from the Q9450 system I left at home to do WCG. Both systems have the exact same ram so it should be an ok comparison at least.
Now for higher nb speeds, I used to have a 9850 setup that was on my vapo and was at 2.7ghz for core clock and for nb. In the gimps testing for prime 95, it was as fast as running my 9600 on air at around 2.93ghz with whatever the nb was at, something under 2300mhz I'm pretty sure.
Don't get to riled up in here now boys, a few arguments here and there are always good for a laugh, but its kind of ridiculous in my opinion. Its to the point where its pretty hard to find any information that people do post in the thread.
Here is xbitlabs testing a Phenom X9850, with the NB @1.8GHz, then @2GHz. L3 cache latency went down from 8.5ms to 7.9ms. The average performance gain was about 1% (WinRar 2.8%) for the apps tested, small gain I know, but still better than nothing.
I don't think Deneb will have the NB running at 3GHz, maybe around 2.6GHz.
I do not presume to fully understand this relationship but I am starting to get a handle on some of it. Below is a quote from Gosh on a thread that is now closed due to a nuclear exhange between Intel advocates and AMD supporters. HERE is the thread and a comment by gosh below.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwidth
The following comment by Gosh made sense to me.
Is this why Deneb NB speed translates to better performance than Barcelona?Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
It’s simple, AMD had the memory controller integrated into their CPUs for a long time now, but Intel didn’t. Integrating the memory controller lowers the overall memory latency (improves performance) because the CPU doesn’t have to go to the Northbridge (on the motherboard) to fetch data, the data is right next to it :) Intel made up for that by having very fast and large L2 caches on their CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
Athlon 64 had the integrated memory controller (IMC) running in sync with the CPU, meaning the same as the the CPU frequency. With Barcelona AMD changed that and added L3 cache to the IMC/NB but made it’s frequency separate from the CPU, and ran it at 1.8-2GHz. They probably had to do that to lower power consumption, at the cost of a slight performance loss.
Deneb is similar to Barcelona in regard to it’s NB, but the L3 cache on it is increased from 2MB to 6MB. That’s where most of the performance gain will probably come from for Deneb, though some programs don’t care much for cache and may not gain much. So AMD must have done some other tweaks to Deneb, one could be what I mentioned in my previous post, running the NB frequency higher than the 2GHz that Barcelona has now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
Barcelona had such a small L3 cache, Deneb’s cache is 3x larger, so there is also a possibility it can benefit more from a faster NB/L3.
Here is what system integrators and OEMs working with AMD have to say about now already shipping 45nm Shanghai product:
Quote:
"I can see the AMD percentage of our sales increasing dramatically with Shanghai," said Philip Pokorny, chief hardware architect for Penguin Computing (Fremont, Calif.) an integrator focused on the HPC market. "Before Barcelona our business was 70 percent AMD processors and 30 percent Intel, but there was a reversal and now I am hoping we get to parity," he said, speaking at a panel of integrators gathered here by AMD.
"Our users are testing Shanghai now and seeing significant performance increases" coming from actual testers themselves tells us that server product (Shanghai) will indeed live up to its promise.As for Deneb(desktop) i guess we can assume a healthy bump(10-15%) with a much stronger gaming performance ,which combined,could be a winner for average desktop user if priced competitively.Deneb+790GX+Cheap DDR2 1066+HD4870(X2) = all AMD based gaming power rig!Quote:
"We were heavily skewed to AMD processors in 75 percent of our business since 2004, but [with AMD's Barcelona slip] Intel has made some recent inroads," said John Lee, vice president of advanced technology solutions at Appro International Inc. (Milpitas, Calif.), an integrator with customers including top supercomputing labs. "Our users are testing Shanghai now and seeing significant performance increases, and Shanghai will be everywhere from general purpose workstations to supercomputing solutions," he added.
One thing i would like to see is an Official list of support for older boards.
In the transition of AM2 through to AM2+ and the introduction of phenom
Some AM2 boards gaind + support for the current generations of 65nm variations.
I just hope that when it finally arrives i can drop it straight iin this NF570.
The move from AM2 to AM2+ included a change to the HT, decoupling the HT from the core frequency, adding yet another voltage, and they also added a different version of cool and quiet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gener_AL (UK)
All this meant there were a few important required bios changes to get these AM2+ chips to work on an AM2 motherboard. Many motherboard makers didn't bother updating their old AM2 boards on older EOL motherboards. (This made many people mad at AMD.)
Since the move from 65nm to 45nm basically does not include anything that the socket will "see" as being electrically different then any bios updates should be minor such as changing the CPU's id string.
END RESULT: If an older AM2 board supports the AM2+ 65nm Phenoms then 45nm chips might work on these boards.
In response to all the cache inquiries..made above. I thought sometime back it was discussed some of the major improvements of the deneb included cache associativity or width increases with deneb vs barcelona.... Anyone else aware of this?
Taken from article:
I'm guessing there can still be an NDA, even though the chips have shipped? I wonder if we'll see any leaked benchmarks.Quote:
AMD's four-core, 45 nm Shanghai processor is shipping now, ahead of schedule.
Deneb left and Agena RightQuote:
Originally Posted by GenTarkin
http://3800z24.info/Phenom/INFO.JPG
sounds like a pretty high ipc if you ask me. 15-20% could be correct. need to know what clock speeds they were comparing tho.Quote:
The chip, which AMD has not yet formally announced, will be priced aggressively and is getting performance measures as high as 35 percent above its previous 65 nm Barcelona while consuming as much as 30 percent less power, said Burke Banda, a server marketing manager for AMD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
If you need a definition of "set associative" like I did, HERE it is...:cool:
Quote: "This scheme has fewer collisions because you have more slots to pick from, even when cache lines map to the same set."
2.7Ghz(SH) vs 2.5(Barc).So it is 25% clock for clock (135/1.08=125,or 25%;100 is 2.5Ghz Barc ,135 is SH @ 2.7Ghz).Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
25% should be average(or close to it) increase for server workloads.Desktop should be somewhat lower,but still a good 10-15%(this can vary of course).What is important as much or even more as IPC is fact that clocks will go up dramatically(stock and OCs) and power draw will go down dramatically.In my book it's success :yepp:
Just for reference,compare the AM2 or even AM3 version of Deneb working @ 3.2Ghz versus now shipping Agena@ 2.6Ghz:
3.2Ghz Deneb should be as fast as 3.2*1.1=3.52Ghz Agena ,if we take a lower end(10%) of the projected IPC improvement
3.52/2.6=1.35 or 35% faster
OR if we take 15% of IPC improvement(higher end of the projection,less probable):
3.68/2.6=1.41 or 41% faster
Or least probable(server projected IPC improvement,least likely to be seen on desktop):
3.84/2.6=1.47 or 47% faster
Drives me nuts I cant find it but if you guys do some digging there an AMD exec interview on youtube where they say it's going to be a 10-13% improvement. So if its anything higher I will be happy. Food for thought if you guys wanna go scrounge through a bunch of vids
no doubt about it deneb is going to be an amazing chip. i guess the only question left is how it compares to high end core 2 cpus and with nehalem. i have a feeling it should outperform core 2 cpus but im not sure about nehalem. need to see some benchies and get more information for that. i hope deneb/shanghai is enough to get amd back up there and in line with intel. i bet amd will finnally have a profitable quarter this quarter even tho we are already halfway into Q4.
maybe 10-13% ipc. but after taking in the higher clocks and higher overclocks the performance will be much higher. how old was the video anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by Glow9
Nice try Glow9...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOc3ayl0zrw
BTW,you have a quote already from the article from yesterday where AMD official is stating:
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/s...leID=212001228Quote:
AMD's four-core, 45 nm Shanghai processor is shipping now, ahead of schedule. The chip, which AMD has not yet formally announced, will be priced aggressively and is getting performance measures as high as 35 percent above its previous 65 nm Barcelona while consuming as much as 30 percent less power, said Burke Banda, a server marketing manager for AMD.
More luck next time though...
PS Shanghai is server MPU so the obvious thing is they are speaking of different workloads from desktop,just FYI.
yea i just found that vid about 10 seconds ago. i didn't watch it but i went to their site: http://www.uberpulse.com/us/2008/08/...reat_video.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by informal
and i bet deneb vs agena will be much greater than shanghai vs barcelona mostly because of stock clock and overclock reasons.
I didn't read clearly...:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
add this for Cpu-z this for all your thoughts about Deneb.Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
http://www.xtremesystems.org/Forums/...1&d=1222483834 Nehalem cache this was pain in the ass to find >_<
let me rmind people of this.
core vs K10 but if we're getting a cache bump expect it to improve.Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
I'm excited for Deneb. I have my M3A79-T sitting behind me awaiting it and I may pick up a DFI 790FXB as well. The price premium of X58 and DDR3 is too much in my opinion.
If Deneb still performs slower than Kentsfield I would be upset but I really don't think that's an option for AMD at this point considering how barcelona performs compared to kentsfield. It's slower in most benchmarks but it hangs.
If Deneb performs between Kentsfield and Penryn that would be acceptable and I'd be happy.
If Deneb performs better than Penryn than I will be extremely happy and it would make for an affordable, nice alternative to Core2 and maybe even X58 depending on the prices and how you look at it. If that's the case than I'd recommend a 790FX/GX and Deneb over X48/P45 and Penryn.
The X48 as far as I know still have problems with the FSB Wall with Quads. I did not experience that with my P5Q Deluxe/Q9450 but I'd rather have an X48 for 16x/16x Crossfire. That to me makes 790FX very appealing because it is so cheap and offers pretty much every feature of X48.
Only time will tell but I am very excited. The first 4850x2 showed up on newegg a few days ago so now all I'm waiting on is Deneb and I can finally get my build underway.
ah yes i posted that awhile back when someone was saying how good nehalem's caches were compared to deneb's. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
Uh thunderbird was still .18 process as the previous Slot A processor,ANDQuote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
was also different socket.462 or Socket A. The name was the same, Athlon.
Id say he means tbred A , not thunderbird. Deneb is definitely not going to be a tbred-a. Thunderbird was great as well.
yes, daneb will be more similar to barton in that case, except for the lack of a new manufacturing process back then.
Hmm, 48-way set associative sounds as it could increase cache hits by up to 50% compared to 32-way set associative. This would possibly increase the efficacy of the L3 cache, even without raising the frequency or increasing size…
Or, maybe not…? :confused::confused:
Could someone with more insight in this matter :fact: elaborate (or speculate) over what this could mean for the overall performance? :bows:
yea id really like to see what is going on with that l3 cache. intel seems to have designed a pretty good l3 cache but amd's could be better because of the fact of 48 way compared to a 16 way. if shanghai is already shipping hopefully we can find some benchmarks around here.
NDA be damned!! Found this on an AMD message board. I know, hearsay, BS, etc, etc. SOURCEQuote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
Quote:
According to our internal testing, we found that its 20-30% faster than Barcelona on floating point applications like CAE, CFD, life sciences, etc. Its 20% faster on integer codes like Web and database applications. Overall, Intel Nehalem and AMD Shanghai are neck to neck across wide range of server applications.
Whats the price of the new Shanghai CPU's?
The way i understand it from http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/sum2003/...mory/set.html:
More slots (higher Set Associative) is a more serial approach while fewer slots is more of a parallel approach.
Example: 4x4 bit matrix (parking lot).
With 64-way Set Associative this would mean in worst case you must search trough the whole matrix for finding a spot. However if the first search is free then you save a lot of time.
With 1-way Set Associative would mean you know where the fixed spot is but it could be very far away. The advantage is that you know how long time it takes to get to each spot and maybe can optimize the priority for each spot.
Interesting is that Intel seems to go for flexible core cache(L1) and stricter system cache(L3) while AMD goes for stricter core cache(L1) and flexible system cache(L3).
they are lower than the same clocked Barcelonas!Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_redfield