Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
Sooner...:D
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
Sooner...:D
Oh ****, just after the Chinese/Lunar new year!
That's $150 out of the ~$250-300 done. Now I need $100 more, hmm.
More performance clues http://en.expreview.com/2008/12/03/p...rformance.html
http://en.expreview.com/img/2008/12/...ce_phenom2.jpg
Again, I must say those graphs are highly misleading... Note the delta difference between Q9300 and Q4000, anyway have fun guessing the score. :D
The only one that doesn't make sense here is HD Video Encoding. Other stuff complies to the < (2.66/2.5 = 106.4%) delta.
i hate this sort of graphs. :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/amd/P..._X4-info-2.htm
If real shot is pretty deluding is same as a Q6600 at same clock :(
not fair to compare a Q9300 and Q9400 clockwise I agree, but maybe they do it anyway because they are in the same pricerange?
yup seems to me, they are comparing the same price range.Quote:
Originally Posted by prostoman
thought i dont think its unfair. If you buy a whole new ring and compare them money wise, you dont care how they are clocked. ;)
^
That means it really is cheaper than an i7 920. And the proverbial Q9550/650/940 etc.
I've got the hunch that it's gonna middle out with the Q9550. Win some lose some. At least on DDR2.
Yes thats very likely, but i dont know about the Q9550. The 6mb more cache bring quite some performance at the same clock. My opinion on this is, that it the PII 940 will settle between the Q9450 and the Q9550, but beeing cheaper then the Q9550 and the Q9450.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
But we dont know what price cuts intel will do in Q1 09, so the price segements could be mix up quite a bit.
Ahhh... Now you are beginning to notice. Better late then never. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
They put the Phenom II 940 as 100%, would have been easier if they used the Q9300 as 100% base, then we would be able to see how much faster it really is. As I said, misleading graphs. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
More goodies http://www.donanimhaber.com/DH_Ozel_...leri-11920.htm from Turkiye... :cool:
http://resources.vr-zone.com/image_d...f229bd2635.jpg
http://resources.vr-zone.com/image_d...a442f321af.jpg
^
lol at cpu-z 1.44.2, someone tell them to grab 1.48 or higher. :D
I'am with Hornet331 about PII940 performance, between Q9450 and Q9550.
I think that overclocking, power compsumption and pricing will make the difference maybe in favor of PII940.
:(
Was hoping for great competition.
Does the 9450 still exist? Looks like it's gone on the Egg.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
All that's left is 9300 and 9400. Maybe they wanted to compare production models? :shrug:
Q9300 is EOL, so is the Q9450. Only Q9400 and Q9550 left. Pretty wierd actually to see the Q9300 there in the graphs. But I guess they needed it....
The 9300's still on the shelves. Checked Egg, ZZF, and NCIX.
It's EOLing soon but looks like the 9450 EOLed.
yeah i also heard the 9450 is EOL, but there are still quite many shops that sell the Q9450.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
http://geizhals.at/eu/?a=300000&t=al...ahme&vl=de&v=k
maybe they are the last units, but they are still listed.
It also seems a bit wired that intel has such a huge hole in the lineup. The performance difference between the Q9400 and the Q9550 is quite big and so is the price... The Q8xxx models suck due to there little 2nd lvl cache....
But this gives the PII 940 the perfect opportunity to fill that gap.
It is confirmed that Intel is ending the 9450 line.
the graphs are misleading as usual, but it is probably the price range they are aiming at...
that would mean Intel need to drop the q9550 price by about 20% to regain the possible price/performance ratio? not including power consumption since this is still unknown and known board prices but is often forgotten in comparison.
I dont know, maybe intel thinks they dont need to drop prices. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
Take a look around, how many guys already have 45nm quad ready 775 boards here.
When the 940 is ~225€ (incl tax) you still need a board for the PII. A decent 790GX board is ~100€ which would put the whole package to ~325€.
A Q9550 is ~290€, so its cheaper to just drop in a Q9950 into a 775s board then to buy a 940 and a board.
The only people that really benefit from the 940 are the quys that already have a AM2(+) board or come from older platfroms (S939 or 775 not compatible with Quads) or buy a whole new pc.
Not what I was expecting, Still not what I would call a legit review so best to not get to disappointed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
Certainly no dissapointment here. I can't wait to get my grubby paws on one of these ice cubes. :D
Ugh, that benchmark with 4x4GB sticks, DDR800 6-6-6 and 1.8Ghz NB... What:confused:
This ain't really reliable:rolleyes:
[EDIT]
Prolly OT, but I just got a mail saying my pre-order is expected to arrive 18-12-2008! WTF!? :banana::banana::banana::banana:'n awesome
I don't know Ramm,those specs are really strange :confused:. I mean,1.8Ghz NB clock was quite unexpected,especially in the light of Shanghai 2.7Ghz specification for the NB(2.2Ghz).I was expecting the NB clocks to be actually higher than that of Shanghai,near 2.4Ghz range,not in sub 2Ghz range.That's Phenom I 9350 territory,not even near 9750-9950 range... And yes,that strange memory config,16GBs of CL6 DDR2-800 ram?? What happened to LL CL4 1066-heck be it CL5?Memory subsystem really looks crippled compared to even standard 2.6Ghz 9950 chip coupled with 1066 ram.Strange stuff :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammsteiner
If you indeed get you chip so soon,you'll be the first to tell us what's going on :yepp: .I suspect the BIOS multies for NB are lower than normal,but that's my opinion.
I've just did a quick Vantage run on my Phenom setting it to 3GHz CPU, 2277MHz NB, 1110MHz RAM 5-5-5-12-18 2T, HTT 207MHz and got:
CPU Test1: 1263
CPU Test2: 15.99
Figure it out :)
For my case and my country context, going for a platform change isn't that hurtful, since my X38 board -DFI LanParty UT X38-T2R has a pretty good secondhand price, relatively comparable to a new, highend 790GX board. And ofcourse, supporting the underdog should they have a competitive product always carries a premium in my decision makin process. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
nice, although can u run it at 3ghz/1.8ghz NB/800mhz ram? just to be 100% fairQuote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
And timings of 6-6-6-18-24 if you really want to compare it to the "leaked" Deneb result.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcmtl
I think you are going to get your wish ... AMD has been clear that they are aiming for the sweet spot (middle of the curve), Deneb appears to be hitting right there, so AMD will be able to increase ASPS, offer up great performance at the price they are aiming for....Quote:
Originally Posted by luie
This is 10x better overall (not performance comparative, but competitive comparative) than Agena.
Jack
prepare for a disappointmentQuote:
Originally Posted by Rammsteiner
i doubt they would allow distributors to sell before official launch`
PhenomII x4 940 on air cooling @ 3,8... :cool:
Why blank out the voltage? :shrug: The Turkiye one didn't... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dread77
Are you really sure? I believe it's a big improvement over K10, yes, but the K10.5 die still is huge and I don't know how good the new process yields? I don't know if they can improve overall margins *that* much. I'd guess margins for desktop ++, 2P server --, others flat. Just a guess. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
what's up with that ht link, the 940 isn't at 1800 at all it should be much higher, or is this still under NDA :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dread77
At 3.8 it is absoloutely stable... on air...:rolleyes:
And the temps are really well...
From oktabits forum...
940 NB will be 1,8 GHz.
945 will be 2400 MHz...
Hmm are you 100% sure?Quote:
Originally Posted by bedlamite
1.8Ghz is way too low,even 9850 65nm part has 11% faster NB.
That's what I've heard today from some sources ;)
But I'll see it with my own eyes soon ;)
Maybe they just want there to be more OC headroom for marketing reasons. A 50% HT oc sounds better than 20%.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
lol, actually that sounds pretty stupid but might have something to do with it.
It would also help create another reason for people to upgrade to AM3 945 otherwise not much to gain from 940 to 945 upgrade.
Aww. I was about to ask if these were going to be ESes.Quote:
Originally Posted by bedlamite
The last time AMD sent out ESes they didn't match the L3 clock at production (but the ES was clocked higher, 2.2Ghz IIRC)
I dunno man.Take a look at the previous 65nm and released 45nm Shanghai parts. The Core clock : NB clock ratio never went above 1.3.Quote:
Originally Posted by bedlamite
For example: Phenom 9350 model has a ratio of 2.3/1.8=1.27; Phenom 9850 2.5/2=1.25; Phenom 9950 2.6/2=1.27;Shanghai 2384/8384 model has a ratio of 2.7/2.2=1.22
Now compare those ratios to unreleased Phenom II chips ratios: Phenom II 920 2.8/1.8=1.55 :eek: (way too high ratio);Phenom II 940 3/1.8=1.66 (way way to high ratio) double :eek:.
It is entirely possible desktop parts will receive these NB clocks,but in the light of Shanghai parts,i'm very skeptical...
What would be "normal" NB clocks if we follow the trend seen in Phenom I and Shanghai? It would go like this:
Phenom II 920 model : 2.8/1.22=2.3Ghz in best case or 2.8/1.27=2.2Ghz in "worst" case.The 2.2Ghz would be my bet following the rule of integer NB multies,Shanghai NB clocks and 1.27x ratio seen from Phenom 9950.So 2.2Ghz for 920 model.
Phenom II 940 model : 3.0/1.22=2.45Ghz in best case or 3.0/1.27=2.36.This time i would say the NB would probably be between these two frequencies, following the rule of 200Mhz increments and integer multies. So 2.4Ghz for 940 model.
Like i said previously,maybe the retail parts will indeed have 1.8Ghz NB clock so the above "math" is pointless.But even so,it makes sense to me.
I think that it is believable. The higher NB clocks for DDR3 is more necessary than for DDR2.Quote:
Originally Posted by bedlamite
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/11...ed-for-ocing/1
"Theo also claims AMD's latest AM3 Phenom II CPUs generate 16GB/s from dual channel DDR3 1,333MHz. While this is clearly less than Intel's triple channel malarkey with Core i7, we've seen in our initial Core i7 review it does little to further performance over dual channel."
i agree with you, as far as i am aware in latest docs its 2,2 and 2,4 depending on speed, even shanghai was launched with parts on 2,2 and 2,2 so i don't see why it would drop again to 1,8 unless we are talking about future desktop E and server HE parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Maybe AMD want to leave some headroom for improvement on AM3.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
I think Theo was speaking about AM2+ version :shrug:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
Also i think DDR3/AM3 Denebs will not need higher NB clocks more than DDR2/AM2+ ones.
In any case,the NB clocks never crossed the 1.3 ratio mark like i've shown in my previous post.Not even on Shanghai 45nm parts(which are socketF,not F+/HT3.0).
Link to new CPUZ:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=209806
Link to new Hall of Fame :
http://valid.canardpc.com/records.php
Link to world record frequency K10:
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=448873
:D
See also :
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=452168
Poser....
If the AMD demo can show Phenom II running Crysis at 5GHz, then why we haven't seen any Phenom II 5GHz+ validation yet?
First i don't think this guy have right to valide CpuZ cause of NDA.
Second i just post link i make zero assumption contrary to u.
if u can conclude base on this link that AMD can't do 5 GHz... you are very good, very, very good :rolleyes:
Exactly.Plus,if I had to guess,I'd say all of those submitted clocks are done with air/wc.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
I guess nothing personally.
Some want CpuZ validation. Here they are!
Cooling? unknow.
Voltage? unknow.
Just one guy manage 4.4GHz with PII940 :)
Well the NDA didn't held back the 4.4GHz validation... so why should it prevent anyone from showing a 5GHz+ validation, which would be good publicity.. ain't it? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
So, none of them tried DI or LN2? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I don't agree with you. The article clearly states that he was speaking about the AM3 modells. I think that it can't reach 16GB/s from DDR2 and they'll need higher NB frequencies to take advantage somehow from the faster DDR3 modules.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Someguy could play with PII940 and was careless enough to validate is score so it show on the new CpuZ Hall of Fame, that's the story plain and simple :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
I don't understand why you try to extrapolate about that Ghostbuster...
Why no 5GHz screenies? Don't know! Maybe No one can, what will probably make you happy ;)
Nice, thank you. They all have to use very low ht speeds here, would be nice if cpu-z would show the nb speed on the validation page.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Can be they do not need >2GHz now because the L3 works more efficient in terms of latencies and bandwidth.
over clocked ram would be needed I can't find the post but someone with 1,200mhz ram was getting 13.5gbs in sandra.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
besides putting more then 2.2 volts can kill some chips,don't know about these new chips but my chip gets hotter at 2.0 ram volts.
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=452168
1. lol OC on an AsRock :shocked:
2. 4.1GHz OC done without raising the multi? Maybe I'm wrong but I thought HT OC is kinda weak on Phenoms..
That P2 920 looks better and better, I don't think I'll have the money for a 940 anyway. I have to get a decent MB too...
I was going to point to this validation, but you're faster :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by azraeel101
Regarding HTT clocking, even recent 9950BE are doing 270-300HTT easily. :up:
Those 4.4xx Mhz where Air or Water-cooling?
Thanks for that info :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
So that settles it, I'll go for the 920 and oc with HT like real men do :D
Now I gotta decide on what mobo to get...
Best 790GX board I had, I archived the same results as on the GBT 790GX.Quote:
Originally Posted by azraeel101
But only if you run (stable) with an modest NB speed which eats up most of the bandwidth gains.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Check http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...6&postcount=12Quote:
Originally Posted by v_rr
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pt1t
Ghostbuster,the thing haven't launched yet,and you're eager to show it OCs like a dog based on 3 submissions...Give it time for more people to try and use the chip first.The more people try out new Phenoms ,more results will be coming in.Heck ,many boards haven't got the bios support yet :rolleyes:
And you are doing what again? Hype? Or eager to show it OCs like mad?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
He simply pointed out it was done under phase change at -40C.Quote:
Originally Posted by v_rr
Reading comprehension problems?
I said:"Plus,if I had to guess". Guess means guess.Like i said it's 3 submissions.Three. Also,we've already seen the 6.2Ghz screen shot most people demanded.
Today is a Chicago event at which some of XSers will be present,maybe you should ask them what is going on?
edit: if you're going to do more ninja edits,i might do it as well :rolleyes: .If you follow his last postings ,it seems he is trying to find something/anything wrong with the submissions or results. Even though it's good to remain skeptical,he seems as if he is on a mission or something ... We simply have almost no clues ,for the time being ,how this thing OCs or performs. Some demo and a few results like Vantage.
So you got dissapointed with the phase change. Poor you. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
It still doesnt change the fact Ghostbuster posted. You should be happy that he cleared your doubt.
And you are on a crusade to bully whoever doesnt post the shiny information you wish for? Its obviously ok to post above and beyond. But posting something thats less of your wishes? Ouch.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Double standards is fun aint it?
Informal try to guess and he missed :(
Now you have on point in common with Informal, seems you both not very good at guessing game :rofl:
joking :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Facts stay facts. Now we know it was phase change but we don't know if it was his max frequency!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Yeah i was "disappointed" by one result lol.. Maybe you should stop guessing,eh? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
As more results come in we will know what it takes to run the thing at 3.8+Ghz and with what cooling.It's too early to say it needs this or that for certain clock.
edit: ahh futile is the fight with shintel's ninja edit skills...
Ofcourse we dont know the max frequency. But we do know it was phase change now and not air or WC.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
But its clearly a hinderance in posting anything less than stellar with this:
Instead fo being happy and say nice. 4.4Ghz reached on phase. Lets see if it can improve further!Quote:
Ghostbuster,the thing haven't launched yet,and you're eager to show it OCs like a dog based on 3 submissions...Give it time for more people to try and use the chip first.The more people try out new Phenoms ,more results will be coming in.Heck ,many boards haven't got the bios support yet
I'm still a bit skeptical... For one, there weren't any 5GHz validations if Phenom IIs could overclock so easily. :shrug:
That's true indeed.But i'm skeptical about what can or can't be posted.On oktabit forums that admin barely posted 3.5+Ghz screen shot(after he got the permission).Vcore was not shown on the screen shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
As moloko said,there are some boundaries until NDA lifts.Maybe indeed those chips at CPUz database couldn't go above 4.4Ghz :shrug:,wouldn't be the first nor the last time we see "bad" clockers(from extreme POV) from certain batches.Remember Agena already does 4.1+Ghz under cold..
But you reproach him what you did one months ago, chasing all non believers in threads relative to Core i7.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
How many Core i7 5GHz validations before NDA left? How many simple validations even?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
Fwik none and thats the point, Intel didn't started a hype, users showed that they can reach more then intel showed.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Amd on the other hand did a demo of a 6ghz Plus phenom II and set the expectation bar insanely high with that demonstration...
I call that bad PR, if amd would only have shown a 5GHz pII everyone would be as amazed as we are now, and if retail products oc even higher everyone would be freaking out. Now everyone expects 6ghz and if this is not reached everyone is disappointed...
Appreared after AMD hit 6 GHz. About 90 % of the posts are in threads related to either Intel/AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
My guess:
*Shintel is reading some XS News at work...*
"Umg wtf AMD 6 GHZ!?"
*Calls to Donnie, Ghostbuster(;)) and DrWho*
Shintel: "MAYDAY MAYDAY AMD HIT 6 GHZ!!"
Donnie: "So? I am tired of this. I quit!".
Shintel: "??? :("
DrWho: "Omg. :|" *Goess to save Intel's honour*
Shintel: "HA HA HA POOR AMD:ROTF::clap:"
GhostBuster: "Hey guys, I am quite new but I do what I can..."
...so they all are on their mission to thrash the competi...on their mission with Holy Olympic Spirit!
;) No Intelists were harmed while making this story!
You speak like PII is out but it's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
You try to judge them before PII even out! Bad PR if it can't reach thoses frequencies.
But I don't think they are moving Sampsa and SF3D for just 4.4GHz max frequency on phase...
ps: congrats 2000 posts Hornet331 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
Then could you clarify this "Retail AMD Phenom II X4 (Deneb) OC spotted" http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=209892 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
It's been clarified by dread77 from oktabit forums(he wrote the news in English there):Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
Quote:
Originally Posted by dread77
I don't know what you want me to do :shrug:
I am the original poster of the links for sure but can't say if this are retail chip...
Ask Pt1t, he seems to know chip owner.
Attachment 90211Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
What a load of BS. So you are telling us that when you heard about a 6GHz Phenom 2 OC done by the best overclocker in the world who works for AMD and can choose between many chips, you immediately thought you could do the same at home. If this is the case, you need your head checked :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
OKTABIT keeps them coming... Temps @ 3,8!!! Better believe it...:yepp:
Oh cmon guys...:confused: There are chips and there CHIPS. Even in the retail market you can buy one that can go a few hundred MHz higher then others.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
Good otherwise but idle temps are useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by dread77
What he is trying to say is that, with the latest processor from the competition we can go up to 4.2Ghz without much knowledge required, right the competition can not make a 6Ghz chip yet like the Phenom 2 but can deliver to all the people a chip which can make its customers happy like me.Quote:
Originally Posted by dread77
If AMD can do the same then it will be a great addition to our list of choices.
+1
Moreover good chip is good but you need skills too ;)
What i mean and Abel almost nailed it is that the chip is only a part of the equation and that Joe Average should never believe he will get the same results than the best overclocker. It just takes basic common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Way to go for a personal attack. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
Read what amd said about the ocing event and what chips they used then come back and read my comment... then maybe let it settle a few hours and then post again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
Well, that's a fact. Not everybody has a spare LN2 dewar in his basement, not to mention the skills...:rofl:
Joe Average will be happy if he can do 4GHz+ on air and MUCH better in a watercooling setup.
he he you are already giving hints :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dread77
so all yorks and nehalems do 4,2ghz on air easy....Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Cherry picked chip is speculation not fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
DrWho? speculate a lot about cherry pick chip from AMD, diode deactivated and 6GHz and more i7. He speaks a lot too...
I think he's even thinking a Sempron was hidden in the Phenom II CPU IHS:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Shanghai/Deneb rev. C2 erratas (19-20.)
Only 12 known erratas. :up:
Not exactly true...Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
Quote:
Note: There may be missing errata numbers. Errata that have been resolved from early revisions of
the processor have been deleted, and errata that have been reconsidered may have been
deleted or renumbered.
OMFG No! Im gonna cancel it all now and wait for C3:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
:rofl::ROTF: Good one!Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Donnie has insider info with no screen shots so NO PROOF.
Do we know how perfomance per clock is in P2?
Proof or no proof... As I've already suspected, NDA or no NDA (we;ve already seen the 6GHz screenshot)... if these chips can overclock uber well easily, we would be seeing 5GHz+ validations already. Furthermore the CPUZ show its stepping 2 and its not ES, meaning retail ones. It goes to show the difference between the PR demo and real world. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Shanghai numbers are already good indicators, then there was the slides which only compared with Q9300 and Q9400. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
If you know additional erratas please do not hesitate to share with us. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I don't want to compare desktop vs server, so Shanghai is out of the question. I want to know if I will have to clock P2 to 4,5GHz to compete with a 4GHz C2Q for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
The missing errata have already been fixed. Your quote only proves my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai