I am getting really tired of seeing FCG having to defend his thread so if it doesnt stop he is going to have this thread closed and wont be posting his results in the open forums.. So please lets keep it clean and stop the flaming. Thanks...
Printable View
I am getting really tired of seeing FCG having to defend his thread so if it doesnt stop he is going to have this thread closed and wont be posting his results in the open forums.. So please lets keep it clean and stop the flaming. Thanks...
so glad i just sold my X2 system. Can't wait to hop onto the Conroe bandawagon ASAP.
And tbh, it's not really a big issue whether it fits it all into the cache or has very fast cache or whatever...certainly nothing to get worked up about. I don't see anyone here denying that conroe is faster than lightning, after all.
What are you talking about? You're just babbling..Quote:
Originally Posted by iterations
I never said the size of the EXE matters when it comes to l2 cache useage..
I said, that if the EXE can fit into the L2 cache, then the program will execute at a faster rate than if the main memory or hardrive were involved..
i believe that while the info here is undoubtedly important and thanks to FCG for doin these tests and providing results (and on WR), we have to ask some questions before rushing to sell grannys teeth to buy intel stuff.
first, if FCG has been given/allowed to show results with this chip, wuoldnt you make sure it was the best ES you could put out. that thing could be cherry picked from a thousand test samples.
second and more importantly, there is something fishy going on with CF working so damn good on these DDR2 chipsets. am i right in thinking that Conroe does not boast an on-die mem controller like the AMD's? so why suddenly so much more efficient? but it does have awesome bandwidth thru DDR2? that wouldnt just make up for AMD ownage for so long tho.
so somewhere round the middle, this setup (bad axe + conroe) is making up for the weak chipset structure that is found on AMD boards - given that there is no need for them to be manufactured with any real FSB control and throughput(due to on-die mem controller). This 'stronger' chipset structure used by the conroe(all credit to intel) is owning the graphics relay procedures ie driver function and PCI-e control (SB?) and allowing better bandwidth and functionality for the CF cards. well, says I anyways...
if this theory is correct (and please feel free to tear it to pieces), then AM2 may not show the better performance seen by the conroe camp because (i think??) the AMD's are keeping there on-die mem controller thru to skt AM2 boards which i believe will use 940pin layouts similar to the current Opteron server line. thus the chipset will not have made up the lost ground that could be slowing the whole CF system down.
Paul
amd started the ddr2 memory controller from scratch, and the 940 pin count is PURE coincidence
other than that, fun read :D
CONGRATS FCG Thx for your hard work and the World Record!
I appreciate it..As you know I was on this forum until 03:30 lol
Heres a BEER :toast: hehe.
Hopefully we can see some more benchies. :)
And I think that 2.4Ghz will be a real seller. It should go beyond 3Ghz easily. Dont you guyz agree ?
This chip FCG has will also go easily over 3Ghz with Air.Just the board that needs improvement, 2.7ghz is only the beginning ^___^
Regards
ORCBEAST
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
well you cant seriously tell me that i could run slower DDR2 against faster DDR2 and expect the same results - and then compare those to an AMD + DDR system of equivalent specification and get no difference again just because the cards were the same. i think the potential of the CPU to do work is somewhat reliant on its ability to use ram thus bandwidth affects the CPU bottleneck reduction of which you speak. and my point was not that the ram bandwidth has increased markedly, it was that the chipset had/ has changed sufficiently to affect the operation of CF
It looks like it will take some people time to "accept" the results in their hearts ;)
Anyway Kris the scores are absolutely great and i appreciate the work and the sharing. Can't wait for you to get a mobo that doesn't limit the OC.
I agree, thanks a lot for putting this together FCG!Quote:
Originally Posted by ORCBEAST
wow i cant wait for these to come out, or at least mobos to support them so i could gat a 9xx to hold me over. I hope with a real OC friendly mobo you can get that "4Ghz easyily" that was promised by your guy.
FCG, I apologies for sounding critical. Didn’t realize this thread was about WR. The FX60 screenshot threw me off. Again I Congrat you for your outstanding achievement. I know how you feel (I've been in the same situation), Sometimes its hard for some people to show a little appreciation.
the "Regal Crown" bestowed :bows:
for gaming i really dont really care so much about the cpu, i would rather pick a good video card instead. I justa wanna play without lag but for testing/beating records this cpu rox.
Great work FCG!
Just unbelievable how Conroe breaks the WR without even getting a sweat.. Amazing!
[Crush's voice from finding Nemo=Donnie27]Dewd yoooou RAWK![/Crush's voice from finding Nemo]Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Congrats and keep up the very good work and your time spent doing it.:woot: :clap:
The Intel is again the king, in the world of the computer, I hope that this new processors arrive soon to Spain. About the topic of the motherboard, it is know, If asus took out their soon his motherboard, with supports for the conroe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenwar
I agree - INTC is a strong buy right now.
FCG
Thanks for your great work. We all follow it closely here and look forward to more results.
Do not pay attention to all the fixed minds that find it hard to face the new reality. They have a problem and they are trying to make it yours. Just ignore them.
LOL:slapass:Quote:
Originally Posted by integral
Really FCC you are tha man. You the first one to bring any meaningful results to us. Sure we'd like to see more. Do some CPu rightmark and some more 3dmarks. And don't forget some games if you can. Fear, q4, Farcry would be nice. Great job man and keep it coming:toast:
FCG, one of your fanboys is convinced that u run CF with Dual 1900XTX without master card, so if I coudl asc you for a little favour. Please don't tell him the truth, it could have catastrophic consequences.
LOL.. no matter how u dice it, slice it.. conroe is more powerful..
im no intel fanboy, neither amd, like both.. better 2 than 1 :D..... cant believe all the negative talk about..
hey FCG, have you tried this: ITK?
i really enjoy seeing these benchmarks bro, dont let all the haters bring ya down.:toast:
Does all this talk of cache and SSE2 and what fits into Conroes cache and what doesn't really matter at the end of the day if it achieves the end goal of being the fastest in everything it does?
I'm all for synthetic benchmarks to draw comparisons, but to be honest Anandtechs article alone sold the Conroe to me - a min of 20% faster than an FX-62 in every single game they tried. 20%+ faster at a 1/4th of the cost - that's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned, everything else is a bonus. And frankly its obvious AMD have nothing to counter it this year, and what they decide to bring out next year is a whole different unrelated issue.
Obviously you can argue the legitimacy of Anandtechs review, and Intels showcase etc etc but these synthetic benchmarks that are coming out now are showing that they probably weren't faked, it really is going to be at least 20% faster than an equivalent setup with an FX-62.
Right now it seems we're just trying to find out just how much faster it can be than the existing stuff. It's not a question of "is it faster", its a question of "how much faster".
i want to know how amd can justify their prices with what yonah is doing, much less what conroe is going to do
yep, x1900 series in CF requires a master card.Quote:
Originally Posted by zbogorgon
Same way intel justified their prices during the P4 vs A64 days?... It was the same, if not worse, than this upcoming one.Quote:
Originally Posted by VulgarHandle
Either way... AMAZING FCG!
FCG, staggering results and am looking forward to more.
How are you getting clockgen to work with the board? I get errors when I try by using either of the listed ICS9541xx numbers in the dropdown list for 975 chipset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
I use that same PLL for my D955XBK and it works fine as long as Intel Desktop control is uninstalled.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
i don't remember the first athlon64's pounding intel's top of the line by 20%, as we see here
You forgot to mention the price difference as well =\Quote:
Originally Posted by VulgarHandle
@DilTech
AMD has never beat intels top end the way Conroe is owning everything...
oh, but i did, couple posts upQuote:
Originally Posted by vintage_guitar
back to topic:
FCG, been a while since last update, hope you're having fun :party:
what ever happened to the rule of crapping on WR threads = instant ban?
"Carfax" pretty much trolled this entire thread.
grrrr i never liked the conroe...
I only have the lite version of destop utillies installed to monitor temps and voltages. Maybe that is it, I will have to try again sometime.Quote:
Originally Posted by cupholder2.0
Military or contractor? Either way, thank you for doing what you're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unrealcpu
:toast:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2149&p=7Quote:
Originally Posted by cupholder2.0
Every other game was pretty similiar during the dawn of the A64... :fact: Funny thing, Doom 3 was intel's best showing interms of performance during the first 1-2 years.
It was exactly like what we're seeing from conroe now. The socket 754 3000+ was pretty much even with intel's top end, and that was with a single channel memory controller. Did I mention that 3000+ costed almost half what the 3 ghz p4 did at that time? Even more-so, it costed 1/5th of the price of that EE which was the only p4 to beat that 3000+. Mobo was 1/2 the price of the intel mobo's too.
Now, back to the topic.
FCG, can we see some game benches?
There were more than just Anand. Webmasters from PC Perspective, Tech Report, Hot Hardware, gotfrags, and others saw and played with the Rig. It took some folks awhile to see Athlon for the performance it brought, so it will be the same with Conroe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Durzel
AMD will have to hope nVidia can pull some SLI magic that will give it a boost then nVIdia would withhold that tech from Intel. Wouldn't be the first time.
They all tested with the same system, at the same place. None were allowed to actually do anything but run those benchies. They couldn't even check the task manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Now, the results we see here can be trusted, but those earlier should've been taken with a bag of salt.
No it's not. When A64 launched, many folks weren't buying the low yield overpriced POS's with Buggy motherboards. As those benchmarks show, the equally overpriced 3200+ was getting spanked by the 3C and ran about like the much cheaper than 3200+ 2.8C, man, revisionist history.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
A one poster already noted, Dothan and Yonah was already causing AMD pain.
Now if you said X2 vs P4 Smithfield, maybe.
FSB increases. was able to get 6x and 7x working as well as 8x.
http://members.cox.net/kjboughton/FCG_380FSB.jpg
Didn't matter if they did anything to it or looked inside and out, doesn't matter that fugger, Victor, FCG testing it says and anyone told you otherwise, you'd still NOT see the light.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Schweet!Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Oh and I still think you have the best Avatar:)
Wonder how well they will overclock with a x985 board, and W/C or Phase with a E6700 @ 2.66, now thats insaine, and i mean thats stock speeds with the E6700
And i also thought that the E6400/E6500 were going to have 2mb shared L2 cache and the E6600/E6700 were going to have 4mb L2 cache
Please correct me if im wrong
These 2.13Ghz chips have 4MB L2 Cache and two cores.
The model number is incorrect as these are not available in retail.
i don't get it, why did intel lower their stock clocks, shortened bus?
now you have done it, he is going to cry :DQuote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
You're looking at the AXP numbers, look at the A64 numbers, even the sempron beat the 3 ghz P4. The A64 numbers are much higher than the AXP. They don't even list the 3200+ A64, that's how I know you're looking at the AXP. As for overpriced...I bought my 3000+ pretty close to release day, at under $200, in a RETAIL store meaning online prices were even cheaper. That's cheaper than the 3 ghz P4 was, and about the same price as the 2.8C was at that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
We all knew the northwoods spanked the AXP.
Nice revision yourself.
Now again, can we get back on topic?
wow conroe is an absolute monster, kind of not fair for the other benchers :p:
Wow, my MS Word will be smokin with one of these Conroe babies! :D
Can you run the same game benchmarks as Anand? Maybe we can see if it really is 20%+ improvement in games as well.
Miltary,Quote:
Originally Posted by tdenton1138
Captain U.S. Army :)
Thanks for your support.
I can not wait to come home and dump some dough on the Conroe and SLI crossfire :) Hopefully the XE conroe will be out soon because it will be going into my Vapochill LS :) I think people just need to accept the fact intel is ahead of the game with thier 65nm process which most of their plants have converted to this process. AMD's 90nm which is close to maxing out in terms of Watts/heat and MHZ unless they come out with some new technology from IBM which i highly doubt. AMD wont convert to 65nm until late 2006/2007 from what i heard :). From initial benchmarks from AMD AM2 i just dont see how DDR2 and AMD's current Architecture will overcome the conroe at all. I am sure AMD will have something up their sleeves in 2007 with some new processor with some different design. However right now for overclocking Enthusiasts the Conroe with less heat/watt and short pipeline , AMD will be in trouble.
Intel will start rolling out the conroe in their plants within a few months and once this gets more exposure im sure AMD prices will fall like a rock.
Sorry for never having seen an ES with specific product branding and significant technical differences to the corresponding retail product before... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor_Sniper
Thanks for that info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugger
Anyone with a "real" E6400 to compare effect of cache-size on a possible performance hit out there? :)
Greetz, Flox
They don't have the same model Anand tested, overclocked the fsb would make a difference and you wouldn't ge the same numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Your_Boss
great result there !!
but you got competition, will bench that Yonah 3.4ghz with crossfire today or later, maybe I can compete with this score :p
Now you're being niave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
I don't trust intel's claims or tests. I *DO* trust what people on here show us. Don't get it twisted.
I'm no fanboy, I go with what's best at my time of upgrading. :nono:
Multi-task with a Sempr(0)n and then com back and talk to me? Better yet, Do some LAME becnhmarks with Intel updated patches and some for most Video apps, no, that's right, only Games and Science marks counts, right? Oh wait, lets overclock both.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Conroe is just following on to, the ass kicking Dothan and Yonah are ALREADY doing while AMD Fans burry their heads in the sand and pretend otherwise. If this is too painful for ya', Please stay on the AMD side of the forum, I'll not bother you there.
Bull, I've posted hundreds links here to GamePC, Anandtech, Hot Hardware and about 40 other sites showing A64 vs P4C. There are Fanboys here who don't accept that ANY AMD processor was EVER slower at anything than anything Intel ever made=P These same folks downplayed any advantage any Intel processor even might have or had, be better SIMDs, MultiTasking with optimized software, Overclocking or anything else.
It is NOT off topic to point out that even when Conroe ships and kicks the snot out of AMD, folks like you will be here to make excuses say things like wait until next year or etc...........
Read Anand's first Opteron review and then tell me about revisionist history LOL!?
Prove me wrong when Conroe has been on the market for a couple of weeks?Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Yes:banana: that's what i wanted to see. If FCC can do this on Intel MB then we definetly got room for higher FSB when enthusiast MB's will arive.Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
I bet your Am3 cpu score with higher FSB increased. I know with dothan every 25mhz + i got 1K more cpu score. Post some benchmarks with higer Fsb
Donnie, if you wanna continue this pointless arguement, we can take it to pm's.
This thread doesn't need to be crapped on like it has from various people like yourself.
Last thing XS needs is FCG and the rest of the guys with conroes saying forget this and keeping results private.
I'm so happy for you FCG! Your score is above 20.000 so Aquanox2:Revelation will run smoothly on your system. Yay!
Man, i want this new conroe! better start saving :(
OK FCG, it's your turn to gain back your AM3 WR from kyosen.:D
Why did the AXP suck compared to the P4? FSB bandwith. Hypertransport and the on die memmory controler changed everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Congrats on the WR FCG. One thing to remember is that the Conroe EE should not be out until later this year, not in june or etc. I also want to see real world game and application (not MS word rofl!) benchmarks.
I also like to see Intel and AMD competing, because in the end we all win. As great as Conroe seems to be, until it is out in retail, we will not honestly know if it can dethrone the FX-60s in 3D03/05/06, but the fact that it can ends up being good for all of us. I only hope that AMD's next generation of CPUs also gets as much attention and coverage.
Congrats man! :D
I wonder how many Conroes are sold just by this thread! I know I'm getting one :D
OK, new hurdle, on air of course.... 7x385=2.695GhzQuote:
Originally Posted by dogsx2
http://members.cox.net/kjboughton/FCG_155507.jpg
-FCG
dude that is just sick:toast: :woot:
Ah nice, a Kris strikes first into Kyosens world records.
:toast:
why are the gfx- and cpuscores not available?
Never a truer word spoken!Quote:
Originally Posted by fhpchris
If only more people shared the same viewpoint.
nobody knows, i talked with some of the guys last night. we believe we may be exceeding a score on the CPU which prevents the calculation of either. i would imagine that the benchmark writers never expected to see wuch high scores and therefore did not code to calculation to go that high. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by LoKi2k
:slapass: :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Thanks for continuing the benchmarks.
Great scores.
Great scores!Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
I get this too if i have a wicked FSB. It seams that issue is not in speed of CPU is the high FSB that AM3 have problems with. It's realy weird issue. Anyhow those are killer scores FCC. Let see some more benchmarks
man these chips are very impressive
Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
how much faster was the conroe clocked than the previous run??
i think i have seen an 18k CPU score before, dothan if i remember right
it does seem to be more related to intel setups than amd for some reason:confused:
and your probably right about they never expected these scores, look at your screenshots, you can play games created 4-5 years ago with high detail:)
God, let this berserkers rampage persist in these most honorable and historic times.
3.6GHz vs 2.72GHz
And the winner is conroe. The increase in CPU score alone is massive: lower clocks and 1000 points more and those clocks on the x1900 are measly.
Could be the same reason why I can't get a PCMark04 completed succesfully on grammar multi-thread test on my E6600. Dual Prime95 stable for 4Hrs+, PCMark05 stable, dual SPi 32M stable, 3dMark01se loop overnight, 3dmark03/05/06 passed without issues, AQ3 completed, I can throw any benchmark except PCMark04...Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
using non Conroe e6600 CPU, PCMark04 works flawlessly on the same set up :confused: :confused:
AMD does have stuff up their sleeves... Will it be enough? who knows and we won't be seeing it till early 2007 either way. Apparently Intel wants to get back to 80%+ market share... I'm glad to see it... I am plumb tired of netburst. and good work FCG
Intel owns in am3, always have. I was beating guys by 20k with single dothan and 7800gtx256 that were using SLI setups with FX's.Quote:
Originally Posted by ex2cib
AM3 is NOT a good benchmark to compare with....it is so intel favored.
A 780m on air crushes the cpu score of the 3.7ghz fx60 and pretty much matches the conroe cpu score at same mhz:
dothan @ 2700mhz 7900GTX@ def clocks
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL256.../142920102.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL256.../142920104.jpg
Could be the overhead of SLI/nv drivers on the cpu dragging down the FX60, or it could be that the intel chips just own in am3 period. Lots of other variables there including x1900 vs 7900gtx, single vs dual gpu, etc..
Regardless, conroe does looks like it could do some damage in AM3 in the right hands. Nice prelim benches Kris.
In 06,05, and 03 it is adiff story though. Got any runs to post up using the exact same clocks you ran there in the am3 with the other benches I mentioned? Maybe something with def gpu clocks in xfire? I'll match your clocks with the SLI rig for compare.
For what i know AM3 is very good indication how cpu performs in games. It's 3dmarks that are far more syntetic, your score could vary on many things.Quote:
AM3 is NOT a good benchmark to compare with....it is so intel favored.
A 780m on air crushes the cpu score of the 3.7ghz fx60 and pretty much matches the conroe cpu score at same mhz:
dothan @ 2700mhz 7900GTX@ def clocks
my dothan does much better at quake4 and doom3 then x2 with same card @same clock. I dont see why am3 is Intel favored there use to be times not long ago when a64 could compete at it. Im surre Conroe is not worce then PM:D Looks like someone needs anew setup to play with;)
Games railer? What are those?...LOL. 3d benchmarks are the ultimate game for me. My everday rig is 3.0c/9200se. Can't play much on that though :)Quote:
Originally Posted by railer
Seriously though, from my experiences, dothan/intel does better than AMD/SLI in am3 at same clocks on cpu end. I think I could still spank my best amd/SLI score with dothan and single 7900gtx. It would be really cool to see someone running SLI with those hacked drivers in am3 with a conroe. I am sure that combo is something alot of peeps would love to see....hint hint Kris.
AND I do have a new setup to play with, but it's not conroe/yonah/xfire ;).
How about Cinebench?
:toast: I think exactly the same! It is MUCH BETTER to save money for buying good videocard (may be couple of them) or... physical accelerator on AGEIA PhysX in the near future. This will have much more impact on real gaming experience than shuffling your CPUs. Do not let syntetic benchmarks to waste your money in this nonsensical way.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillo-kun
Just a quick quip -- FCG's chip is an A1 stepping, release version will be B0 or B1 stepping, i.e. one major and perhaps a minor revision before release, expect 5-10% more performance as Intel engineers work out the design bottle necks and target critical process steps better.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrewolf732
The clocking of these chips are certainly pointing toward a 2.9 or 3.33 GHz version on the horizon.
Yep plus then also add a FULLY supported motherboard and Bios then add another few % performance ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
WOW...... Dont know much about overall system performance, do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimd
CPU is everything...... I went from a P4 @ 3.6Ghz to a P-M @ 2.8Ghz and the games FPS just sky rocked with the same clocked X850XT PE.....
Alex
Of course! But I just mean that it is completely wrong way to change your present powerful CPU (as Athlon 64 3700+ for ex.) with the any more powerful one. If you care about the gaming experience (not highest marks in CPU benchmarks)!Quote:
Originally Posted by AgonxOC
If you have not-top-end videocard you can spend equivalent amount of money on upgrading your video than you will have smoother picture (without bad slow downs in hot episodes).
Or you can wait till AGEIA accelerator will be on retail and you can get with it really impressive picture that no one conroes or the CPU at all can show to you.
I just see how it works, so I was impressed. And maybe I buy conroe (or whatever AMD will prepare to answer later) but before I will buy some of the physical acceleration stuff.
Cool, look forward to seeing some results..:)Quote:
Originally Posted by k|ngp|n
Quote:
Originally Posted by k|ngp|n
yea, you do have a point about intel owning am3 now.
am3 seems to like CPU efficiency more than anything else
i mean
P4 < A64 < dothan < conroe
it also likes ram timings/bandwidth. ive had my a64 @ 2700mhz before with higher cpu scores than an a64 @ 2850, just because of extra ram bandwidth and timings (/screams at venice for not wanting to clock ram anymore, rip 313 2.5-3-3-7 :()
then you have no dual core support on am3 either.
what makes dual cores helpful are the dual core graphics drivers
ive always like AM3 as a benchmark, since it ran in a minute or so.
the next time someone posts scores, can you add the max and min FPS as well? those are just cool to look at as well:)
good work on the 150k's FCG & KP, makes me sad though, as you doubled my max score:p:
personally, i think it's largely a smaller L1 cache that helps conroe with this benchmark. The smaller cache size means data is spending less time on the core, and latency, at this point, is less.
As driver commands are relatively small, the shorter time spent on the core, rather than it fitting "inside the cache" as someone else posted, as well as the faster transmission to the vital "part"(chipset, gpu, drive controller, audio) as a side-effect of the smaller cache, is why we see such a boost.
This would explain, very easily, the huge growth in 3d-scores, rather than cpu scores, and we can just forget the extra execution unit that Conroe has.
Well not to mention the entire Intel pre-core lineup right? This has got to be the greatest preformance leap in cpu history, Usally its a decrease due to lower starting freq. and systemarchitectural first batch issues on supporting hw. It´s simply earthshattering. :woot: :clap: Way to go Intel!Quote:
Originally Posted by eBoy0