HT link at 1600? either CPU-z doesnt detect it right or thats not a Phenom CPU. Do AMD ES CPUs actually have a unlocked multi? Seems strange to me that they would
Printable View
HT link at 1600? either CPU-z doesnt detect it right or thats not a Phenom CPU. Do AMD ES CPUs actually have a unlocked multi? Seems strange to me that they would
Yeah something is wrong with the HT link...Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
what are the prices for each of those, eh?
it's too bad phenom doesnt even match conroe...
i was expection york to beat amd, but i didnt expect conroe too....
The memory as well; 5-5-7-18-22-2T is really bad. Cheapo DDR2 can do a lot better than that not to mention Phenom has 1066 mem clock supportQuote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
I'm not calling the FUD alert. Someone else can :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
*coughs* Two CPU-Z 1.41 screens with Phenom.
http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/d...0000061446.jpg
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2007/amd/...4-on-RD790.jpg
edit: WTF those CPU-Z not reporting HT Link and the one for the Crysis bench is?
I understand why you would even the processor speed for this benchmark, but unless something has changed further, AMD's clock speeds do not mimic Intel. They revamped them a few years ago using a different algorithm, atleast to my knowledge.
looks better than i thought
which one will be cooler Phenom or Intel? (power consumption figures)
AMD will go down the same way P4 said goodbye to us not too long ago. I sure will not miss them. I mean wtf were they thinking? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
It is obvious by now that barcelona or phenom only received an update based on the same architecture. But of course this plan got cursed the day intel spoke to god and told them he got a new son called conroe.
Stop being sarcastic. I dont like it when im crying. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
lol i'm serious here :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull78
lol Yeahh sure and I was just born yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
as ridiculous as you sound, you got some sense in your posts in that barcelona performs like a slightly tweaked k8. what it seems happened, is that amd had to scrap their k8 replacement around 2005, then went "we need something to offset core", and did not expect the desktop version of core to be so devastating to k8... not only did they underestimate conroe, they also completely failed at releasing it in a timely manner. what i love, is that even nn_step has pretty much all but given up on spreading amd fud...Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull78
scratches headQuote:
Originally Posted by RedBull78
gotta google search myself i guess
Who said you have a self?Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
damn it are you trying to increase your postcount today or something lol :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull78
you know what i mean
The last time I tried that I got banned.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Holy cow : look at K10's voltage !
1.536V is simply huge , that's an indication of serious problems.Remember the nice chat on AMD's 65nm process ?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&postcount=57
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&postcount=49
Something just doesn't seem right about that Phenom...Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Wait a min, what about the NDA thing?
That's bad but something I expected. Thats a B2 step core as well there and thats about the same voltage it takes an ES QX9650 to do 4.7GHz IIRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
As voltage increases, power increases quickly and the electrical resistance will also increase along with it so you get less MHz the higher V you give (low resistance junctions and interconnects are worst affected) and high TDP. Theres only two ways to take for CPU design when it comes to metal gate AFAIK and ones for high performance/high TDP and the other is for low TDP/v.low standby TDP preference. Intel chose the high-k dielectric metal gate which means you get maximum clock speeds (makes for easy PR work too) and not much TDP advantage over what the basic node offers and AMD AFAIK chose low-k dielectric along with IBM, which is not made for high clocks at all but low power usage. SOI and other straining techniques combined can do better than having a metal gate BTW. Then again I read AMD chose to go for high-k dielectric metal gate at 32nm, so I'm not sure what they're doing for 45nm or 32nm anymore. You can read more accurate info here: http://www.semiconductor.net/article/CA6402509.html
Around 1.5V is about the max possible a CPU MFG wants to retail at, and usually never above 1.4V nowadays. I wonder what the TDP is. Intel breaks the 130W barrier after 3GHz on Penryn at 1.216-1.248V, so what would 1.536V 3GHz quad get? Must be high but they're planning to retail 2.8GHz this year, so we'll see what they have to offer then.
That's not too bad clock for clock, but even the Q6600 can hit more than 3ghz, so I really hope the Phenom X4 will at least hit 3.5+ ghz. Otherwise the difference in performance will be huge (20-30% after oc).
Phenom B2 have max HT multiplier of 8... What he did to achive 3GHz was by setting the multiplier up to 15... HT Multiplier still at 8Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
so HT Link : 200MHz x 8 = 1600MHz
CPU speed : 200MHz x 15 = 3000MHz
NB speed should be arround 1.6GHz on that setup as well ..... :shrug:
Dual Channel with ganged mode ..... :shakes:
AFAIK.. it is unlock on ES.... If the bios didnt support it.. there is AMD Overdrive tool that will allow changging the multiplier for each core and HT multiplier....Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
That 2 screenshot are running CPU-Z Version 1.41.0 with B0 SteppingQuote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
CPU-Z Version 1.41 does detect HT Link correctly for Phenom B2 Stepping :yepp:
I thought the 3.2hz @136W or whatever was just a rumour, and the 2.8ghz K10 in 2007 too. AMD stated "up to 2.5ghz" for Barc and Phenom @2.6 imho.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Anyway nice to see a Barc finally reach 3.0 ghz again...