AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-19-2008, 08:58 AM
QuietIce

Quote:

Originally Posted by biohead

READ:

Those two "shots" are CPU-Z validation shots, not actual shots of the program running.

My bad *redface*
I'm still looking for another v1.49 Deneb SS (but my 9850 still shows up as HT Link in v1.49).

Edit:
Finally found one - it also shows "AMD Processor model unknown" in "Specification". I agree - it's a fake.

Trust me, I probably hate people who create fakes even more than most people do!!! :mad:
(But I'm also more cautious about calling other people liars.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

My point exactly. Thank you. :)

Phenom has not beaten Core2Quad, period.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "beaten". I don't know about you but with current economic conditions I can't afford even $500 for a CPU - $1000+ is definitely out ... ;)
12-19-2008, 09:03 AM
LC_Nab

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

My point exactly. Thank you. :)

Phenom has not beaten Core2Quad, period.

We shall see on the 20th ^ ^ "Never say never "
12-19-2008, 09:31 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlanK3r

i found this, i mean, its not from Chicago or diferent presentation...

ehhhhhh looks fake to me.
12-19-2008, 09:32 AM
demonkevy666

Quote:

Originally Posted by LC_Nab

We shall see on the 20th ^ ^ "Never say never "

time to say up all night lol
12-19-2008, 09:35 AM
Oldguy932

Does anyone know the 4 cores enabled record on Core 2 Quad? Because nobody has mentioned that the record on the other page was with a single core enabled and not all 4. Just a thought on it.

And I just finished pricing out a system with it to use with my vapo ls :D.
12-19-2008, 09:41 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuietIce

My bad *redface*
I'm still looking for another v1.49 Deneb SS (but my 9850 still shows up as HT Link in v1.49).

Edit:
Finally found one - it also shows "AMD Processor model unknown" in "Specification". I agree - it's a fake.

Trust me, I probably hate people who create fakes even more than most people do!!! :mad:
(But I'm also more cautious about calling other people liars.)

I guess that depends on what you mean by "beaten". I don't know about you but with current economic conditions I can't afford even $500 for a CPU - $1000+ is definitely out ... ;)

Beaten as in CPU-Z record. E.g. "Wow heres the screenie! And heres the C2Q record! Look phenom beats best C2Q!!". What I mean is that Phenom has not beaten anything yet as the screenshot was/is obviously fake.
12-19-2008, 09:55 AM
Throwed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Beaten as in CPU-Z record. E.g. "Wow heres the screenie! And heres the C2Q record! Look phenom beats best C2Q!!". What I mean is that Phenom has not beaten anything yet as the screenshot was/is obviously fake.

Record? You're a funny guy. First of all, that screen shot means a hill of beans TBH. I and a few others here don't really trust things like that. Though most of us do trust the words of people like "Team Finland"(Sampsa and crew) and they reached 6.3Ghz so your point is moot! IIRC they even ran the Crysis demo at 6Ghz on a Deneb. Not sure if Intel has accomplished this milestone, but since you seem to favor Intel why don't you link us to something similar. Better yet, DON'T because this thread is NOT about Intel. Go start your own rant in the Intel section. FYI, the videos from the Chicago, Boston, and etc. AREN'T fake.

I'll never understand why people that favor Intel come to a thread in the AMD section to voice their opinions that NO ONE wants to hear. Talking loud and saying nothing sums their actions up.
12-19-2008, 09:58 AM
Trunks

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldguy932

Does anyone know the 4 cores enabled record on Core 2 Quad? Because nobody has mentioned that the record on the other page was with a single core enabled and not all 4. Just a thought on it.

I think this one
http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/screenshot/372113.png
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=372113
12-19-2008, 10:28 AM
Furiøùs

Who cant raise the multiplier to 15, and put INSANE amounts of voltage on a chip under L-N.

*rolls eyes* why does everyone have to bring in Intel. Im going full AMD / ATI next round. Getting a Phenom II, best mobo on the block, good ram, new PSU, and ATI's next video-cards.
12-19-2008, 10:46 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

Record? You're a funny guy. First of all, that screen shot means a hill of beans TBH. I and a few others here don't really trust things like that. Though most of us do trust the words of people like "Team Finland"(Sampsa and crew) and they reached 6.3Ghz so your point is moot! IIRC they even ran the Crysis demo at 6Ghz on a Deneb. Not sure if Intel has accomplished this milestone, but since you seem to favor Intel why don't you link us to something similar. Better yet, DON'T because this thread is NOT about Intel. Go start your own rant in the Intel section. FYI, the videos from the Chicago, Boston, and etc. AREN'T fake.

I'll never understand why people that favor Intel come to a thread in the AMD section to voice their opinions that NO ONE wants to hear. Talking loud and saying nothing sums their actions up.

Who the *** has been talking about the LN2 runs in the events except you? Why are you trying to put words into my mouth?

One valuable tip: Learn to read.

Look at this: http://bbs.chiphell.com/attachments/...4B0vamd7VO.jpg

Then look at this: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=612

Now, read this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

No.

CPU-Z validator which generates the static image has only rated FSB, however the actual CPU-Z client has HT Link for AMD AM2 processors. That Chiphell screenshot shows the CPU-Z client, which shows Rated FSB instead of HT Link - what it should show.

That could mean that the pic was taken with Intel CPU and then just shopped it as a Deneb CPU-Z screenie. Most certainly a fake, considering that vCore is lower than 1.9 V
and Sampsa & others claim/were told that 1.95 V is needed for 6 GHz.

All I've been saying is that the Chiphell pic is FAKE and AMD has not beaten Intel QuadCore MHz record. I think that it really hurts your feelings? Besides, even if PhII beats the MHz, the actual IPC advantage still makes Intel clear winner. Sad but true.

Ok, if you consider me Intel fanboy as I bust your dreams and beliefs and am running Intel platform then fine, but don't be disappointed when you wake to the reality and see Intel spanking AMD once again. Phenom II is no godsend.
12-19-2008, 10:53 AM
crazydiamond

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Besides, even if PhII beats the MHz, the actual IPC advantage still makes Intel clear winner. Sad but true.

Ok, if you consider me Intel fanboy as I bust your dreams and beliefs and am running Intel platform then fine, but don't be disappointed when you wake to the reality and see Intel spanking AMD once again. Phenom II is no godsend.

idk but i gotta like the $275 part over the $1000 part (as i am not rich)... unless of course the $1000 part is 300% better than the $275 part, then it might be worth it.
12-19-2008, 10:58 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

idk but i gotta like the $275 part over the $1000 part (as i am not rich)... unless of course the $1000 part is 300% better than the $275 part, then it might be worth it.

Sure the price is nice. Then again Intel has similarly performing Quads around the same price, e.g. Q9450 and Q9550. Performance-wise Intel still has i7 spanking everything AMD has and everything AMD will have until Bulldozer. PhII is nice improvement over Phenom but it is no Intel beater by any degree, as some here have been wishing.

(sorry if my post did hurt someones feelings, but busting the bubbles has never been this fun. I finally understand Shintai.).
12-19-2008, 11:06 AM
crazydiamond

4.4 ghz is max validated q9450 and 4.8 is max for q9550??? similar but not really

thats like sayin 9850's and 9950's (4.1ghz max for both i think) are similar to q9450's and q9550's lol and they are only $175 & $190!
12-19-2008, 11:11 AM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

4.4 ghz is max validated q9450 and 4.8 is max for q9550??? similar but not really

thats like sayin 9850's and 9950's (4.1ghz max for both i think) are similar to q9450's and q9550's lol and they are only $175 & $190!

Do us a favor and compare to those to the Q6600. :rolleyes:
12-19-2008, 11:18 AM
crazydiamond

tell that to ur buddy who said a 4.4ghz max validation is similar to 6ghz+ crysis runs (with only 5-10 min. to tinker on each chip) LOL
12-19-2008, 11:18 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

4.4 ghz is max validated q9450 and 4.8 is max for q9550??? similar but not really

thats like sayin 9850's and 9950's (4.1ghz max for both i think) are similar to q9450's and q9550's lol and they are only $175 & $190!

Yeah right, people who do 6 GHz runs are on budget.:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazydiamond

tell that to ur buddy who said a 4.4ghz max validation is similar to 6ghz+ crysis runs (with only 5-10 min. to tinker on each chip) LOL

Honestly, do you have pains reading that AMD still hasn't beaten Intel or what is this all fierce stuff about? I mean, what are you being bitter for?

Sure AMD goes past Intel when it comes to stuff like "Hey, I have $400 and I need CPU and Mobo and I want to do LN2 runs, which one delivers better performance?", there is no denying that PhII @ 6 GHz beats Intel counterparts of the same price range. Then again, people who do LN2 rarely are on such a strict budget. :rolleyes: Besides, that only applies in applications where multi threading gives edge. Single threaded apps are being reigned by steady hand of Wolfdales, no AMD fanboy can deny this.

Love it when in other threads I am being called an AMD fanboy and in other threads I am being called an Intel fanboy. Just, great. Friends with everyone!
12-19-2008, 11:25 AM
gallag

calmatory, Thats what others have been saying, Over the last few months if you are not 100% hardcore AMD cheerleader you are talked to like dirt and told to get out.
12-19-2008, 11:29 AM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by gallag

calmatory, Thats what others have been saying, Over the last few months if you are not 100% hardcore AMD cheerleader you are talked to like dirt and told to get out.

It's an evolutionary phenomena; it's so anti-enthusiast. What on God's earth are they doing in here? :rofl:
12-19-2008, 11:32 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trunks

I think this one
http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/screenshot/372113.png
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=372113

:eek: wonder if its stable. didn't think core 2s could oc to 6ghz.
12-19-2008, 11:37 AM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Sure the price is nice. Then again Intel has similarly performing Quads around the same price, e.g. Q9450 and Q9550. Performance-wise Intel still has i7 spanking everything AMD has and everything AMD will have until Bulldozer. PhII is nice improvement over Phenom but it is no Intel beater by any degree, as some here have been wishing.

(sorry if my post did hurt someones feelings, but busting the bubbles has never been this fun. I finally understand Shintai.).

Yes, they have parts in same price point, but I can't stick an Intel chip in my AM2+ M3A79-t motherboard. and most people over here have boards like these. In my book, it is going to be plenty fast and a heck of a lot more fun to tweak. And AMD has said this many times, they did no intend to steal the performance crown with these chips. So, I don't think they will. I am just glad they will be a nice choice for new system builders, who don't wnat to spend a fortune for a nice tweakable system.
12-19-2008, 11:37 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

:eek: wonder if its stable. didn't think core 2s could oc to 6ghz.

Might find this interesting.

Waiting for 45nm AMD Duaies with a tad more mature process.
12-19-2008, 11:40 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Might find this interesting.

Waiting for 45nm AMD Duaies with a tad more mature process.

i should of said core 2 quads. lol i have been forgetting words lately. yea core 2 duos can do it. but for a quad its pretty amazing.
12-19-2008, 11:45 AM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

:eek: wonder if its stable. didn't think core 2s could oc to 6ghz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Might find this interesting.

Waiting for 45nm AMD Duaies with a tad more mature process.

I wanna see some benchable OCs so far we have seen and heard from trusted guys, that Phenom II has run 6ghz time demo of crysis, now before you say, Crysis, Bla, not even worthy, bla bla.. does anyone have a link to such proof of these high clocked Intel chips @ 6ghz+. I don't go visit the Intel side much so I have no idea what is tue or fake or etc.
12-19-2008, 11:51 AM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

i should of said core 2 quads. lol i have been forgetting words lately. yea core 2 duos can do it. but for a quad its pretty amazing.

The numbers we're seeing from Deneb are amazing for the simple fact that it's a huge leap in frequency from the last gen offering. No doubt about that. If AMD can improve on this (like 7Ghz) overclocks, they can win a lot of enthusiasts back. But that is to assume that Intel won't improveon their current offerings either, which would be dumb. The fight as I see it, is going to be who can shrink their cores even more and how much they can put on a die; unfortunately Intel is ahead to the 32nm process. If AMD can stage in a coup by surprising Intel with speed and even ipc efficiency, then that'll be fun to watch. Hopefully, I'm wrong and AM3 Deneb is a 7Ghz monster chip, because that is what it's going to take to compete.
12-19-2008, 11:52 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

I wanna see some benchable OCs so far we have seen and heard from trusted guys, that Phenom II has run 6ghz time demo of crysis, now before you say, Crysis, Bla, not even worthy, bla bla.. does anyone have a link to such proof of these high clocked Intel chips @ 6ghz+. I don't go visit the Intel side much so I have no idea what is tue or fake or etc.

Why do you think that I'd say so?

If talking about benches.. Let's see this thing again once AMD is actually able to do something faster/with better score than Intel is able to.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page