I didn't even see that quote.. now that's some good news!
The answer is yes, try the L1N !!
Printable View
I didn't even see that quote.. now that's some good news!
The answer is yes, try the L1N !!
No, they are NOT!Quote:
Originally Posted by kyosen
BA is mass production ready B1, and B2 is yet to come... B2 will be for K10 what Thoroughbred-B was for K7... feature wise nothing change, but B2 will bring frequencyes over 2.5 GHz. In Q12K8 there will be another revision that will enable 3+ GHz frequencies on stock voltages. B2 will be able to do 3 GHz but with overvolting in general cases. 'of course there will always be cases where 3+ will be reached on stock voltage, but for mass production will need to wait B3, or what ever they decide to call it.
The l1n bios didn't work...however, the custom bios by AMD for the Tyan board does...well sort of. I'll have more info later, but for now take a look at this and you'll see why this is driving me crazy trying to figure out.....:shrug: :shrug:
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/6318/1stbootvc2.jpg
nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
BA is the fixed B1 rev that patches AMD errata 281 (stream, int, float performance). No production systems will use B1 chips. PERIOD. straight from AMD's mouth about 30 minutes ago from the field application engineer who has to support this. All review systems that you've seen have utilized a BIOS patch to workaround the errata which does in fact impact performance.
B2 is the mask revision for higher speed parts. AMD will announce these in Q4 and ship for rev. either at the end of Dec. or Jan. these will be 2.5 and 2.6 parts.
cheers,
dave
that's up to marketing. production BA steppings have been and still are allocated for enterprise customers first. BAs should be sample available mid/late september for SMB.Quote:
Originally Posted by red
dave
i'd hardly suspect a Sr field engineer from AMD who works with some of the larger enterprise customers in the NE and NY regions to be spoofing the proof. ;) matter of fact, i've confirmed it through secondary sources at Sun and Dell. they have recieved BA stepping parts for their production systems. Not B1s.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
[not going to argue this point. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
this errata wasn't acceptable as it does significantly impact performance for FPU, Int, and Stream applications. the BIOS workarounds unnecesarily hamper performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
want one? btw, the 3992-E or 2915-E are the boards you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
cheers,
dave
hehehe.... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
again, not a big fan of the L1N in regards to that. additionally, no dual Ht and power planes. :)
dave
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
it uses the 4.1mm mounting pitch vs. the 3.5mm pitch from the other parts.
I've got some Dynatron A84G's you can use.
dave
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
So we will see a inproved preformace with reatail systems! Good to know ;) I supose that dualcore K10 (Kuma?) will be B2 aswell? Just looked at asus Rd790 borad, looks nice but not "finished" Hope to see a Dual K10 borad from Dfi to, now THAT would rock! In the mean time I just have to play with my new 6400+, hopfully tomorow ;)
read it wrong, ignore:)
btw Dave, I assume the 3ghz Phenom X4 (the one Rahul got its hands on hehe) will be B2? or B3?
can B2 provide a 3ghz X4 under 120W TDP?
how much measurable performance in an ideal platform is up for grabs. 5% would be expected.Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNizze
phenoms are B2.Quote:
Originally Posted by alayashu
as for what Rahul is working with, god only knows.
cheers,
dave
If you wanna see the new DFI board for the K10, then you should look here :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNizze
At first I thought it looked fine then I saw the one running at 800MHz... lol? Looks like one is in powersave mode? Or maybe the bios is still glitchy? Or CPU-Z is a bit off? You know more about this stuff than I do :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
It seems strange that AMD have been shipping BA chips to customers for a while and then supply bugged B1 chips to the reviewers fixed by a BIOS patch. Something does not add up there.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Regards
Andy
I have an idea:
Steve and Dave, you 2 guys need to get together for a weekend and I think at the end many issues would be solved.
Dave, weather is probably better in Cal than the monsoon we've had for the last 3 days..
Go west young man, Go west!:D
I'm a little supprised at this also, but maybe they want to keep true benchmarks secret just a little longerQuote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
lol, give it up, for the last year every time some one has posted about the slight advantage k10 brings there have been people saying noooooooooo just wait and it will be amazing. well the time for waiting is over, The NDA is over and people pretending that the systems amd are sending out for reviews 2 days before nda ends are pre production es bugged chipes kidding them selves
K10 is good, Its not great like many thought or like amd promised but as of today WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET live with it
That was like a hot knife through fud flavored butter, spot on. :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
there's a difference between qualifying a platform and shipping for revenue. that gap can be SIGNIFICANT in time. I'm not shocked at all. I know quite a few folks that are qualifying their products on pre-release intel silicon.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
lol....Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
god, you're a tool. what you see is not what you'll get.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
cheers,
dave
would love to. Steve and i will definitely be catching up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
dave
Nothing in life is so black-and-white.:fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
Bet this will look much different in six months.
First it was all I could think of for a reason. The chips they sent to Anand etc are not for qualitying as I take it, they were for review. I can understand as you said qualifying, that understandable, but why do that for a review? That make little sense to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
trust me...had that same question today....and just a shake of the head, a meager grimace, and...nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
Marketing evidently doesn't understand the "best foot forward" principle.
*shrug*
what are you going to do? The customers who do need the BA's are getting them and they're not "broken"
Btw, Phildoc, the "you're a tool" comment was not directed at you. I seem to have a significant troll presence in AMD threads and yet, i don't seem to be crapping in theirs. I appreciate the questions you ask...I like trying to answer hard questions because in the process, i get to learn answers that aren't as cut 'n dry as they might appear. :)
cheers,
dave
And that's really what counts in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Thanks Dave and S7 for still participating in the thread :).The only reasons why majority of us are still reading this thread.
Someone is a tool here all right.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
If AMD were so terminally stupid to send out performance crippled parts for review 3 days before launch to tier-1 review sites, any potential customer would have to be an even bigger moron to ever trust such a bunch of clowns with critical server applications.
Fortunately AMD is not a bunch of terminal morons like you claim, and you are just spreading FUD.
definitely for revenue though i too would've preferred a little better intro. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
well, informal, i evidently can't tell my ass from my elbow according to some of these guys but, again, that's a challenge i'm seeking to overcome. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
cheers,
dave
I'm not sure why you're getting upset. You did direct the comment at me or at least part of it and my comment about why they sent the B1. I wasn't trying to be antagonistic just trying to understand. Actually, I'm for AMD and always have been, haven't had an Intel rig for years. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
tier 1 review sites? are you kidding me? since when has HP, Dell, Sun, IBM, or any other manufacturer even considered Anandtech, Tech Report or any other pro-sumer site when evaluating a platform for development and integration? got a hint for you....NEVER.
i'm definitely not contesting that AMD marketing completely fscked this launch. i'm contesting people who seem (in the face of evidence to the contrary that I've accurately provided) to assume that these folks have the gospel message for Barcelona...which is patently false.
where have i claimed that AMD is a bunch of "terminal morons...."? you must be confusing me for one of the wide variety of pernicious trolls present in this thread.... i had lunch with a Sr AMD FAE today...you think that if i though he was a moron i'd even entertain that?
wow....they never prepared me for this type of response in my degree program. ;) (yes that's a thinly-veiled joke about my education...)
cheers,
dave
multi-quote doesn't work very well when re-quoting...what happened was your post contained a trace of 3 different responses to 3 separate people interspersed in there.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
see the thread here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=219
like i said, you're asking honest questions and for that, i'm grateful.
cheers,
UMM, Yeah!!Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
That is NOT the L1N board there dude!! It's the Tyan...:p:
So you lunch with SR AMD people.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
You should have all the answers then.
If Anandtech and like sites are not in the loop, why did AMD bother to give them test samples? Especially considering your opinion (that is so easily read between the lines) that their input could only hurt AMD and not influence positively any real server based customers like IBM Dell etc.....? Does AMD have an entire PR department that is so incompetent?
On the other hand IF they did not hand out chips for sites like Anand, they surely knew that those sites would get their hands on them soon and do articles anyways. At least you can admit AMD tried to keep as much control of the situation as possible, that does not look incompetent to me.
Thanks and my mistake for reading the post wrong. I like many others here appreciate the knowledge and experience you bring to the forum. Like the vast majority of us, I'm just playing in your world. Its been way too long (25yrs) since I did this for a living to totally understand it. So if I ask some naive questions then you know why, lol. But hey, I'm trainable, lolQuote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
:up:
AMD did a nice job of putting a presentation to stop -ve press on their site, wish they would have done it before.
At the same time, no where they mentioned using what hardware config they got those benches, it would have shut this whiny article "article"...aaah
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] M411b
well, let's work our way through this, then.Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
ever hear the quote "there's no such thing as bad marketing?" listen, one way or the other, they were going to start having to answer questions that they probably wanted to do on THEIR terms. there's a tipping point. FWIW, AMD basically embargoed the hell out of a LOT of documents that normally we'd have access to ahead of time. Not trying to apologize for them (as i've stated, it's a :banana::banana::banana::banana:up in my opinion).Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
just because you can read between the lines doesn't mean you're right. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
I don't believe that AMD is "hurt" by enterprise regarding this early launch. Again, enterprise companies (like EMC, et al) rely on their own test/dev labs and dedicated FAE (field application engineers) that work one on one with them. Anand, et al. work with pro-sumers; folks that could spend the coin but won't really move beyond the (i'm being conservative here so give me some grace) occasional tray of processors. for example, one of my FDS clients is a small storage company that uses Opterons for their SP (storage processors). They've bought approximately 8 processors from me for test dev. in the past 4 months. That's the kind of target that AMD can aim at with these type of sites, not the big guys who are already receiving the direct attention they deserve. AMD doesn't achieve revenue from the enthusiast market at the same level they do at enterprise...then again, you probably read that between my lines as well. :)
honestly, this launch doesn't actually impress me at all. it could've been MUCH better handled and done. so, for this launch, YES, they were highly incompetent. (honest enough for you?) :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
eventually, sure...but, there's always the carrot of "you obey the NDA, you get parts..." i went through this a long time ago with Damon, et al. Basically, if you have XXX amount of traffic (and a unique perspective), you'd get on the list for parts....I know for a fact that Anand holds his NDA status near and dear (we've chatted about this) and is loath to jeopardize this. So, there's an inevitable trust that has to be developed and maintained. and, for the record, coolater provides little/no threat to the AMD marketing machine. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
strangely enough, this is one of the most interesting launches i've been apart of. little to no access to power datasheets (embargoed even for those with NDAs), little to no whitepaper access, etc. so, control doesn't need to be a bad thing. (as evidence by those wonderful little "leaks" from Intel regarding Harperstown and Penryn on Anandtech... LOL) problem is, control is a two edged sword: you can control all you want but you do begin to develop a constituency that is somewhat suspicious of your motives...and that chances a big letdown on release...sound familiar?Quote:
Originally Posted by gone_fishin
anyhow, I hope my answers are somewhat helpful...a little less stressed right now so, i'm a little more composed.
dave
i don't mind pissing people off...just want it to be the right people for the right reasons. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
i'm a young buck; easily carried away by this.
dave
That kind of diferentiation exists in hardware manufacturers i know about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Gentlemen:
People like Steve and Dave come here and take the time to pass out information as a courtesy to us and in friendship and get what in return?
Sarcasm and essentially called liars?
If you disagree with these people thats your right but to attack them is not only wrong it's bad manners.
The next person I see do a personal attack on one of these people who take their valuable time to bring us this info I will ask in the admin section that they be banned from this site.
Your parents taught you manners, USE THEM!
sure, i can rate sites by traffic, etc. but unnecessarily elevating them to some golden status in the eyes of pro-sumers is a little...tiresome.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
remember Alexa? :)
dave
meh...this is fun, Dave...you know that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
now i've got to drive home and worry about my wife and kid(s)
dave
It's supposed to be fun but some forget that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Good manners never goes out of fashion and reading some of those comments to you got my Irish up.
People also forget that your in business and take time away from that to bring this info.
Well, I'm a little bit of an old dog, lol, and it still irritates me to no end all the tread crapping that goes on. But, what can you do? Just have to consider the source.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
:up:
K. This thread got way to long and off topic for me to read every page.
Can someone please tell me if Barcelona is actually any good?
For example.....which is gonna get me more points in SETI. Barcelona...or the Woodcrests
Yes these threads are getting out of hand, seems alot of ppl have no clue but think they know whats going on, Thanks Dave and Steve for there input. I work for IBM and from what i have seen yesterday on our server platforms AMD is looking pretty good to me, but no doubt im just making :banana::banana::banana::banana: up aswell.
Phil: What gets me constantly is the degree that people get all up in arms over these issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
The " I gotta know every benchmark that exists at 12 seconds after launch."
The ones that when they do see numbers don't beleive them.
Then the just insane level that it all gets brought to.
Jeesus, I wish they'd keep a perspective on things.
They want something to look at that is important?
I've got 2 friends in the WCG section that lost their fathers this week.
Now if that doesn't put this back into perspective then nothing will.
Thank God for someone to "clean the house" a bit.
Anyway: I'm really looking forward for more "trustable" benchies, from people that work all day on this kind of babies. Specially cause this people usually say that they "runned bench A, with compiler B, libraries C and compilation flags D, in an E processor with F memory configured in G way, over an H motherboard together with bios version I...".
Forgot something here? There is still half alfabet. :)
But, that's my point: that's the way opteron and xeon and whatever big processor shall be benched. :D
hey Dave,
Ive been avidly reading the thread here. I want to thank you and steven for this great thread about Barcelona :)
Looking forward to benchmarks! :)
Well, that should put things into perspective. My heart goes out to them. Certainly have seen enough of that in my day. If I contributed to the mayhem, I appologize. Thanks for stepping in an bringing some order to this thread. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
no, you didn't, you just happenned to post then and got caught in the message..No issue with you here..;)Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
Glad to hear it and thanks. So, back to business and say a prayer for your friends for me. :up:
Yup, everyone needs to take a deep breath and calm down. Not everyone's a mudderfudder just because they question something about AMD's marketing strategy.
I just hope that s7e9h3n gets his mobo's mojo workin.
And... a prayer for your friend's and their families MOVIEMAN.
BRUNO
What's up with the clockspeeds Stephen? :(
And Dave, thanks for the info. Don't mind the people startin' stuff.
Those multipliers must have to be set separately, for each chip.
I'm suspecting a bios or mb issue, but that would just be a quess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
First movieman,Did you see the part where I posted my opinion and dave called me a tool, I think you are one of the best mods about here, but this is disappointingQuote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
Dave, the main thing that annoyed me about chatting over the Internet is that people act different that if you were chatting in a bar etc because they are not physically near you. What I mean is, If you were facing me you probably would not be so quick to call me names. I like moviemans saying "attack the argument not the person" even if it dosent apply to all.
Sorry I haven't been able to update this thread today, I've been a bit busy. Here's the deal in regards to the B1 vs. BA fiasco:
B1 is the silicon upon which ALL current Barcelona's are built and BA is a REVISION of the B1 silicon. So in essance, both sides were correct in their claims. To put it in more familiar terms for those who've had experience with the last generation of AMD's - consider BA a revision of the core/imc just like "BC", "BH", "BN", etc. with the FX57's. When AMD starts ramping up core speeds, we will then see the next generation of silicon -> B2.
Oh, and it seems as if I got a broken cpu. There's a identical system running in the lab and both procs properly boot @ 2g. I'm now waiting for a replacement chip - and possibly a few others ;) - to arrive, hopefully, in the next few days....this sux. I'll see if there's any way to get this thing to run properly, but don't hold your breath :p
Leave us hanging s7e9h3n why dont you :P
Bad luck on the broken chip, i seen abotu 20 of today at work , wish i could have nabbed a few .
Many thanks to s7e9h3n, Nedjo, dave_graham, for clarification about stepping/revision!!!
According to AMD in late June they would be shipping for revenue in August.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...118193,00.html
They then confirmed this on the very last day of August
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...831115038.html
So, assuming that those are all BA revision of B1 stepping as S7e9h3n says then I think it likely that Anand was also sent a BA rev step B1 so the values they got reflect the current production K10.
Your claim that Anand is not a big fish, so to speak, might be true. However they were big enough for AMD to send them a B2 as well. Would they send them a B2 and not a BA?... hmm, highly unlikely. More likely is that your field engineer does not know and has fed you duff information which you are trying to reconcile assuming he/she to be correct.
Regards
Andy
another teaser
http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7LNUkHa7U8
that's 8x8 Skulltrail hehe:))
muhahahha :gay:
I just wasted abotu 40 second sof my life i will never get back on that crap
Any latest scores here? :D
If you guys can show the highs and lows of the processor when you get time (thanks), I'm just interested in the raw architectural power and weaknesses based on the specifications I know of it. AMD engineers seem to think its a major overhaul and are happy with it, and they aint no dummies but pioneers.
One thing: I 'aint a corporation or enterprise worker dealing with database centers and tons of servers (Uni student yet but do work with them at hospital), but I clearly understand the difference in server benchmarking and desktop: two different ball games. They are unequivocally very different to one another, as servers usually tend to perform very differently based on application and software optimization (in-house usually). I know it from the medical center I work in part-time for experience which is a sub-department of the government, and they have their own engineers, analysis, system setups and software which they base their analysis and reports on.
Just hope you can sort out this core revision mess once and for all -> reconcile all the info spreading around rather than leaving it for 3rd 4th 5th parties to make sense of, which they can never (missing common sense you know :D) and then it all turns haywire into a pig farm. :D
Movieman, bro, thanks for keeping it a little sane and yeah, I realize reality from fanfare very well. People die all the time every second, some more fortunate with better lives than most others in non-Occidental nations. ANY loss is always unfortunate though. My heartfelt condolences to the bereaved. :)
K10: Last I heard (well I sent buck loads of emails ya know :D) from my uncle whose worked in this enterprise business for long so is in direct contact by technology firm reps on all sides where need be especially second quarter where his company departments usually upgrade systems (though I get no answers :(), the rep dealing with him at AMD was saying its upcoming chips outperform Intels for general business, high performance, Int and FP intensive computing (yes all) based on price/performance, performance/watt, and they will have 2.5GHz delivery parts by end of year (Opteron - which is only what his corporation and their affiliates wanted). This is roughly what Dell reps said to him aswell.
Dave, Steve or anyone "informed" know if there's any truth in that?
Is there anyway to force the multiplier to a Manual setting in the bios?Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
i apologize. was again getting frustrated at being attacked in character when, as you so succintly say above, you'd probably never say the same thing in close proximity. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
that being said, beers on me in Boston if/when you come up. :)
dave
well, they're shipping for revenue (according to them) but not to the channel. this is for direct buy enterprise. they didn't make the august rev. date but they will make Q3.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
i still maintiain that's not the case. but, we'll see. between S7 and I we should be able to validate those #s...which is the sign of good science anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
anand IS a big fish in the prosumer market but that's about where it ends. they DID send him B2 procs....those 2.5ghz ones with the Sharpie writing on the top :) . that's the coup d'etat in the whole deal...they're showing that:Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
a.) they CAN scale quickly to higher speeds
b.) that Barcelona really has a lot more breathing room than was previously thought.
again, it's the double-edged sword i talked about in earlier posts....
as for my FAE, well, he's been @ AMD for a LONG time and has no compunctions whatsoever in telling me what parts of AMD function well and those which don't. that's the screening question for finding out if someone's telling the truth or not. :) And, he comes highly recommended from several of my other AMD collateral in the area (folks at the Boston Design Center) as being a no-holds-barred kinda guy.... :)
cheers,
dave
no at least on the boards i've dealt with.Quote:
Originally Posted by akaBruno
dave
Dave somhow you are loosing credibiity in my book.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Check this:
So phenom at 2.5Ghz will only be 15% faster than Phenom at 2.0GHz so much for the incremental speed gains or linear speed gains.Quote:
“AMD today shows the path to better performing design for demanding data center requirements, again. In fact, here is a proof to you of our 2.50GHz [quad-core] processor that is going to be available in December and what it is going to deliver to the market. […] This chart shows incremental performance that is going to be delivered on top of that existing [2.0GHz] product: you can see 15% performance benefit, 15% performance increase that will be delivered [by] our 2.50GHz product,” said Randy Allen.
Source
Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
I don't understand the Quote at the end.
The figures they show don't add up. Either it's a dual core, with 1MB cache or it's a quad with 512.Quote:
AMD Phenom FX-80 quad-core processor is projected to operate at 2.20GHz – 2.40GHz clock-speed, have 2MB of L2 cache (1MB per core), 2MB shared L3 cache, dual-channel PC2-8500 (DDR2 1066MHz) memory controller and AM2+ form-factor with HyperTransport 3.0 bus support. The AMD Phenom FX-90 and FX-91 models are expected to operate in 2.20GHz – 2.60GHz clock-speed ranges and support dual-processor configurations.
metrocl, what were you expecting?35%:rolleyes: :D
dude learn to read i always said no linear not incremental.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardyMan
Others kept saying wait and see more MHz will do wonders, is the stepping, etc..., that is a lie!
Well, going from a 2.0G to a 2.5G you would expect a 25% increase if it scaled perfectly. If you look at the Anand Phenom article it fell short of that but not by much. When they compaired the two only on two of the benchmark were at the 15% range, two others were at the 25% range. The average increase was 19%. Of course we don't know the stepping of the 2G chip, but as Dave said the 2.5G look to be a B2 stepping according to cpu-z. Looks pretty good to me.
It looks like Anand has done a little revision of their Quad Barcelona article. They've added the prices and looks like they've revised some of the benchmarks. In the end it look as though Barcelona does very well clock for clock against the Intels. Only losing in two tests that are biased toward the Intels to begin with. In the other benches the Barcelona is quicker clock for clock. Considering how immature all of this is, imho this bodes very well for Barcelona.
As for the Xbitlabs article, don't you just love the Intel Add next to a AMD article. I just about rolled on the floor when I saw that. I think when Allen said 15% he was being concervative
The 2.0G was B1 stepping.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilDoc
Now if there is no difference in the steppings, then yes. Perhaps 15% is a conservative estimate but 20% on average would be max.
It looks like 15% is going to hold true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
Well its early yet, but it looks to me from reading that article. 15% would be the least you'd get. But you're right, if that was a B1 stepping, and I believe Dave that it was, then we just don't know and 15% maybe right. Either way that's not bad. Increasing clock speed rarely gives you a 1/1 increase
Yes indeed, what we need is a greater mass of evidence to be able to judge fully, so both your results will be appreciated. From a home user perspective it is a shame we did not see Phenom FX being released today being benched on multiple sites with it's relevant memory and motherboards, to give a better representation to the enthusiast. Opteron K10 looks pretty good for server applications in it's price range, but that does not really interest me.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Regards
Andy
and what exactly have you done with BarcelonaQuote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
are you just looking for another "scoop" for your website? more information that you can "leak" on upcoming products? :rolleyes:
or, do you really want to come through here and sandbag people who have actual experience with the platform, have spent the time trying to understand the issues, etc? only you can answer that...I won't do it for you.
for the record:
B1 chips have the errata worked around in the BIOS.
BA chips have the errata fixed in silicon.
B2 chips are the "SE" parts and have not been committed to production yet (they will be shortly) and should be available by (or during) January.
i have not, anywhere, promoted the idea of performance scaling except where it concerns moving errata fixes from the BIOS to silicon. I have promoted the idea of hardware scaling (core speed increases) but yet, you somehow seem to think that I'm misleading you....interesting.
I have questioned the validity of posted results online based on what I have seen to be poor benchmarking, architecture understanding, etc. but i have not made promises on performance.
for the record, can people stop comparing a 2350 to a 5365? that's 1ghz in clock speed differences that really is a worthless comparison. of COURSE the 5365 is going to be on top. if it didn't, that'd be a big issue, now, wouldn't it?
cheers,
dave
I guess you missed this:Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/...na/scaling.png
Not perfect scaling, but better then "only 15%".
hahaha you are totally sold to AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Funny thing is that if i wanted i could have leaked tons of info related to K10.
Time will tell about performance but i firmly believe you arent right, K10 is not meant for desktop and not meant to beat C2D or Penryn in desktop market.
Read this i believe you know Kris and also i leak because as i've said before is the only thing i can do since we dont get the hardware we want even thought we are like Top 5 hardware review website in Spanish.
One shop in Akihabara starts Opteron demo!
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/akiba...elonademo.html
They use Tyan n3600M + Opteron 2347 x2.
...I must go there tomorrow:)
BTW, I've just read an official K10 Revision Guide:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...docs/41322.pdf
This guide describes only "DR-BA" and "DR-B2" revisions.
So, CPU-Z should shows "A" as stepping value in case of "BA" revision,
and "2" for "DR-B2".
i'm willing to devote my time and efforts to a company that actually supports the work i do. In addition, my customers have requested AMD workstations in greater proportion than Intel, so....of course, i'm going to spend the time there.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
proud of you.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
and Barcelona is for Workstations and servers....sounds like you're in the wrong thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
let me know what you need and chances are, i can provide it. I ship to Chile and Argentina all the time...no small task for me. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
dave
Calm down boy, no need for being personal.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
Thanks kyosen-san, please let us know what you see!Quote:
Originally Posted by kyosen
Just a little follow up to this:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=277
Just comparing E6420 and E6660, that have the same 25% clock diference.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
Quake 4: - 7%
Unreal Tournament - 7,8%
Fear - 5,5%
Mpeg Encoding - 7,7 %
H.264 Enconding - 9,5 %
Cinebench 9.5 - 11,3 %
POV Ray 3.7 - 10.9 %
Tired of proving the point, more here:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...0_7.html#sect0
Pretty obvious that at higher speeds K10 will be more competitive against c2d then at lowers speeds...
So where's the lie, and who's sold on what?
E6420 is 2.13GHz. E6600 is 2.4GHz 12.7% difference. lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleZero
Out of a possible 25/25, AMD achieves 15/25 or 60% clock scaling. Intel achieves average of 8.5 scaling from above. 8,5/12.7 is 67% clock scaling. :D
Once again that is diferent from K10 scaling linear or better.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleZero
This same thing happened to K8 vs C2D push MHz on both on stock and performance will get closer
There are days where i just need more coffee :DQuote:
Originally Posted by red
K10 were scaling 500mhz not 300mhz :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by red
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...4-x2-6000.html
2.93 vs 2.4 22% clock difference.
Quake 4 7.1% scaling
Unreal 17.8%
Fear 11%
MPEG 16.7%
h.264 19.2%
cinebench 23.5%
povray 21.6%
Average, 16.7% scaling out of possible 22% or 76%
:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by red
Those aren't quad cores thery're dual core Intels and the Bacelona is 19/25 or 76%.
Where do you get Barcelona 19/25?
Here I go again
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...me-qx6850.html
qx6800 vs q6600 both 1066fsb, 2.93 vs 2.4
Quake 11.4%
Unreal (none)
Fear 10.5%
MPEG (18.1% for divx and 16.8% for xvid)
h.264 12.1%
cinebench 20.7%
povray 25.3%
16/22=73
From the Anand article and I only get 14.3/22 or 65%Quote:
Originally Posted by red
my point of posting these numbers is that Intel scales a tangible amount with clock speed despite what others insist
Quote:
Originally Posted by red
Sorry, just bored atm. I think the Intels scale very well and you've shown that. :up:
I'm trying to roughly compare things here, on average.
K8 90nm-> K8 is 65nm - K10 is 65nm (shouldn't be much clock speed bin differences, short maturing time)
P4 65nm-> Core 2 is 65nm - Penryn is 45nm (should be much clock speed bin differences but long maturing time)
We know that staying on the same fab level does make clock speed raising easier as the process matures, but while that'll hold roughly true for AMD dual cores like it did for Intel dual cores, I doubt it too much when passing over to a fully different and new quad core.
K10 server: I've looked at Anandtech review long and hard and extrapolated backwards the dual Opteron 2224SE 3.2GHz scores for perfect clock scaling (which is obviously rare), down to 2x 2GHz and compared to 1x Opteron 2350 2GHz. A few times I used the 3GHz instead (where scores were available - twice I think). Flaws will arise since clock scaling won't be linear, but not by hugely.
Overall Opteron 2350 @ 2GHz (4 core) comes to be 52.2% (or 152.2%-100% for some) better than 2x Opteron 2224SE @ 2GHz (4 core).
Now that certainly is inline with what AMD has been saying.
Take one high Intel optimized benchmark score out of the equation, LINPACK and you get an average mean performance increase, clock per clock of:
39.28% for K10 server chip in server benches. That's not far from a Core 2 over P4...
August '07 HKEPC desktop Wolfdale 2330MHz was overall ~9.8% better than a E6550 2330MHz. Anandtech's was around 5%. We'll take the first one.
That's including the one high Divx score with Intel SSE4 specific optimization.
Take away that score and the mean average performance increase clock per clock basis is:
7.45% for a desktop chip with desktop benches.
Boards used were? Two separate ones IIRC, a GA-P35-DQ6 with DDR3 1066 for the Wolfdale and a GA-G33-DS3R DDR2 1066(?) for the E6550. Which ones runs 1066MHz on RAM default or did they overclock for RAM to the same speed? I'm not sure.
14.156sec SPI 1M at stock for that Wolfdale IIRC.
Tigerton/Clovertown: is beat clock per clock basis by K10 Opteron overall. With 2.13GHz and many times even with 2.33GHz parts compared to 2GHz.
Desktop: no idea.
Problem: Intel is competing with higher clocks and good performance per clock. AMD with better power efficiency and lower prices but lower clocks. Will outperform at the equal price market with its low clocks yet, but it has nothing for mid-high end.
AMD loses out when comparing top offerings due to low clock speeds against an already very matured chip and fab process. Price is very good. They just need higher clock speeds to compete more on a level basis. It'll be tight but I reckon AMD takes this clock per clock basis, and maybe by even price. They just need a 3GHz Agena X4 part by sometime Q1 when desktop Yorkfield will be releasing 3.16GHz. :yepp:
Do I give a damn which chip kills what? No, because it kills inside weak minds only. Competition is always healthy, even Intel knows that. If the highest Barcelona quad beats or levels the highest Penryn with highest clock possible by Q2 08, then the same excitement and effort turns out for Nehalem, and so on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Did pretty much the same thing, but came with some different numbers using the articles last page. If you thow in the B1 stepping that was used, then maybe a little higher, don't really know.
Came to the same conclusion that AMD needs to get to 3G. If they do we may have a nice little price war, which is great for us. Plus Intel may have some tricks of their own, which would mean even faster cpus. All in all, I think we as consumers are going to win bigtime.
Came across some interesting cpu bench scores.
In an article,
http://www.crn.com/hardware/201805044
"The Test Center was provided with an engineering sample server equipped with dual Barcelona CPUs and 16Gbytes of RAM"
and used PasMarks benchtest to obtain a cpumark score of 4693.
Going to Passmarks site, you can see an updated table,
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_look...45+%40+2.33GHz
Including Xeon 5355 dual cpu (8 core it means) that get 6207 cpumarks.
So AMD = 4693 vs Intel's 6207.
And the highest end Intel 5365 is not on the charts yet.
Well , waiting for results still. Considering that this processor has been released and is in final production form it is a very poor showing up to now when it comes to actual results.
As a reference
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ghlight=conroe
That's a Conroe 4 months before release, not too many bugs or excuses there. Just goes to show how shoddy this release has been. How many more months can it be strung out that AMD will rule ... if you wait just a little bit longer. I am sure I have been hearing this from just before 65nm K8 and that ended in nothing but a massive let down with its poor overclocking and slow cache. Slow cache, hmm, that rings a bell with the K10 ...
As an avid overclocker since the Celeron 300A all I can say is
PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Or can you not put up AMD merchants? Show us the scores.
Don't bother quoting me and arguing the other side, just put up some earth shaking benchmarks in the desktop space. If Conroe can get good scores 4 months before release then Phenom should be able to provide similar 2 months before if it is that good, or are AMD just dicking around still in the quicksand ?
This is another HD2900XT all over again.
Regards
Andy
and your point is?Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
why don't you let the folks who actually know something about the platform get a chance to get test the processors out besides hacking through a list of "Well, Intel did this..." stuff? we get it, you're not impressed....don't really care.
i have been upfront in claiming that B1 cores with their BIOS workaround DO cause performance deficits. BA will eliminate that, so, why don't you shut up and let me (and S7) get back to getting the platforms in line. you don't see me crapping in your threads, so....please, stop trying to attack people.
dave
Ohh Andy, your on a roll today!;)Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
I think what happenned is that AMD backed themself into a corner.
They had moved the release date I think twice and knew they couldn't do it again BUT, they still had some issues with the chips so they kept it all quiet as long as possible( great job doing that) with the hope that they would solve the issues before release. It seems they didn't but JUST seems that way.
I think that given 60-90 days they will correct most of the issues and then is when we should make our judgements not today..
Just my 2 cents pal..;)
We are talking about a server chip here folks. Not an overclocking cpu for gaming punks. You don't OC these things!!! We don't even have a solid mobo chipset yet to really see anything to compare. Let alone comparing them to a 1G+ cpu advantage.
C2D is great. No doubt. Give it a rest on your laurels.
I beg to differ but yes you can OC server chips and effectively..Quote:
Originally Posted by akaBruno
Limitations, yes, due to bios constraints mostly, but it can be done and done with excellent results.