AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashraf

Chad Boga is temporarily banned. This is not the place to troll and flamebait. Keep AMD vs Intel discussions or "AMD can't beat Intel" out of this thread.

Please stay on topic.

---

How hard is it for peeps to stay on topic????

Its quite clear what is happening, AMD peeps are trying to keep on topic, then someone posts info regarding Intel CPU v the Phenom II CPU's and the AMD peeps have to counter.

Now.......the peeps posting the Intel info are consistant, one of them has already been banned, I will be contacting Ashraf directly if the other peeps (you know who you are, the usual suspects) continue in trying to derig this thread.

There are other threads making comparissons between PII and Intel CPU's

GO AND POST ON THOSE

Leave this thread to be as title says

'AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread'

PI vs PII comparissons very welcome as they are both AMD and relevant

PI vs PII vs Intel counterparts

Unwelcome........

-- ON TOPIC --

Peeps posting info regarding PI vs PII, try to post comparissons using similar OS's, been many people posting 32bit vs 64bit scores and not initially realising this. In this way a more realistic picture can be gained of what to expect.

Also, this is Xtreme Systems, we are ofcourse happy to see default clocks vs default clocks. But its not like we are going to be running our CPU's at default clocks, LOL

I am very interested in scaling of NB clocks as are many with CPU speeds, this will be the rabbit in AMD tweakers hats to getting better scores. Hopefully the info regarding PII reviews will increase.....

Final words

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

The 4GHz Phenom II system was using ASUS HD4870 Toxic.. so that is pre-factory overclocked for sure. Thus I look for a similar card (thus similar GPU scores) and a similar clocked Q9550 processor. :)

---

Like we are all saying the phenom II is runing on beta bios so im pretty sure it will perform even better with the true bios and mostly on the true am3 boards . Time will tell :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoF

Here is my 5.6 :D http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=466799

---

:)

it 's -195° ?

Another validation of our boy, this time is 6.1GHz :up:, a tiny pity...2 core are disabled :(

Anyway, thank dread77 for this :up:

http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/screenshot/466047.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

The 4GHz Phenom II system was using ASUS HD4870 Toxic.. so that is pre-factory overclocked for sure. Thus I look for a similar card (thus similar GPU scores) and a similar clocked Q9550 processor. :)

---

Time wasting for you!
On Orb it's too hard to know if videocard are overclocked, so busting such score will indicate a lot but so little in the same time :shrug:
Same for CPU score with 06, so influenced by subsystem optimization is hard to compare.

Hey i was looking through coolices benchs and i saw something really nice. In 3dmark 06 the cpu score is 4483 and i know the cpu score for i7 920 was 4609. So not that much difference!!

Also at stock Wprimes was done in 13 secs on a Ph II while it took 10 on an i7

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pt1t

:)

it 's -195° ?

---

no it's -155°C 1.85V - A79A-S can't run HT Link 1.0 yet but with 6x multi and 1320 MHZ I was doing not too bad I think. with 1.0 and 5x there should be room for maybe 6gig validation :) my friends from benchbrothers could run both of their chips -195°C with 1.0 on Destroyer and Gigabyte board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

---

Intel users have done that a loooooong time already, to max out their chips. I don't see why it's useless when the whole Intel-batallion does the same:D It tells something about the potential of these chips. At least that's what it tells me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

---

Try to do it then :shakes:

and Welcome amdcian!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

---

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=465848
For you Mister Fake!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=465848
For you Mister Fake!

---

Is HT at around 1000MHz a must for Phenom II overclock?

Not really...
Take a look here...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

---

Your posts are more useless. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

oliverda what do you want ?
do you want dream ? or look the realilty face ?


What is the utility of a cpu-Z validation with quad core but only 2 core enable ?
Do you like 2 cores ? BUY a dual core ! and don't break the testes !


in Quad core processor i LOOK the overclock with all cores enable !!!!!!!
ENABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or look directly a dual core 7750 BE overclock.

---

:ROTF:

you clearly have no clue what or how overclocking works and whats legit and whats not. :ROTF:

Running one core on a quadcore is fine for getting max frequency or running SPI or any other singel threaded benchmark to get the best score. :yepp:

Striving for records is a whole other ballpark then trying to get a 24/7 stable config.

I lose about 2 IQ points everytime I read a post from that guy, soon I'll be lobotomised by only reading forum posts:(....

Oktabit team did the 6120 with two core, 6020 with all 4 cores. Currently they hold the two top records in amd validated offcourse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leoy

Oktabit team did the 6120 with two core, 6020 with all 4 cores. Currently they hold the two top records in amd validated offcourse.

---

Pretty awesome, only 100mhz decrease goign from 2 cores to 4 cores :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

oliverda what do you want ?
do you want dream ? or look the realilty face ?


What is the utility of a cpu-Z validation with quad core but only 2 core enable ?
Do you like 2 cores ? BUY a dual core ! and don't break the testes !


in Quad core processor i LOOK the overclock with all cores enable !!!!!!!
ENABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or look directly a dual core 7750 BE overclock.

---

What do I want? I want you to take some english lessons and stop the stupid posts in this forum. http://prohardver.hu/dl/s/ul.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

^^ What Macadamia said.

BTW check justapost's results at the same clocks/settings and in the same apps here:
http://www.ocxtreme.org/forumenus/sh...&postcount=131 (thanks justapost ;) )

---

NP, problem is coolice ran many benchmarks on windows 7. I can not get that here atm. Maybe that's why wprime results are so low. We've already seen em beeing ~7% faster.
I get 12.5s under winxp 32bit and 12.9s undr vista 64bit, never compared winxp 32bit with vista 32bit. Can be the results are even lower on the 32bit version.
Most valuable new piece of information is the high nb speed coolice reached benchable.

I'd prefer previewers would focus more on pI vs. pII comparison and leave overclocking to the users.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

oliverda what do you want ?
do you want dream ? or look the realilty face ?


What is the utility of a cpu-Z validation with quad core but only 2 core enable ?
Do you like 2 cores ? BUY a dual core ! and don't break the testes !


in Quad core processor i LOOK the overclock with all cores enable !!!!!!!
ENABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or look directly a dual core 7750 BE overclock.

---

Well, you may look after validations with 4 cores enabled, but it seems a you're the only one:D

It's not THAT much of a difference between 1,2 and 4 cores anyway... (I'm talking about max frequency here).

And no, it's not "wrong" to disable and validate. That's how we do it. In fact, NOT doing it would be noobish (if you're going for the highest possible clock, of course) - as you may earn a little bit on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mongoled

How hard is it for peeps to stay on topic????

Its quite clear what is happening, AMD peeps are trying to keep on topic, then someone posts info regarding Intel CPU v the Phenom II CPU's and the AMD peeps have to counter.

Now.......the peeps posting the Intel info are consistant, one of them has already been banned, I will be contacting Ashraf directly if the other peeps (you know who you are, the usual suspects) continue in trying to derig this thread.

There are other threads making comparissons between PII and Intel CPU's

GO AND POST ON THOSE

Leave this thread to be as title says

'AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread'

PI vs PII comparissons very welcome as they are both AMD and relevant

PI vs PII vs Intel counterparts

Unwelcome........

-- ON TOPIC --

Peeps posting info regarding PI vs PII, try to post comparissons using similar OS's, been many people posting 32bit vs 64bit scores and not initially realising this. In this way a more realistic picture can be gained of what to expect.

Also, this is Xtreme Systems, we are ofcourse happy to see default clocks vs default clocks. But its not like we are going to be running our CPU's at default clocks, LOL

I am very interested in scaling of NB clocks as are many with CPU speeds, this will be the rabbit in AMD tweakers hats to getting better scores. Hopefully the info regarding PII reviews will increase.....

Final words

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC

---

Well, you did a very good job of staying on topic yourself :clap: Yes this is the Deneb review thread, problem is reviews are not here yet and we're on 30 pages :shrug:

About PH1 vs PH2: PH1 is not going to be PHII's main competitor, the competitors are on the other side. We all know when the reviews start streaming in, it's going to be 45nm vs 45nm. This is always the way it is. This is what makes sense! PHII is going to be tested against the competition. It is going to be reviewed, it has to be tested against something? For example, ALL the Shanghai reviews on the first page, pit it against products from Intel. Even the previews of Deneb do the same except for a couple. So it is inevitable, we'll see it. If you prefer to discuss exclusively Deneb without pitting against other processors, create your own thread because you're in the wrong thread. It's obvious that the OP (Original Poster) had a different idea from all those links on the first page, you can look it up if you're in doubt.

Now, On Topic: It seems there isn't much that'll be accepted by either side until we start seeing the hard facts. Maybe this thread needs to be closed till reviews start streaking in, otherwise we're on topic by discussing Deneb (as per the OP's post) against the competition. Some choose to see it as Intel vs AMD, I choose to see it as the reality.

Sorry for going off topic, but with the way things have gone so far, someone needed to remind everybody what this thread is truly about. Thanks.
Maybe let's all wait till the reviews start coming in and then we can start talking about what chips are included in the review?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justapost

NP, problem is coolice ran many benchmarks on windows 7. I can not get that here atm. Maybe that's why wprime results are so low. We've already seen em beeing ~7% faster.
I get 12.5s under winxp 32bit and 12.9s undr vista 64bit, never compared winxp 32bit with vista 32bit. Can be the results are even lower on the 32bit version.
Most valuable new piece of information is the high nb speed coolice reached benchable.

I'd prefer previewers would focus more on pI vs. pII comparison and leave overclocking to the users.

---

Yes, I agree.
(Not the last part though).
I thought the sreenies from coolice showed XP as OS, but it could have been 64-bits.
CPU score i 3DM06 varies too much to be used as reference for performance I see (I only use XP 32-bits for my use/benches).
So I am a little bit more optimistic for the "real" reviews (after NDA). :D