Wait,there were core i7s there too(at AMD's event)??Or mj is speaking of his own tests?If he speaks of his own core i7 tests,i doubt they would turn off HT and turbo since both are out of the box features and legit.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
It was at the amd event. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I grabbed the numbers from that ht4u i posted before.
i965 HT off: 11,47s
i965 HT on: 9,27s
I got 11.7s at 3.2GHz and 14,4s at 2.6GHz, means 12.5s at 3GHz.
Means deneb must be 8% faster to compete with i965 HT off and ~35% faster to compete with i965 HT on. But wait won't 4x1MB fit in denebs bigger L3 cache in opposite to agena?
Guys donīt you think you are a little overhyping deneb? i mean, i would really really really LOVE to see i7 being destroyed by deneb, but there is like 1% possibilities of that happening *snif*
Why donīt we let it be and wait instead of creating higher hopes and in the end deneb will be a flop because it didnīt deliver what it promised?
Nope,nobody is talking about core i7 being destroyed.Justapost just posted( :) )a link to a planet3dnow thread where a guys who was at teh AMD event saw some numbers from both 3Ghz deneb and i965.He didn't gave any more details apart from saying very competitive (perf. of the two).Like justapost already said,it could very well be a HT off/turbo off situation ,which in my view would be rather lame to do(since both of these features are out of the box for core i7).Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnJohn
Anyway,a month or so to go before we know the real results.Or someone gets a Deneb on 16th of December and breaks the silence :p:
Here's what Yorkfield and Agena at 3Ghz achieve in wprime(source:madshrimps.be):Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/5...reprocewx9.png
Thx, so round 9,7s with HT off. Means deneb must be ~29% on IPC to be onpar. Dunno if they ran 32m.
I assume they ran the i965 system with turbo and ht of to give an IPC comparison and here deneb was able to compete (can mean was not destroyed). Sry about that cache crap. Sad to see amd lost that benchmark.
EDIT:
i965 3.2GHz HT off 9.7s / 9950BE 3.2GHz 11.7s / PII 3.2GHz => ~11s (assuming 6% improvement here) => i7 ~10% faster on same clock with ht off in wprime.
IF AMD brought the i965 to the demo then they're on to something. Though, most of the little info there is seem to concentrate on the overclockability of P2 (which does make sense) but if it was a head to head demo, then the NDA has been very effective. At this point, I'm confused as to where exactly AMD plans to target its new chips, that would be the biggest indicator of their performance compared to the competition.
This benchmark seems to favor memory bandwidth and cache. At 32M Phenom takes the lead but at 1M the Yorkfields took it back. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Edit: Certainly that big bandwidth on Core i7 made some difference even with HT off.
Early pricing seems to be on par with i920(a920 vs i920).At least thta's what this article suggests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
From hwbotQuote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
Source is optimized for C2D and AMD 64 X2.Quote:
WPrime is a simple, easy to use multithreaded benchmark application that can quickly test your processor performance. In contrary to most other simple benchmark applications, wPrime is written to take full benefit of processors with multiple cores, like the new Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Athlon 64 X2.
Nope,wprime is a specific multithreaded benchmark that uses a recursive call of Newton's method for estimating functions while super pi is an old singlethreaded test(a poor one while we are at it,a lot slower than other methods for pi number calculations)which likes big L2(dataset) and uses specific old x87 instructions that have very low latency in Yorkfield(Merom/Nehalem) case.That's why you see totally different numbers from these two tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
edit: justapost was faster :)
Over here the Q9550 is a bit more expensive than the Core i7 920. :hammer:
EDIT: Here's another one for comparison
http://movies.custompc.co.uk/cpc/images/corei73.gif
Source: http://www.custompc.co.uk/reviews/60...l-core-i7.html
From Ex-INQ http://theovalich.wordpress.com/2008...less-than-400/Quote:
After dropping the bombshell last week, more details about AMDs exciting fight back are slowly coming to life. Several e-tailers decided to get under the limelight and listed pricing of upcoming Phenom II processors.
As well all know, the Phenom II will be launched on the first day of CES 2009 (January 9, 2009), and the launch models are 920 (2.8 GHz) and 940 Black Edition (3.0 GHz). According to Australian website Austincomputers, the price of Phenom II 940 Black Edition is set at 532.40 Australian dollars (264/US$342). It does not stop there - TDshop.it , Italian e-tailer who listed prices for both Phenom II 920 and 940. According to Italian store, price of 920 is set at 251 Euro, while 940 will set you back for 299 Euro.
As you probably know, Sales Tax/VAT in EUrozone is extremely high, in the range of 15%+. For instance, Croatia has 22% and that isnt the highest on the continent. Thus, if we deduct VAT from that Italian store, we get following:
* AMD Phenom II 940 Black = 245 = US$318
* AMD Phenom II 920 = 205 = US$266
There you have it. Now, we can get clearer picture at the cost of upcoming 45nm processors from AMD.
This pricing is much better, LOL.
It should come down even further by launch as I see an Intel response in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
people make so much fuss about these stupid pics, where it is even not confirmed that these are from AMD, let alone the information from the site is big fanboism and wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostbuster
And yes if they are comparing a 790gx against a G45 with any nice blue cpu you want i am sure you get such results but they have 0 added value to the market.
^
Obviously, with a fan.
ĶŽ
Any chance it was like -30C in Finland lately though:p: Then it might have been fanless.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
But more serious though, think indeed a fan is needed. That's what making such heat sinks good, to exchange heat quick to the air. If it would have been fanless it would have exchanged it way to slow, but actually I dont think Ive to explain much about that though:p:
Lord I hope it's true. Back to the days of K6-2 glory!
...indeed, which was beaten by Intel counterparts. Now waiting for K7 and K8... :) :)Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
Pffff...there was a solid period of time there when the K6-2 was the pound-for-pound, dollar-for-dollar champion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
No it wasn't! Then it had crappy VIA motherboards as well. Wayyyyyy too many folks blamed Data corruption on Win95 and Win98. Thank goodness AMD isn't that same boat.:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
Not like Windows 95/98 were that solid and stable anyway:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
I never had data corrupion with my several via boards... My first AMD was a 80386, then I skipped the 486-geneation with a P133, afer that the great K6-2 times began... K6-2 300 was replaced later with my beloved K6-III 400 beating every higher clocked celeron around (compared Q3Arena and such, using a Riva TNT) - dunno if that gem was able to beat these great P2-400, but it performed similarly well nevertheless.
Win98 SE was very stable for me BTW, but everything went crap w/ WinME. :D