Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
and u know thats a fake...becuz...???
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
and u know thats a fake...becuz...???
B is mass market, A is ES ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by pengizzle
i would think that right now AMD already produces mass markt K8Ls....and this guy, probably a slippery chinese dude, maybe got his hands on one of these..far out..but...possible?
if that is true, we would be seeing K8L retail in under 2 weeksQuote:
Originally Posted by pengizzle
time for a new thread in the news forum: "K8L to come within next two weeks?"
but seriously wouldnt they need some time to produce enough units for worldwide delivery? i got no imagination of batch/lot numbers there.
if it is a B chip, that means it had to be made about 6 months ago thus they have enough for a launch or are very close to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by pengizzle
k, thx.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
I think this is what he means:
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/s...leID=196701258
Quote:
For low-k, AMD used Applied Materials Inc.'s Black Diamond CVD-based technology up until the 90-nm node. At 65 nm, it switched to an IBM low-k film, dubbed SiCOH, that has a k-value of 2.7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
Yes. Give AMD about 2-3 weeks and you guys can start :slapass: each other. :)
I just wanna see some performance numbers..
Quote:
Originally Posted by mAJORD
can u say for sure cpu-z creator made L3 field centered vertically? and if not?
to ensure u have to take a SS of any announced cpu with L3 cache
easy to destroy but so hard to create...
btw i remember we had this in xs that ppl were accused of faking screens of upcoming Intel/AMD products and got flamed by omniscient "fake-screamers" and later those pics turned out to be true.
so..whatever just a screen and so much time to flame...give us a launch (AMD) and end this :banana: for at least some weeks.
Also, why did he blank out voltage? And look at the codename field, the blank out doesen't look big enough to actually cover much up...
Hey guys,
cpuz does not even look for a L3 cache on K8, so, there are very very little chance it displays one, unless the prog is tweaked / debugged / photoshoped.
So, all are fakes.
Franck
Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
I think you are wrong on this one. I have Athlon XP 'A' and is normal retail CPU.
But sometimes (http://badhardware.blogspot.com/2006...y-rainier.html) K8L was referred as Revision B!
CPU-Z 1.38 can't recognize 'Code Name' of K8L family CPUs so it's putting there simply 'K8L' (sprayed but very short name). It's saying this is Opteron 1220 because of 2.8GHz clock (as normal 1220 has). For me everything is looking LOGICAL on this screen shot.
Only thing not right is CPU 1/2 selection box which is grayed :confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpuz
And in case of K8L?? You know your software best :)
Did you already get CPU signatures for K8L family?? Or AMD is very secretive about that?
I got some hints about K8L signature, but nothng 100% sure. This is why the dump above shows the "K8L" string, but no code names yet. So "Altair" has no chance to be displayed neither.
I'm the 1st to be sorry, a K8L dump would be a great chance ! :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpuz
Yeah! looks like it really is (K8L) best kept secret of x86 world EVER!
I wonder WHY??
Thanks for quick reply CPUZ! :toast:
Itīs always grayed:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/1...pi27906ww8.jpg
http://img241.imageshack.us/my.php?i...perpi1mqp6.jpg
Yes! My mistake! :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
It was possible to choose a core in older versions, now it's only available if you have 2 or more SOCKETS....
Thank you for confirming....I came to the conclusion another way :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by cpuz
I'll show you guys what a real K8L CPUZ looks like SOON (But that doesn't mean tomorrow) ;)
s7e9h3n so 'SOON' mean more like week or month?? Can you be a bit more precisely? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
I'm guessing it's less than one year :lol:
...came to conclusion by looking at real cpuz window being run on real k8l machine :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
(my guess :) )
Gimme a couple of weeks - but don't hold me to that :p: ...I gotta check first ;) I have a feeling we may be seeing some screens even earlier (but not from me)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
The CPU Selection BOX is for multi socket boards, like the Quad FX:
http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/7...adfxfr9.th.jpg
Now that, my friend, is an interesting cpu ;) May I ask where you got that pic?Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
s7:
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/425/1/
Hope succeed in your plan ;)
Sheesh, I feel stupid...I thought CPUZ had been updated to include FX-7x....I guess not :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
I have Core Temp 0.95 (beta) that recognizes QuadFX cpu. Do you want it ?Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/news.php?ti...ime=1167580800
Star cpu's to have SSE4a announced by AMD!
Regarding with the 48 SSE4 to be added into *That Other Companies* next-generation 45nm products, AMD has announced last week that Star will have SSE4A, a derivative edition of SSE4 in which those *Other Companies* 64 instructions are not available. Instructions include graphic, video encoding, 3D calculation, multimedia related are all compatible in Star.
Great, so we get another flop like 3Dnow! Gotta love it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
Just as a note, for those still far away in dreamlands. AMDs SpecFP_rate thats their only estimate of beating Intel and dualcore K8 in. Is more or less a memory benchmark. Also quite obvious why AMD haven´t posted a 4 dualcore setup in the list.
So...its like posting a sandra memory benchmark for AMD, or sandre SSE benchmark for Intel.
Another hype killed and fanbois screaming in vain.
AMD to intro four Barcelona parts in second quarter
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37390
inquirer did swallow w0mbat's photo
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37375
congrats.
It would be even funnier if it all turns out true. We'll just see who's side was told so and who will be laughing then so don't hold your breath so soon until its out, then we'll look back on all this and see who was right and who was wrong, then the people who had a big mouth feel stupid. *Rolls eyes* I'm sick and tired of fandom wars. Run their mouths to the very end until they are behind again and told so. Who really cares? This is about K8L not Intel.
It was directed at nobody. :D
Are there any other sites with information on star besides hkepc?
http://arstechnica.com/Barcelona news
I find this very Interesting:)
Amd Analyst day pdf downloadQuote:
Finally, K8L's floating-point/SSE datapaths have been widened from 80 bits to 128 bits, and the resulting scheduler and execution hardware has been widened, as well. This improvement gives K8L's FP/SIMD units the ability to do many common scalar and 128-bit packed single- and double-precision operations at a rate of one per cycle, bringing it up to speed with Conroe in terms of per-unit throughput.
Here is another Amd Pdf file from dec 6
There are info for their upcoming fusion, but also have some info on Barcelona(k8l)
Dec06 Amd analyst day Pdf
Wow! thanks, I have to say I like the way amd is headed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teroedni
Thanks!
Good read. 8-core in development :) .
AMD will launch its quad-core Opteron lineup for SocketF at 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3GHz in mid-2007, with 2.4GHz to follow in late 2007 / early 2008. The design won't exceed 2.5GHz until Q2 2008.
Maximum dissipation is 95w for models under 2.4GHz and 120w for models above 2.4GHz.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5992
So all the 2.9Ghz parts are gone...becides dualcore maybe...Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Just on a sidenote...even if it is 40% faster (Unlikely due to the specfp_rate only and its the highest bench at all) then it would "only" be about a 3.2Ghz Core 2 at those speeds to 2008.
Downgraded and late it seems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
About the 40% claim , it is simply restricted to SpecFP_rate and it is simulated.
Intel isn't standing still , it will introduce a new series of chipsets for DP.
Allow me to doubt K8L matching a 2.66GHz Cloverton on Stoakley.Quote:
The Stoakley platform is based on a 90-nano shrink of the Bensley architecture. Bensley's dual 1,066/1,333MHz front side busses return, this time with support for upcoming 45-nano Penryn chips. Stoakley also features plenty of PCI Express, with 44 lanes of PCIe joined by a pair of second-generation PCIe x16 links. Generation one PCIe links can be used to hook into a variety of peripheral chips to provide Serial ATA RAID, Gigabit Ethernet, and PCI-X connectivity.
Seaburg is the codename for Stoakley's Memory Controller Hub (MCH), which features four channels of FB-DIMMs at 533 or 667MHz. Up to 128GB of memory is supporteddouble that of Bensley's Blackford MCH. Seaburg also offers an enhanced memory controller that Intel says improves sustained throughput by 25% and a larger, smarter snoop filter optimized for quad-core chips.
The snoop filter stores coherency information on all of the cache lines mapped to system memory. The Blackford MCH's snoop filter isn't really optimized for quad-core designs; affinity groups are tied to each front-side bus, but quad-core CPUs add additional agents to those busses. With Seaburg, Intel has designed a snoop filter with four affinity groupsone for each last level cache on the front-side bus. Seaburg's snoop filter also features a new eviction algorithm, and its size has been increased to ensure complete coverage for future quad core-chips that Intel says will feature larger caches.
any believable link?Quote:
Downgraded and late it seems.
About the 40% claim , it is simply restricted to SpecFP_rate and it is simulated.
Intel isn't standing still , it will introduce a new series of chipsets for DP.
they said FP will get 3.6 boost Quad vs Dual, this is all we know regarding this (so more like 80%).
2x cores 2x SSE throughoutput = 4X the SSE power of a current DC.But it's all theory , in practice the gains will be much smaller.Quote:
Originally Posted by alayashu
let us remember , that is a dailytech road map , not amd's road mapQuote:
Originally Posted by savantu
you mean like that penryn story with HTQuote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
i do not know about that , they had two articles that stated that they was contacted by intel that the HT information was wrong , and they also stated that penryn was not going to be out until first quarter 08Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
!!!The Ultimate K10 Thread 2007 & Beyond!!!
They are limiting the speed to 2.5ghz because its a opteron. 2.6ghz for the X4's. And the only cpus that will reach 2.7 to 2.9ghz are the AFX's and X2 Kuma's. They are not limited by clockspeed, if that was so the Kuma's would be only clocked at 2.5 or 2.6ghz but, they are not.
Nobody here is speaking logically. That other company doesn't clock its arc to its max speed when it comes out, they wait for when its needed or when the customers demand greater performance to be compeditive with the rival company. Not because its limited but because its just not needed at the time.
K10 is not K8 so we can shutup about how it won't clock higher when its not even the same damn arc we are talking about here. :rolleyes: AMD sees that the higher clockspeeds are not needed or that they have reserved them for the AFX's only so they stay more exclusive. When a arc 1st comes out they clock it at the lowest possible speed they can such as when K8 1st came out.
However K8 could oc the same 3 years ago as it could now yet worse for some reason until F3 came out. Rev E6 killed rev F2 in OCability and made AM2 look like a joke. However K10 isn't even K8 at all so why compare clockspeed limitations to a 3 or almost 4 year old arc to a brand knew one? Where is the logical thinking in that when we have no idea how it will OC at all until it comes out. Don't be spreading CRAP over here when nobody knows what the hell they are talking about because they are all for the other company and wants to see AMD fail.
We seen what K8's max was a long time ago and knew of its limits years before it was finalized in stock. Now its time for a new core with unknown limits at its lowest clockspeeds possible 2.9ghz is its lowest clockspeed at launch means it will have a high stock limit when its life ends 2 or 3 years from now when APU's come out from AMD. Thinking otherwise would have no logic to it at all if you really beleave otherwise. Because AMD is doing the same thing like that other company did with their arc. Clocked it at 2.93ghz and waited about a year to clock it 1ghz higher just to stay compeditive when needed.
Quite childish I must say to think differently unless anybody can comment? Because thats how history goes with all cpu arcs before this gen and so forth. Where they clocked at the max on launch ever? No! We only see when they are 2 or 3 years after launch. :rolleyes:
http://badhardware.blogspot.com/2007...03147767030984
Also remember that lower clockspeeds mean higher yield, and less voltage, meeting TDP goals. No way to know what the headroom is until these get out into the wild.
Mmm, can't wait to get my hands on a K10 proc. And yea, clock speed isn't everything. You have to factor in the whole processor. It's like comparing an AM2 2.4 vs a Prescott 3.4.
Not really much headroom when you are doing 125W at stock, is there?Quote:
Originally Posted by ether.real
Shintai,
Why don't you go troll in the Intel section.
125w is the max for a particular process node (ie. 65 nm quad core processors) We have no idea what speed that will be achieved at.
Regards,
Amazing a quad core QX6700 has the same watt's as a K10 and it doesn't mean thats its max speed. It does 5ghz in a OC. So where was your brain when you tried to figure out what K10 can do? We are not talking about K8 here and K8 can sometimes do 4ghz in the past. It just needs too much voltage and cooling to get there most are willing to pay for. Doesn't mean that chip is limited, only depends on the skill of the OCer, the coolent, the voltage, motherboard limit, how well the silicon was forged and so forth.
One wattage conclusion doesn't mean thats its limit silly. Yeah go back to the Intel forums. The wattage has nothing to do with its max headroom. *Rolls eyes* Get it through your thick head this is NOT K8 got it? Its 90% totally different new. NOT K8 NOT A 3 YEAR OLD DESINE!!! HELLO???
WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT CAN DO BECAUSE ITS NOT OUT YET. AND COMPANIES HAVE NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF COMPUTER MANUFACTURING RELEASED A PROCESSING UNIT AT ITS MAX SPEED AT LAUNCH. LOOK AT THE EXAMPLES AROUND YOU UNLESS YOUR BLIND TO THAT FACT.
P1 never started at 266mhz P2 never started at 500mhz P3 never started at 1.5ghz and P4 never started at 3.8ghz. K7 never started at 2.2ghz. K8 never started at 3ghz. It all took time to get there because they wanted to spread out the arc to as long as it could spread out until needed by the demands of the consumer. So how is K10 suddenly different from conroe or any other cpu in the past? Please tell us all that smarty pants. Ooooooo
Yes we do...did you even check the slides?Quote:
Originally Posted by tritium
Here is some more:
http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Quadcor...rticle5992.htm
K8L is still a K8 design with its limitation. Itīs clockspeeds and high TDP also shows its weakness there. 4Ghz K8? You mean a single singlecore K8 with extreme cooling an a suicide shot? And the normal OC is what..3-3.1Ghz tops if you got a superchip?Quote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
Snap out of the dream, or you gonna get a rough nightmare soon. And anytime anyone kinda dissagree with the overhyped pipedream of K8L. Then we all get told to go to the Intel forum. Because we donīt want anyone to break the illusion..just like the specFP_rate benchmark...
lol
-K8L is not a K8 design.
-3-3.2 is a normal overclock for higher end K8 chips, not super chips. Super chips do 3.3 to 3.5 to pull rough figures out of my head. Get with the times.
- what the hell has anyones response to your trolling had to do with disagreeing with an over hyped pipe dream???
I agree there is a lot of eye rolling hype and whatnot in here, but it's to be expected. Unfortunatly for you though, the hype is a lot less annoying than your trolling.
It's quite obvious the soul purpose of your replies is to bag AMD, (hence you being labelled a troll) which i just DON'T understand, when, as an intel fanboi, you should be content and happy that intel are leading the cpu race atm. Seriously, it's bizare.
:cool: Very sorry if this interview is a repost. I couldn't find it here.
http://www.hexus.tv/show.php?show=28
Interesting talk.
The above power disipation argument is touched on in the video. As are some very bold claims regarding performance.
It's pretty funny that the video begins with an Intel C2D ad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I think it may be you who's dreaming bud, I've only purchased 3x A64's that couldn't go over 3Ghz. My 3500+ WINNY does 3.1ghz, my 3700+ does 3.25ghz and my X2-4400 does 3ghz also...and those are just the ones I still own, nevermind the others.
As for superchip A64's, well....those goto 3.4ghz & 3.8ghz as I'm sure you know since they're ALL on this very forum :)
When it comes to nightmares I'm afraid INTEL are the only ones in REM-STATE. You remember 5yrs ago INTEL had a cpu that outperformed every AMD at the time. All the talk was INTEL,INTEL,INTEL. Then, from nowhere AMD released AXP and INTEL had trouble. They've since been inferior to AMD and that lasted until C2D's launch.
Now AMD are gonna let INTEL have some time in the sun, god knows they need it. That's almost a year INTEL have held the performance crown, only 3 more to go to equal AMD's previous title reign. Ofcourse that won't happen, since AMD are gonna launch K8L and INTEL are going back in the shade. Except this time it'll be more like the dark side of the moon :p:
Clockspeeds mean nothing, 2Ghz A64's rape 4Ghz PENTIUMS, so whats the point in chasing them?
Regardless of TDP's, CLOCKSPEEDS, projected clockspeeds, DIE sizes, architecture ancestry......K8L are gonna make C2D look like PENTIUM. It'll be AXP v PENTIUM all over again :)
AMD FTW ;)
Much like 2.8ghz is an AVERAGE OC for a C2D. Experienced guys with good cooling go higher, but your average joe will be lucky to see 3Ghz. Doesn't stop the INTEL fan club raving about 4Ghz C2D's, even though I've only seen 20 or so guys out of hundreds manage it.Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
I agree with you on the '06 parts being better OC'ers though, definately.
No arguing with that.....COMPETITION FTW :)Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
we all know its the internet and everyone can OC over 50% prime95 24/7 stable on most of their processors. or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
The average C2D are not hitting 4GHz, but more like 3.2-3.5GHz. The average K8 X2 are not hitting 3GHz, but around 2.6-2.8. that is if you exclude the kamakazi screencapture runs.
Thats not AMD's style. AMD is not that other company. They show benchmarks on release. I was never much for benchmarks anyways because they mean nothing in the real world, thats why i don't use benchmarks myself usouly only a validation and cpu speed, with memory speed, timings, and so forth.Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
I thought it was a fairly entertaining and informational video. The epitome of infotainment?
yea ... but they're not hands on benchmarks XP
Well we seen photos of the physical parts so its not just a pipe dream man. Its out there in AMD's hands just as a real working CPU is. But remember this is not 2003. Leaks happen for lack of security. Or from people with (ES)'s that don't care what happens to them when AMD gets mad for showing off their product too early. We are not in the same time frame. They took better steps this time around so there wouldn't be any leaks from the inside.
Atleast to delay the spread. AMD doesn't intensionally leak information. It happens because some people can't keep their mouths shut in the company. They can bend the rules a bit but breaking them is not so good. But we'll see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
Wow,if I had a product that was supposed to outperform the competitors product by 40%,I would be leaking my information to the public in a heartbeat.
If we don't start seeing leaked benchmarks from AMD soon,I'll lead me to believe their product isn't quite up to par.
I don't need KL8-10 or whatever to beat conroe by 40%,I just want it to compete.
What happens when your backed to a corner little rat agenst the Liger (Biggest baddest cat in all the world) eh? XDD Can you say 16-ways? 32 cores on one board, 8 sockets. Thats what direct connection 2 does. Nobody can compete agenst that monster. What use would 2 quad cores be agenst 4 or even 8 on one board? Thats a lot of zeros in front of that % sign. lol AMD is the Liger and the little rat is that other company.
More chips on one board means less rack space less servers more doe saved on power overall giving atleast XXXX% more performance for half the server space.
Often companies don't do this because they want to avoid the "Osborne effect." This is when the hype for future products causes demand for current products to drop off. When this happens, you have to slash the prices on your current products just to sell them.Quote:
Originally Posted by oicurafox2000
However, if your new product doesn't really compete with your current products but does compete with your competitor's product, you want to talk it up a lot.
I think AMD is in both situations now with rev. H. On one hand, they want to hype up Barcelona because they currently have nothing to compete in the quad-core space, and they want to make potential quad-core customers delay purchasing decisions until rev. H is released.
On the other hand, if they hype it up too much they risk hurting their current dual core sales. Eventually their dual core prices will be so low anyway that the Osborne effect can be expected to be small.
With every X2 price drop, they get closer to the point at which it makes sense to start hyping rev H. I think they're close to that point already. I find it interesting that the most recent dual-core price cuts are rumored to take place on February 12th. On the same date, AMD will be giving a talk at ISSCC about Barcelona. Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part, but that would seem like a good time to release the first benchmarks.
I do find it suspicious that recently they seem to be trying to hype rev. H with no real data to back it up. The longer they keep this up, the worse it looks for rev. H.
AMD is a serious company. If they are not hyping and are telling the truth this will kill the compatition for another 3 years specially in the 4 socket and 8 socket, nobody can touch them here. the other company will lose even more market to them.
If not then AMD will just be like that other company was to AMD like it was for the past 3 years. If so again we have the P4 days all over again with the P4 struggling to a higher clock speed and AMD with a even lower one out performing it.
Exactly, right now AMD will not do ANYTHING that could possibly hurt their market share. Besides not even with Conroe can Intel possibly touch AMD in the 4+P area (until tigerton finally works).Quote:
Originally Posted by oldblue
I dunno if Barcelona will have a 40% performance advantage, but at least it will put amd back into competition with Intel. Hopefully this will put them back on the path of performance dominance they once had.
http://news.com.com/AMD+Go+to+Barcel...l?tag=nefd.topQuote:
Originally Posted by ramenchef
umm yeah.Quote:
The quad-core chip also will outperform AMD's current dual-core Opterons on "floating point" mathematical calculations by a factor of 3.6 at the same clock
And a little bit of facts for Serge:
Power6 has exactly 16 stages and it runs at 5Ghz (something intel couldn't do with 31 stage :p: ) [Random associated fact, K8 has 12 and conroe has 14]
Can we drop the 40% performance BS? Its SpecFP_Rate!
Its more or less like a memory bandwidth test.
For those that still don´t get it (Like some diehard fanbois above)...visit this:
http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/rfp2000.html
As example from same vendor, same modelrange:
2220SE 4 cores, 2 chips, 2 cores/chip 83.3 90.4 (2.8Ghz)
5160 4 cores, 2 chips, 2 cores/chip 82.0 83.0 (3.0Ghz)
That alone is the first 9% if you are into marketing on old K8s.
And in case the fanbois didn´t get it yet:
854 4 cores, 4 chips, 1 core/chip 90.5 98.3 (2.8Ghz)
OMG...4 singlecores are way better!!!! 18.5%! (And thats with DDR1! With DDR2 it would have been even higher.)
There is a reason AMD selected the benchmarks as they did. If you eat marketing PR spins like candy. Then don´t post in a place with speculation and rumour. unless you wanna join the console hype bandwagon.
So lets drop the BS numbers, its like saying Core 2 is 300% faster than K8 after running the Sandra SSE benchmark. Or the other way around with the memory benchmark.
Hmmm....not too shabby of a guess :clap: Now I'm not going to get into specifics, but EARLY (note the emphasis on EARLY) ES AM2 quads are showing approximately a 10% performance advantage over Intel's offerings at the same clockspeed. Keep in mind that there may be/ will be changes before the design is finalized.....Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
*I'm already going out on a limb by disclosing this info so please excuse me if I choose not to comment any further...(at least for now) ;)
wow looks forward to hearing more....let me know if you want me to edit out your quote in case you're asked to pull the info :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
Nice to see alot more realistic numbers :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
10% would be good. Hopefully abit more to keep the competition up due to their low clockspeeds.
it looks like truthQuote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
my own suggestion was K10 is 7 percent in 32bit and 12 percent in 64bit mode faster than C2D
Thanks for the info S7e9h3n :toast:
@S7e9h3n
I hope it will become like you say! :)
7% & 10%?
Yeah, whilst it boots up.
I think everyne knows AMD's track record. They didn't lie about they're performance increase with AXP over PENTIUM so I reckon it's a safe bet they've got it right this time also.
They ain't made this many revisions for a 10% BOOST. I reckon we're talking 15%-20% minimum.....and a lot higher on the HIGH-END OC'd baby's.
now why post that when an AMD guy a few posts above you just told you what the numbers areQuote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
I think what SOLDNER-MOFO64 is saying is that s7e9h3n and his figures, will be improved upon by release (going off cpu optimisations and chipset improvements).Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Well I think he's saying that.
@s7e9h3n - Thanks for the info. Much appreciated.
10% faster in average like C2D faster K8 by 20% in average as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by LOE
s7 do you know what sort of ihs the new cpus will have
i understand if you can't reply to this :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
I think you just answered your own question.
2.7ghz-3ghz on AIR is more common. Want to exaggerate more? This, my friends is what you call a fan-boy. Something this forum had very little of a while ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by mAJORD
Ummm... The Palominos were shocking clockers and P4A series were the most common amongst the community and also 2.4B. Intel gained the performance crown with P4C series. At that time it was really back and forth but the P4C just settled it. Also you are another example of a blind over-exaggerating "fan boy" Jeez, its a disease on this forum recently, turning it into dumb/blind/propaganda/insult central. Why don't u go join [H] or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
My Opinion:
I think this little battle coming up will resemble something like AXP (Barton, Tbred B) vs P4C.
Can't wait to see initial results/previews.
I think this little battle coming up will resemble something like AXP (Barton, Tbred B) vs P4C.
imo like k8 vs. P4
so basically you think the Conroe vs K8L will be like P3 vs K7Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
If a 2Ghz K8 was roughly equal to 3Ghz Prescott,than its a bit more than those 20% of yours...Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
And BTW Brent,we don't know how much the K10 will be faster than Conroe.We have speculations tho.No hard numbers.So by stating the 10% general figure(what ever it means..),you risk being embarrassed :) by the real numbers.
No Steve, a highly informative AMD connected guy risks being embarrassed. And considering his strong links from the past, i doubt he will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
All i'm looking forward to now is how far this thing will overclock on average. Then compare to a C2D/Q at an average overclock. That will make my decision.