lmao!Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Printable View
lmao!Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
You on the other hand were graced with foresight on birth ?Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
How about we tone it down a tad and wait for more results to come in ? you know, cinebench/superprime/superpi produce really fashionable numbers, ay . But what do they mean in "real world" (if it even has a meaning of its own) performance ? not a great deal .
If amd has failed, then so be it . "Better luck next time" .
That's blind faith territory ; Intel failed with Prescott altough it was supposed to be a killer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
You can have a superb product ( Alpha ) and still go down under , far larger companies crumbled in this space ; why whould AMD be exempt ?
K10 will offer sizeable benefits over K8 in the server arena , altough this will be obvious only when it ramps up the clock.But that's about it ; it won't obliterate Core , not to mention Penryn.
i hope later today we see some gaming benches, im curious about the performance of K10 in games.
well you need to buy a cellphone first my friend :rofl: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Cinebench is portrayed as representative of commercial 3D rendering SW ; that is pretty real world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slay0r
After all , what's real world ? 3Dmark ? Games ?
If anything , tests like the above show which core has more oomph , even if the results are semi-worthless for real world.
Just because AMD can't release anything that beats a conroe/kentsfield does not mean they will just "suddenly die"...
I guess if worst comes to worst they can go back to the days of the K6, where they were vastly inferior to intel in terms of performance.
already taken care of that one (I use it as a modem when I travel)Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
If the results are correct, then AMD looks like it will be without a paddle in the home market. If this is the case, they better had hope that when put in typical servers, it performs exceptionally well.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
I'm just hoping these chips are "broken" revisions and the 3Dmark Phenom is the actual speed. I wont be holding my breath though.
ye, but you have to consider that:Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
- only cinebench and wprime were used to measure the performance. this is just a very small amount of benchmarks at all
- this is just ONE source that shows us its benchmark-scores. if more and different sources report the same performance numbers than we can say that the results are representative (almost).
we won't know for sure until barcelona is officially launched and credible review-sites put it to the acid test. ;)
What's to laugh about ?Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
Have you heard of Fusion , Silverthorne ?
The purpose of such devices is to move the PC as we know it on the cellphone. Current cellphones are slowly going uphill into PC territory ; this will advance at a very rapid pace once system-on-a-chip devices appear next year.The whole point is to move x86 down , into cellphone territory and this is the purpose of Silverthorne early next year. ( Iphone 2 will use it according to rumours )
This is real and is happening now ; both Intel and AMD are preparing for the 2010-2012 generation , by that time , cell phones will be more powerfull than current PCs.Add 3D glasses to them and all my multimedia needs are satisfied.
/End off topic.
yep, our current gfx-cards consume 200w+ and need a bigass cooling solution and you're talking about cellphones that are faster than our current pcs by 2010-2012?Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
even if this would be true, who could afford these cell phones? talking about premium deluxe highend ultra extreme prices :rolleyes:
c'mon, i can't believe you're serious about this...
imho real world is different from user to user . I'm essentially a gamer, even though my job wants me sat at a pc all day for obvious different reasons . Bearing in mind that I am a fanboy of performance, I'd pass a SPI 1M 15sec pc for one that takes twice or three times as much to complete the loop, if the latter, afterall, ran cpu intensive games at a higher frame rate when compared to the former .Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Given that the above has little chances to reflect reality, that's the way I see it .
more on topic:
can anyone provide benches for Friz Chess Bench, CPU Mark 99 with xeons @ 2ghz ?
woooooow hold on.....am I right in saying you guys are arguing over an early K10 benchmark submitted by an INTEL fanboi?
You can't pay attention to a bench from people who jumped ship to intel and have licked their a$$e$ ever since.
I could bench a Q6700 and show you 28second Pi 1M times......big deal.
:welcome: to common sense
i didnt know you know that 84036980 dude, who posted the benchmarks... so everyone who posts something "negative" about amd is a intel fanboy... :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
btw. nice ninja edit on the 18 secs to 28 secs. :p:
lol...no no not everyone.....just the INTEL fanatics who submit K10 scores :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
yeah, I'm ninja-like alright ;)
my common sense fails to understand how one could be "fan boy" of either company, never mind "jumping ship", unless there were lucrative reasons in the background .Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
it's like me turning down a ford mustang for a fiat panda (given that money wasn't an issue) because fiat is an italian brand . what the :banana::banana::banana::banana: . :shrug:
AMD ppl appears! Have been a long time without them in this thread. Only informal remains in silent :rofl:
Now we have some real numbers, more to come in the upcoming days. As spected, K10 seems to be a disappointment. And that really sucks. No competition to Intel = Intel wont innovate as fast as they do with the C2D.
AMD BAD!!!
Put it this way, when I see an AMD user post K10 benches I'll believe them, or atleast someone with some credibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slay0r
And if the benchies are true, then AMD could well be in very big trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slay0r
Italian is Italian , how can you turn down a fiat :shakes: ,,,
some people will favor a product over another one due to a good past experience ,, the other type of fan boys those who pays more to get less either stupid people or retarded ,,, you should only buy whatever will give you the best for your budget and always hope for better competition and better performance with every advancement
fair enough, i still fail to see how one can only either be amd or intel. I have both in my house, does that make me an untrustable bad e-person ? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
well, if i was to choose between italian brands, i'd be more prone to buy off alfa romeo or ferrari(i wish). :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
:up: :up: :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by kemo6600
Already got my Alfa :)
Soo anyway... now you've all stopped being b1tches at each other (yeah right!)
..here are some some:
1Mb K8 (Windsor) Super pi @ 2ghz , with DDR2 667, to serve as some sort of comparison, since the opty's must be running reg'd 667.
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/3645/pi2gmy8.jpg
And a 32bit cinebench 10 single CPU score..
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/504/cine2gpi2.jpg
So this should give a rough idea of the single core performance delta if these benchmarks are a true representation:
5% faster at super pi
somewhere between 0 ann 7% faster @ cinebench, depending on how much K8 scales in 64bit version.. (anyone?)
If someone with a socket F opty system lurks out there on 64bit would like to do the same.. would be good.