AM3 is a shader intensive benchmark, so obviously it would get higher scores on a X1900CF platform which has 48 pixel shaders per core.
Conroe is an amazing CPU, but I'm sure the score is mostly attributed to using the R580..
Printable View
AM3 is a shader intensive benchmark, so obviously it would get higher scores on a X1900CF platform which has 48 pixel shaders per core.
Conroe is an amazing CPU, but I'm sure the score is mostly attributed to using the R580..
Go ahead and ask anyone you know with the right cards to set their x1900 cards to 712 core and 738 mem and see if they can beat me. The cards are not what made this score possible. It was the CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
Congrats on that clock. Makes me wish I didn't upgrade this past fall but oh well somethings always greener around the corner :)
OK I believe you.. I didn't think anyone had benched with X1900CFs, but then again, synthetic benchmarks don't really interest me..Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
So, the only other explanation must be that the entire benchmark itself can fit into Conroe's L2 cache, and combined with Conroe's extensive execution resources, enables Conroe to get more work done in a fraction of the time it takes the K8..
AM3 is probably INT intensive (most game code is), which explains why Conroe and Dothan do so well.
If there's one area where Conroe just absolutely rapes the K8 (and every other processor), it's in INT..
Tony and I were on the phone and for S's & G's just ran 3D05 with 2 x X1800 in CF at identical clocks to FCG's cards (X1800 and X1900 have same number of shaders and pipes...X1900 is mostly just a die shrink)
Opty 165 Clocked to 2.9+ GHz, OCZ PC4000 EB 2GB kit at 267MHz 3-3-2 timings and only scored 15,3xx. So you can see the CPU making up the 1500+ points :D
Sorry you're wrong there dude. The X1900 core has three times the amount of shader units as the X1800 does..Quote:
Originally Posted by RyderOCZ
They have the same amount of pipelines though..
X1900's have 48 shaders not the 16 that the X1800 has. And didn't think the X1900's had a die shrink yet, thought they where using the 90nm dies.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyderOCZ
And, the total score is what counts....a lot of what this is coming from is actually a VERY high GPU score because Conroe removes all the driver overhead.
FCG whats the max & min fps for that run?
i can guarantee you that the AM3 benchmark does not fit into the Conroe's 4MB L2 cache. stop trying to rationalize this with unfounded theories. why is it so hard for people to accept the power of Conroe? i getting so sick of posts like this, i'm about ready to stop making this info public and just share it with my friends who i know are intelligent enough to look at it in the right light....Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
Edit: in fact, someone load AM3 into memory and tell me the size....I'm going to say somwhere in the range of 16-18MB is resident at any given time. then someone look at the size of the program on disk...I don't know...100MB? 4MB of memory is a lot for a CPU's cache, but remember, it's just that....4 MB....not a lot in actuality. bottom line, knock off the "fitting in cache" statements. enough of this crap.
He might be onto something...(well, not really, but hear me out, lol).
One thing we're not seeing with Conroe is the really HUGE jump in CPU scores that we were expecting (a la Pi times and overall scores in 3D). But overall 3D scores are going up dramatically.
This means one of two things...either the graphics subsystem (chipset and vid cards) are actually faster (they're not--in fact, they're SLOWER than on RD580), or that the driver overhead that plagues CrossFire (and SLI), is being completely manhandled by Conroe, allowing a lot more of the CPU time to be used for the benchmark.
Maybe the driver's 'work' is handled within the cache, requiring little memory access? That would require a lot MORE memory access for the actual benchmark though, so I guess there goes that theory :-/
EDIT: in conclusion: Conroe's good
I can rationalize anything I want.. I'm not forcing or peddling my theories to anyone, so stop telling me what to do..Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Anyway, what does my theory have to do with NOT accepting the power of Conroe?
All the cache does is make sure the execution units are fed at a very fast rate..
I also believe I stated that Conroe rapes the K8 in anything INT related, and it just so happens that games tend to use INT code more than anything else.
Conroe has 3 64-bit ALUS, and 3 SSE2 units solely devoted to INT.. Thats alot of firepower..
Again, how am I in any way not accepting the awesomeness of this processor? :rolleyes:
The actual EXE is going to be much smaller I'd think.. It's similar to the Quake III benchmarks.Quote:
Edit: in fact, someone load AM3 into memory and tell me the size....I'm going to say somwhere in the range of 16-18MB is resident at any given time. then someone look at the size of the program on disk...I don't know...100MB? 4MB of memory is a lot for a CPUs cache, but remember, it's just that....4 MB....not a lot in actuality.
FCG, dont let thing like dat get to you! Congrats, also you are doing some nice work to let people know how Conroe is going to be :)
I sure crossed that up somewhere....oh well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
Graphics drivers use alot of SSE2 instructions, and Conroe is an SSE2 monster, which could explain why it's so fast in gaming..Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
This was theorized at one point over at Aces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
Bleh don't penalize everyone for the few bad eggs that doubt the power, Everyone will always have bad or good opinions about something. I think some are entitled to it but others just act ignorant. Keep us posted man I can't speak for everyone but i'd like to know what it's capable of before buying it:clap:
Don't stress over chumps. There are plenty of technology enthusiasts out there who greatly appreciate the access to info that you are providing. Keep up the good work, and gratz on the WR.Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
The cache has something to do with it, but I think it's more that Conroe is such an SSE monster..Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
Graphics drivers use alot of packed SSE2 instructions, and as we all know, Conroe just whoops ass when it comes to SSEn..
a quick score comparison between FCG's conroe and Fugger's 955XE
Fugger's score:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1140254590
X1900XTX 700/900 CF
955XE @ 5.8ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...01&postcount=1
FCG's score:
http://members.cox.net/kjboughton/FCG_153219.jpg
X1900XTX CF 718/738
conroe @ 2.72ghz
The Cpu scores are almost identical here,
Fugger 16.6k
FCG 16.8k
but, FCG's cards are slower than Fuggers and but still end up with a higher graphics score, which would probably mean, like its already been said, that conroe can help reduce the bottleneck by using CF.
then for fun, conroe has a higher CPU score than a 955XE at more than double the CPU speed.
AM3 will use atleast 80MB of Vmemory. Last time i checked with Rivatuner it was in this range. Ant 4mb" fith into cache theroy" is so frkn wrong only people that have no idea how cpu works can say something like that.
I was not addressing you in general. He's not forced to display anything unless he wants to so we should show some gratitude towards him for giving us the inside scoop. All I meant by that statement really.
Edit: You do not want to discourage one that is helping us all gather more information about it than you can shake a stick at
congratz from my side
Um, I'm not talking about the entire program :stick: .Quote:
Originally Posted by railer
I'm talking about the EXE..
I doubt you have any clue how a CPU works if you think the size of the EXE matters in the least when it comes to L2 cache usage in this benchmark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
it's nice to see conroe performing the same/better than an older intel at half the speed, really, awesome...
but the claims of 4ghz on air are still unfounded
don't get me wrong though, i'd LOVE to see 4ghz on air, hell, i'd LOVE to see 4ghz on phase
FCG, FTW!!! get the phase cookin!!!