Ahh... that's the beauty of C2Q, it will overclock crazy and stay cool while on average giving higher ICP then PII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caveman787
Printable View
Ahh... that's the beauty of C2Q, it will overclock crazy and stay cool while on average giving higher ICP then PII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caveman787
I still think deneb fully overclocked with overclocked nb/hypertransport will have a chance of being equal or a little faster then c2q.
Got phenom 1.
Crash is @ 84 C.
Orthos can run 24H at temperatures of 76, so no issue there, the limit is clearly not 60's.
Temperature decreases the max clock, there is no shock there, if you can run 4.2 ghz on air the first 10 minutes with orthos @ 60's but then goes over 70 and fail, you can probaly run 4-4,1 somewhere, easy as that.
Athlon x2's stop at 71 for my windsor 5600+ and the 5000+ brisbane stopped at 69.
according to their temp sensors.
My pentium 4 70 C idle and load, just no diffrence, and it died after a year, stock cooler, all stock settings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caveman787
zucker has a point, ever ran prime @ stock with stock cooling on a Ci7?
Temps get into the mid 80s. :D
Is it bad? Well that depends Ci7 only shows the worse temps on the whole core, there are several DTS in each Ci7 core and the worse temp is given out as Core temp.
I dont know how Phenom or Phenom2 handels that, if they have diodes at every hotspot as Ci7 does. If not you cant compare temps between Phenom and Ci7.
For my personal likeing i also dislike everything above 80°C, so i try to stay under this point.
you forget on little thing -> if you clock a C2D you also increase the clock of the 2nd lvl cache and 2nd >>>> 3rd level cache. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Caveman787
Yes zucker good summation, i7's kinda said "power efficiency....with performance....forget that, that's just greedy talk!"
No matter what the benchmarks may show on i7, truth is that it's still very far from perfected, the thermal envelope should be enough to show that fact. However, deneb can take alot more volts then I7 from what i've seen.
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Over...cessor/?page=5
While i've already shown that you can do 3.2 at 1.0875 on deneb (where as i7 takes 1.13 for 2.6) though you can actually go lower. keep in mind that that 3.8 i7 runs at around 1.37v.....and still gets that hot...and still has that high of power consumption. The link above shows 100-114w increase with cpu under load over idle. 316-368 between 3 and 4ghz with load. Phenom II load power consumption is below to I7's idle.
Denebs have a kill temp of 60 or 65c this is true, but as caveman pointed out, who the hell wants to run their chip at 70c if it can be avoided.
You cant compare voltages from a AMD chip with those of a Intel chip.Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
Intel uses High K and AMD low k SOI. And there are many more differences. Chips can be designed for low or high voltages. Same goes for temperatures. So you cant compare them 1:1.
I love how they can't be compared when it comes to intel losing any portion of the battle but they can be if intel comes out on top :rofl:
I wonder how C2Q would do?? Only reason I'm asking is because it appears that C2Q performs slightly faster then PII so it would make it a fair comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
Ci7 is good if you are freezing....its like a fire place... it loves high temps :yepp: , i dont like have cpus that are 60c+ thats why i choice Phenom II instead of Ci7.... Maybe its dont clock high like the Ci7 with air and sucide screens...buts its looks its clocks very well under LN2 and are much cheaper than the Ci7 if you buying all the parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
Seriously guys!
Are you really believing "temps" (*numbers*) reported by software?
Supposedly "measured" by some hardware within the core(s)?
I have several K8's that shows 5-10 degrees idle, and 30-40 full load (depending on clocks/volts).
I have had numerous Intel CPU's (P4, C2D, C2Q...) that shows completely different "numbers" between similar models/revisions.
Even seen that upgrading Bios results in 20+ degrees differences.
The *ONLY* way to compare *true* temps are by hardware mods to the CPU (installing probes).
ONLY compare temps for CPU's from a given model/installation!
Please also remember that many are not that clever when it comes to mounting heatsinks (ecpecially on S775). :)
As long as the system shows no signs of instability absolute numbers ("temps") are guidelines for you system/OC/volts.
This said most people (including myself) wants to see low numbers. :)
Well....i'm somewhat confused....if you're trying to say that phenom ii doesn't clock high like I7...that's backwards,Quote:
Originally Posted by Lastviking
I personally already posted screenie a few pages back in this thread near 4.6. That's on air.
Official record on air for phenom II is 4.7
The world record for I7 with LN2 is 5.5
The world record for Phenom II is 6.3
Phenom II's clock higher than I7...no debate about that. They do it on air at about half the load temp, and no matter how you slice it system power consumption is a fraction of I7. :)
As far as chip temps go, i half agree, since thermal probe can clear that up, or IR thermometer at base of heatsink should be within a couple c of reported temp. It does depend on motherboard and whether or not the thermal probes got screwed up.
However, i will say again, that the reported temp is nothing near the INTERNAL tempatures at the hot spots which are usually 15-20c above anything accurately reported. Yes many are not savvy when it comes to installing heatsinks, but i would think that the majority of those that post in this forum can figure out how to mount a heatsink properly.
Regardless of software, bios is almost always accurate and shouldn't be much question as to validity if software reports similar temps. Bios, Asus AI, AOD, thermal probe and IR thermometer have ALL given temps within 1-2c of one another for me, and as far as I7 goes, again there is no debate on thier high temps.
No one is doubting they clock higher, the problem is the PhII's IPC. It's not as good as the i7, so higher clocks is the only way to get around that. In that sense, does that 800Mhz clock advantage even matter in the WR? And for the air OCs, are those sufficient to compete with 45 Q9's? Particularly if people already get 1:1 the same clocks?Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
Don't get me wrong - I want to return to being pure AMD, but that's tough if it's not even winning the IPC department anymore, and then only marginally winning in the air OCs. If we know AMD requires more clocks just to be competitive, then the small difference in max OCs is no longer a positive, just a necessity :(
*mind you I'm still keeping hope, but only my heart is. My head is saying stop being optimistic, and to wait for more data come Jan 8th.
Price may be the only thing that deneb has to fall on.
But if that's the case it won't likely draw people back from intel.
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles...738&cid=2&pg=5
Without hyper threading i7 is doing 15k at 3.86ghz in cinebench, 18k with hyper threading
Phenom II does around 14k at 3.3 or 3.4 i think it was in 64bit will have to switch over and bench again now that i have a fresh instill (still looking for 64bit Xp disk) But even so not a drastic lead
diehard intel fans will stick with intel, diehard amd fans will stick with amd.
The other 90% of the consumer market will be based on price/performance and performance per watt, In both of those categories i think it's looking like AMD has a commanding lead.
When it comes to server enviorments AMD will be quite competitive again, especially since system power consumption and temps are such a conern as well as price. When comparing single socket and dual socket configs, AMD had 230w total system consumption compared to intels 320w for single socket, and dual socket amd was at 540 while intel was 760 i believe, something close to that anyway.
But here again i have to point out that AM3 is really about 6 core istanbuls which are only a few months away where intel still needs to iron out their 4core chips. Deneb are a stepping stone, that just happen to be surprising everyone including AMD.
Intel already has a 6 core cpu ;) (dunnington)Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
Also dont forget the L versions of the xeons, thos little suckers are just insane when it comes to power consumption. Not even the new Shanghais can competent with those.
You've got the wrong review... that one was 32-bit. You should check the test setup.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
For 64-bit this one http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...-965-review/10
according to amd engineers deneb can take a lot of heat. way more than what agena could.
Dont get me wrong here :)Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
Phenom II clocks higher on LN2 than Ci7(buts its looks its clocks very well under LN2 and are much cheaper than the Ci7 if you buying all the parts"this is ++ things for Phenom II)
Ci7 clocks high on air(Phenom II also but its looks like Ci7 is abit stronger here but not much, but it can be becuse of that not all can buy Phenom II yet)
You did say Phenom II have done 4.7 on air...the Ci7 920 have also done that and many is doing 4.6 on air.
Dont get me wrong... i love Phenom II but i dont like "Zucker2k" ;)
And one more thing 4.8 will soon be taken by air if i dont get a bad one :) (Phenom II 940BE)
snip.
Awww, you're breaking my heart. :p: Can we keep personal feelings out of this thread? Anyway, I'm curious; why don't you like me?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lastviking
might be because the thread topic is amd shanghai/deneb review thread not all out bash amd and everyone that runs amd without any logical thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
Reminder: AMD(or Intel) section does not(or at least should not!) mean "Here AMD(or Intel) can suck as much as possible and get owned by Intel(or AMD) as much as possible without anyone disturbing and laughing at it!". :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by roofsniper
(Waiting for someone to misunderstand this post as flamebait and as AMD bashing! :rolleyes:)
ah didn't notice ghostbuster, but still not drastic difference in scores on I7 to justify the price, and still have difference of ddr3.
Yes roofsniper, Denebs were redesigned to diminish the internal hotspots allowing for greater heat tolerance.
Lastviking i find it hard to blieve that anyone has been able to push an i7, let alone the 2.66ghz 920 flavor to 4.6 on air unless someone has their box sitting outside in sub zero temps when 3.6-3.8ghz is already doing 80-90c. especially when LN2 record is 5.5ghz. Btw you will have to do better then 4.8 to beat me, that's why i said "offical world record";) Just not posting till i can get it on an FX board and at least prime or SuperPi stable. :p:
Yes intel has a 6core penryn....which really is a different thing then the i7
yea i understand but have you read his past posts? they make absolutely no sense and most of the time have nothing to do with the topic. i can't even recall if he has ever said anything positive about amd. most people aren't trolls but there are a handful that come here just to troll.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
yea i heard that the balanced the chip out a lot more so there aren't spots that get really hot and some that stay cool so it would allow for a higher overclock.Quote:
Originally Posted by iocedmyself
i7 can oc up to crazy clocks on air http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...splay.php?f=56 just look in the overclocking section, And does nobody think it might be possible that the temp probes in phenom2 might not be so good? Some crazy low temps being reported considering the volts and clocks and power used.