It works:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...6000GTS320.jpg
P.S. Nice results every one ,Iwill be hoping AMD pulls through because i really want a 4core Proc that isnt INTEL!
Printable View
It works:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...6000GTS320.jpg
P.S. Nice results every one ,Iwill be hoping AMD pulls through because i really want a 4core Proc that isnt INTEL!
Wow, very nice feedback guys!! :D
Dave: the 1.7GHz vs 2GHz comparison will be very worthwhile IMHO. Frequency scaling is already hot on the topic with tests so far showing k10 scales better than core 2: frequency scaling and socket scaling.
K10 is an architectural beast: if I was an engineer, I'd be damn praising the K10 just as Core 2 was to be praised over P4. I'm pretty sure Intels upcoming CPUs will be based on many technologies you see within K10 now although they are very risky. It certainly is weird but this independent core frequency/voltage control can also throw off quite a few more potential problems. :D
AFAI understand... processor mfgs don't release another core stepping (a re-spin will take 3 months at least usually) unless there's a good enough gain with the tweaks to make it justifiable. Am I correct?
And from what I'm hearing now, they're trying to push B3 out of the door as quick as possible late Q4. Must be something worth it then.
I know one thing for sure - B1 leaks a lot more current than B2 hence why it aint shipping.
Stephen: Nice work with the CPU .. but what about the low RAM frequency and it looked like your RAM was running single channel mode? Imagine if all but one of them was running at the correct frequencies just like the CPUs :p:
Dave, if your board has the errata 281 workaround in BIOS it will work just fine.
The NB 200MHz boost on a dual plane board won't give more than 3% performance increase.
And I just can't wait to know how it performs :)
B3 isn't coming in Q4. wipe that off your "it's coming list." B2 will be Q4.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
dave
not saying it doesn't work, but the BIOS workaround does inhibit peak performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
in order to respond to your next point, I'll need to do the adequate testing and comparison before I note the exact perf. increase.
dave
Reluctant to post info from Fudzilla, but here it goes:
Does this sound right?Quote:
Shanghai / Moscow 07: The fixed B0 revision, no B2
Back in Barcelona Spain, AMD officially said to the Fudzilla that the shipping Barcelona K10 is a stoning B2 revision but a few independent sources have confirmed that Barcelona Opterons 23xx will come as BA chips. Well AMD folks were wrong as B2 wont be ready till Q4.
The BA revision is improved and fixed B1 revision that is suitable for mass production. AMD simply couldn't launch the B1 revision as it was buggy. The infamous B1 had Errata 281 bug with horrible stream, integer and floating point unit performance and BA fixes it.
The B2 comes in Q4 and it is likely to save AMD's behind as it offers higher clock speeds of up to 3GHz and even higher.
So, the first Opteron 23xx at up to 2GHz won't be exactly the greatest thing around but at least it's a start.
Dear Dave,Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
My point is that Intel Conroe was putting in great scores months before release even with new BIOS and motherboards. K10 doesn't do the same after release, what does that show?
You say I attack people, however I have only ever attacked the initial K10 results and said that "excuses" for it were not logical. If you want an example of somone attacking the person let me quote you on another forum:-
""i'm a liar at Xtremesys by a few uninformed imbeciles but, whatever....""
Nobody called you a liar, we were trying to work out the steppings by asking questions to try and get to the bottom of it. Nice to know what you actually think of us when you are not here though.....
And as for you claim about :-
"i have been upfront in claiming that B1 cores with their BIOS workaround DO cause performance deficits"
I can inform you now that Anandtech were using BA and B1 according to a source at Anandtech and did not notice a difference between the two but they are still testing and will give a full report later.
On the subject of testing, you said why don't I shut up and wait for you to get testing these things in anger. Good idea. I waited and you both are producing very little so I thought I'd just mention
SHOW US THE BEEF
XS is all about results on the desktop, not excuses and what ifs and could have beens and just wait a bit longer and the platforms currently is not right. A fantasic processor would still cut through all of this like Woodcrest/Conroe did.
You have to walk the walk, not talk the talk and after 17 pages how much walking has actually been done in this thread? And this is a cpu that is being shipped for revenue, not something to be released in Q108
Regards
Andy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
First part is a very good summation Dave, the "it will get better" part I don't agree with. They can make it better but they would need to pull off a Thoroughbred B trick again and I do not think they can find the magic again this time round.
I tell you what, if they do manage it I will dedicate my 2 machines to the DC project of your choice for a year and you know what I now think of DC after being addicted for years :D
If AMD are 10% better overall than Penryn on desktop benches on the last day of 2007 my machines are at your DC command :)
Regards
Andy
i understand taking a few days to respond but seriously, this has been thrashed through enough by myself and others. read the pages AFTER your initial email.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
that was from here: http://forums.2cpu.com/showpost.php?...1&postcount=48 (for reference)...always quote your source, zakelwe. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
hey, you missed one here: http://forums.2cpu.com/showpost.php?...9&postcount=73
In that thread i say:
on AMDZone, i said this: http://amdzone.com/index.php?name=PN...wtopic&t=11206Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
let's see...where else have I posted? gah...it escapes me...Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
actually, it's been implied, im'd, and others directly to me. i neither have the time, patience, or energy to go through and grab all the snarks that have been tossed my way. Have I lost my patience? you betcha. you can quote me anywhere you want, the message is still the same. iirc, that might have been from 2cpu where GENERALLY speaking, the level of intelligent conversation around this particular topic has been lightyears beyond here. With KTE's, PhilDoc's, et al. entrance into this thread, we actually have a bit of work to do.
see, at other places, there are less trolls simply entering into threads bashing a concept or a company. at XS, it's taken to the extreme. Not only do i have to defend myself, my statements, my ideals, i have to protect EVERYTHING i say since, as you've so delicately pointed out, i might infer something that I never actually said. happens too often here which is why i took about a 4 month hiatus before coming back. it's tiring and, when you actually have another job, it's not worth it.
well, given that i've talked to Anand about it, they've disclosed that they used B1 and B2 steppings in their reviews, i don't see how your statement brings anything new to the table. *shrug*Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
i'm testing at the right i'm able to. trying balancing a day job, a pregnant wife, a 2.5 year old child, and any number of other things that I do. matter of fact, don't because that would, in addition, complicate your ability to shoot arrows at the undefended down below. I buy all my own hardware, with the exception of processors and the OCCASIONAL memory relief, and have to fit it into the budget. I've already explained that I'm receiving BA steppings within a week or so, so, you can keep asking for it, but i'm going to keep saying, it's coming. then again, that gives you another platform to cast dispersion on myself and others for at least attempting to intelligently answer "critics," "trolls," and "fanboys" (on both accounts) with the platform performance. I can't help it if your expectations and timelines are unrealistic.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
and your point is? woodcrest and clovertown weren't without their share of problems though intel has a better track record of first run releases. who cares? the "results on the desktop" statement is...well, interesting. the issue is that XS exists in a vacuum; it in no way, shape, or form represents what revenuing partners, manufacturers, etc. care about when it comes to processor design. See, i guarantee that AMD didn't stop by XS and go, "wow, these XS guys are so cutting edge that we need to release a product that will appease them." that's what's so unbelievably unrealistic about your worldview.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
and I am. simple as that. I've engaged the resources that I've had the time to all while balancing work and family. i'd like to see you do the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
it's easy to cast stones...much harder to actually quarry them.
dave
as i've stated: BA is the shipping rev. not B1. B2 in Q4.Quote:
Originally Posted by F@32
cheers,
dave
Thanks Dave.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
np. now, as to whether or not joe user is going to be able to get BA's....well, that's a different story.Quote:
Originally Posted by F@32
dave
My 2 cents, as a guy, not a mod:
I think people are just too emotionally involved in this.
Let's take the worst case scenario.
AMD announced before they were ready but had to provide something so they sent the best they had.
It's flawed. Ok, it is,thats life and the sun is still going to rise tomorrow.
I'm confident they will "fix" the issues and whether the final result is an Intel beater or not my guess is it will be a decent cpu.
Here's the part that I really don't like: Seeing people get into these heated arguments over this.
There's an old expression that if you don't have something nice to say then maybe you shouldn't say anything at all.
Now I know both Dave and Andy and like them both.
Good guys and both sharp but as a friend to you both I'd ask that both of you stop and take a breath.
As to Dave's comments on other forums, I'm sorry to see them but he's stating the truth. There are a lot of people here that are just that: Trolls.
Sitting back at their PC's getting their jollies from giving others grief.
Go read the news or speak freely section and daily you will see people start threads that just by their titles are designed to get peoples emotions boiling.
Trolls aren't just here, 2cpu has it's share also as I learned the hard way and I imagine that every forum has them.
Let's try and act like adults and if someone posts something that you have an issue with, state the facts, but stay away from the personal attacks.
They solve nothing my friends..nothing.
PS: If these reasons aren't enough, then I'll ask for a personal one.
I almost broke my right hand on this fools jaw a week or so ago and it still hurts like hell.
So be kind to an old guy and be nice to one another and save me some pain!:D
Oh,yes, before you ask..He went to la-la land..I dropped all 230lbs into that shot..:p:
oh baby.... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
hmmm...wonder what an EMC LCC would do to him? hmmmm
dave
Define EMC 'LLC"..All I know is that when I got a tour of their place down off of 495 I had drool all over myself..Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
A hardware junkys dream..
More talk Dave and no action.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
So, you'd like to see me doing the same with a wife and family ?
Well check out the 3dmark 2001 scores for nvidia cards from GF3 ti200 onwards and see how many first pages have my name on them. I'm still pretty proud of my MX440 with FX-55, took them 2 years to take that score down. I've often stayed up till early in the morning in sub zero temperatures in my shed and then set off for work whilst my wife and kid were in bed so don't go giving me lectures about not doing the same :-
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&highlight=5am
I was up to 3am and had to get up at 5am to go to work
So no excuses, where are the results?
Andy
sorry man...I'm not capitulating to your requests. i'm proud of your work ethic but that has absolutely nothing to do with me or my work. As I get the time, I'll keep working on what other people have requested me to do. simple as that. My work isn't based on your perception, your timetable or your feelings about AMD or I.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
I just find it funny that I'm being targeted for this. *shrug* I've answered every single person who's asked me a question, I've been more than honest in my opinions on the launch, etc.
cheers,
dave
"Link Control Card" - about 8 inches deep, 6 inches wide, 1.5 inches high and made from aluminum. weighs ABOUT 3 lbs. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
dave
Patience my friend..Rome wasn't built in a day and it looks like AMD isn't ready for any final verdict..Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
Not capitulating to my requests is an interesting way of responding to me just asking for some numbers. Numbers and not words is what XS is based on.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
As for your time, you have spent a long time posting on this forum but cannot find the time to run a simple 30 second pifast bench?
Rather than reply to this post just run it and publish the results. Thanks.
Regards
Andy
zakelwe, chill out man. :yepp: At least these guys are testing them, give them some credit bro, we all want to know. I couldn't give a phooking monkeys if an Intel or AMD acolyte becomes baptized at the new results, but its only fair that the guys work through and give us representative launch product results best they can- and actually its not even fair, they do all the hard work dammit. Why don't we help rather than cuss and :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: at each other here. You don't know each other or each others personal lives, you just know bits and bats of what ones said about a freaking processor! Wayyy nothing of a reason to start getting emotional, personally serious or antagonistic.
And yeah, Dave was right about people calling him a liar. Words don't have to be said in literature do imply something, there's ways of sentencing which means clearly what you want to say but rather elusive of the exact bold words, and we all do it and learn it. Sarcasm is one. They did exactly that insinuate that here earlier on. Just look at how many times he's said the same things again AND again Zzzzzz in 3-4 threads here because people cant be jack assed to wolly up and read some facts already posted, but still ignorantly love to think conspiracy and spread negative conjectures as biblical fact. How many others do you have doing that with a new hardware that you all may want?
He doesn't have to post anything FYI and neither does anyone else.
Jeeeeez!!! Cut this, please. Its dead boring ya know. :shakes:
Amen, more that just insinuation if I recall.Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
Either way, I'm starting to remember why I quit this for 3yrs.
??? :shrug: After that... I wouldn't run it at all or post it if I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
Wow zakelwe, your not coming across as a good guy in this thread even though you are. Do as MM says and take a deep breath and maybe reread some of your posts to see how they sound.
I'm really glad I sold my ASUS L1N64-SLI WS as it's just too tough in the AMD section anymore. :argue:
and it isn't hard in the Intel section? c'mon...this is the whole Democrats-Republican back and forth banter that happens all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by dogsx2
relax.
dave
i ran wprime, truecrypt, wrar.Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
you can see the results right here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=375
and
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=364
feel free to read those at your leisure.
i'll put pifast in my queue but, it's not top priority.
dave
:eek: Are you sure??? Intel is :buddies: ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Alright, this is funny. Skewering a person cause he hasn't run what is most likely the world's most useless benchmark? Give him a break. They're still trying to get stuff to RUN this, let alone run a waste of time program. I'd rather see some real world stuff-LAME, DivX, etc. Photoshop filters, that's one I use EVERY FREAKING DAY, (emphasis for the fact that I can't seem to find a way to not fire it up every day... it may signal addiction, I'm not sure)but something that showcases some real world performance where it counts.
Dave, I don't care if you wait till the Judgement Trump, take care of what is important and all this will fall in line behind.
And, since it seems to be so thin in this area, thanks for taking your time to try and provide us with information. I appreciate your work, and look forward to more in the future.
Well said man.My thoughts exactly :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin
can you do that bench on the 32M w/ 2 threads?Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
cuz with 2 threads my Core Duo and 2GB 533mhz laptop @ 2.16ghz scores 39s (yes core duo not core 2 duo)
32m on wiprime w/2 threads @ 1.9ghz = 41.906 seconds.Quote:
Originally Posted by GenTarkin
dave
hrm....I dont know if thats good for barcelona then if a cpu clocked 260mhz more wins by almost 3 seconds....wonder what the core 2 would do @ 2.16ghzQuote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
or OVERALL lol wonder what the barcelonay would do @ 2.16ghz how close it would be.
Since I'm waiting on another mobo for my cpu's, I decided to see what my 2218's could do @ a comparable speed to Dave's 2347's in Wprime. Although the Barcelonas do show a bit of performance increase from K8, it's quite obvious that our current bioses are crippling the quads. The mobo makers who are claiming support for quad AMD's have quite a bit of work to do.....:slapass:Quote:
Originally Posted by GenTarkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
My Opties @ as close as I could get them to the 2347's:
http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/7...prime19kf3.jpg
BTW, thanks for all the suggestions to get my quads running correctly but I've decided to let AMD figure out what's wrong with the Tyan setup and not make it my own problem. Should be up and running again with a fully functional system by early next week.....
Thanks Steven. Just as a further comparison:
Opteron 2210 1.8GHz 4GB 667MHz Win x64 = 26.844/856.171 sec (belongs to justapost)
http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/3...ipleru0.th.png
(although this is a desktop part, 4 cores, and far higher frequency/tight timings)
Q6600 3150MHz 4GB 4 threads = 13.37 sec (belongs to ...cant remember :D ) http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/4...rimeek2.th.png
E6300 (2MB L2)
@ 7x266 DDR2-800 = 50.203
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/9...x266ws4.th.gif
@ 7x333 DDR2-667 = 40.219
http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/2...x333pz0.th.gif
@ 7x400 DDR2-800 = 33.407
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/8...x400bg2.th.gif
That a really fast Core Duo. Most Core 2 Duo T7400 are around 40-42 seconds according to this, and looks like Core Duo/Core 2 Duo are pretty well equal clock for clock in it anyways: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=123570Quote:
Originally Posted by GenTarkin
T7400ES (2.16ghz 667fsb, 2x1gb 533mhz ram 4-4-4-12, 945GM.)
XP Pro-32
32M : 40.020s
1024M: 1273.53s
2x 5120ES @ 2.8ghz (7x400 5-5-5-x 4x1GB FB-DIMM's)
XP-64
32M : 15.875s
1024M: 494.782s
I have a C2D lappy lying around somewhere here. I think its either that or T5600.... or maybe higher. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
I'll check it out soon and try getting some wPrime scores, although it has no OS on it yet and hasn't been touched for quite a long time.
I just ran it again with nothing going on in the background..or everything I could rid of as far as chat windows =P
and got this:
38.687 sec on the 32M one
UPDATE: after few more runs was able to attain 38.276 sec on 32M
thats with my Core Duo 2.16ghz and RAM @ 533mhz - laptop
Im running Vista Ultimate 32bit
UPDATE: Just completed the 1024M w/ same system. Result: 1236.75 sec
:ROTF: thats so mean! :D no fair! i dont even have a lappy - but if i did i sure as hell would know where it is :D :rofl: :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
looks like i missed some fun here:
anyhow here is a cpu-z of one of the first EVT samples.
http://users.telenet.be/duploxxx/cpu-z1.jpg
@s7e9h3n nice to see you have some samples to play with. But Bios does magic in these barcelona figures and behaviour! fixed bios for oem was only released last week. can't you get a 790 board somewhere?
Wow dude, what board are you using to run that Phenom? Is it AMD's 790 reference board?Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
from cpu-z 1.40.5 beta it is able to recognize it is a barcelona. 1.40 wasn't able at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by prostoman
it's just a wrong screen from cpu-z about the phenom part.
i had a 2s system tyan system btw for a few weeks from second week of august.
after reading thorugh these thread i get the feeling that s7 is running on a x1 ht link multiplier (according to CPU-Z), maybe that's the problem with these benches :confused:
i can't try it myself because the only 2s system i have is the ones of my dad and this is a first gen 940 board running 2 265 cpus :( , but all the screens of K8 cpus show the correct ht link speed...
and s7 s DC optys also show the correct ht link ( do they run in the same board as the quads???)
Oh, I see it now. I was blinded by the AMD Phenom sign :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
Well I just found out we have a pair of Barcelonas at work (2347s) and have this entire week and noone told me. :mad: But when I found out last night, I asked about them and they tried booting them on our current Tyan motherboard we had for the 2P Opteron platform. However, it won't boot (or wouldn't last night, anyway). The product guy should be in today, and I'm going to see if I can help him get it booted with at least one proc. I'll post the motherboard we have when I get a chance, but again, not sure what it is at this point.
Also, I think we have 0721s while s7 has 0725s so we probably have B0s I'm guessing. :( I now feel s7's pain of having two procs to try out and not being able to. Argh.
I know this is probably the wrong place to post this, but it's thread got locked for some reason (maybe it was generating more interest that the Intel/Havok news....) Anyway, looks like AMD is going to produce a tri-core. I wonder if it will be native. One article says it will be.
http://www.hardtecs4u.com/?id=1189807351,51761,ht4u.php
translated
And from the Inq
http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=42369
That was amazing.
People think that everybody has what, 40 hour in a day to work for free for them and give them results? Give all us a break.
Dave, take your time and bring us the results when they come.
I think that everybody already know that for the server world there are ALWAYS bios issues, usually called "imaturity of the plattaform". They are always in there, doesn't matter the manufacturer. Intel has those too, and the prove is quite easy to find: it took more than 6 months after release for their server parts "core2 like" start to harm the opterons selling, despite the fact that the core2 arquiteture always were faster than the at time opterons.
why that? no chipset worked at time.
So give everybodyu a break.
But, anyway: Dave, could you explain to us what exactly makes a server part bios so harder to clean than a desktop one? It's a fact... but I still can't see the reason behind it. :)
And thanks a lot for all info and time!
An update for what it's worth. The motherboard we're using is a Supermicro H8DME (but the POST screen says H8DM8, oddly enough). Either way, we flashed it with the newest BIOS from 9/7/07 and now it works. Old BIOS was 11/28/06, so there's a clue to why it wouldn't even turn on before. ;) Got a set of 2347s with 16GB of PC5300 ECC in there, and they're now building out the server to install an OS on it and start testing it. As far as working properly, we'll have to see but the BIOS is counting 8 cores. I took pics, but they're on the phone, so I'll have to get them off when I get home tonight if I can figure out how.
Just letting s7 and Dave know in case they want to know of another board that works. :) If the machine gets setup and I have access to it, I'll run what tests I can, but we'll see what they're doing with it first.
A rd790 board shouldn't be a problem for me to get, BUT a 2s rd790 board is impossible to land....Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
CPU-Z is giving a bugged reading and the DC opties are running in my Asus L1N64 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
If the bios is from Tyan, you're going to have some major issues booting the board. The Tyan I used was running a custom bios from AMD which [allegedly :rolleyes: ] allowed the cpu's to function properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
Yep, although AMD's preferred Tyan as their main launch partner for the last few years, it seems as if they're having more compatibility problems than Supermicro this time around :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
yep same here... tyan system with special AMD bios. and 0 options to controlQuote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
Hah! Good news!Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
When we can expect another update from you? Are you gonna install Windows based OS or Linux?
:up:
I asked the guys to install Windows for me. :) They need to test *all* of the installs, so Windows is taking priority so I can play with it. Hehe. So we'll see soon if it's bugged or working properly. At least if it breaks, we have a contact at Supermicro that should be able to get us a proper BIOS, but that remains to be seen.
Just finished installing the motherboard into a chassis going to to test it shortly...I'll update as I can. :)
Excellent
My lappy w/ 2.33Ghz C2D and 2GB 533. When I get windows back on it I will run 32m and see!Quote:
Originally Posted by GenTarkin
Then I have only one dilemma: to go to sleep or not to go ?? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
:)
I'm at work until 9PM so if all goes well, I should be able to do what I want as long as I keep on top of work. ;) Also, the system has booted into a live Linux environment without problem, so that's a good sign. I'll let everyone know how the Windows Server 2003 install goes. :)
Till 9PM on a Sat? I feel for you :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
BTW, is this is the same board that Anandtech used for their preview?
This is the board we're using:
http://www.supermicro.com/Aplus/moth...55/H8DME-2.cfm
And Windows is installing now...and yes, until 9PM on a Saturday, and I work until 9PM tomorrow as well. Thanks for the sympathy. :)
no. anandtech used a DMU+Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
cheers,
dave
After a few cursings and some various BIOS changes....
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=243088
Still trying to figure out why it's unstable, but considering that's not really my department and I have other stuff that needs to be done, I just messed with it until I got it to install properly. Either way, the memory was giving me problems so I ended up clocking it down to DDR2-533 to get it to boot without either rebooting or BSOD'ing. Might be a bad stick of memory in there, but that could take forever to figure out.
The main thing I'll point out is the HT Link speed. Processor #1 gets 400MHz, and Processor #2 gets 200MHz? :confused: Not sure what to make of that.
Either way, I'll try to get some stuff posted assuming it doesn't flake out on me like it has been. :)
Ugh, this poor system. The memory is just being abused just to get it to run. The timings are auto, which of course are bad, then for some reason it's in single channel mode, at 266MHz, and the HT Link is slow as Hell. Yikes is all I can say. Here's a painfully slow SuperPI 1M for what it's worth. Gotta get back to work. ;)
http://www.sourcekills.com/albums/ts...de/nastypi.png
Ninja Edit: The first bank of memory (first four sticks) are the only ones showing up. The other 4 sticks in the bank next to CPU #2 aren't showing up at all, so it's only seeing 8GB of memory (but this is 32-bit Windows, so it doesn't really matter). However, the memory is still showing up in slots 1/2/3/4, so I'm not sure why dual channel isn't kicking in...
holy crap, everybody who tests seems to have these problems. for a platform just released, this is ridiculous... not trying to beat a dead horse, but conroe worked flawlessly months before release. I mean jeez, when did amd send these poor mobo manufacturers the damn samples?
We have a set of 2218s here I could drop in to see how they were working on the same motherboard to see if indeed the processors are to blame, but again, I simply can't do that tonight. Maybe tomorrow depending on circumstances, but I don't want to shoot Barcelona in the head when it could be bad memory causing problems (although the HT speed is a bit strange).
ahn... all those problems AND 43 seconds?
For me it's a good start. Since it can only get faster from there. :D
cky: YES, conroe and kentsfield did worked.
NOT clovertown and their "likes". The prove is one the time necessarya for intel to begin to ger market share from amd in the server side.
moreover, I do think that Dave and S7 have enough links to prove that it's true.
What bothers me is: since the chipstes from server parts are more difficult to deal with is already a fact, why the heck are they so more difficult to deal with? What are the reasons behind it?
Last bench for the night. Just used the default settings of 800x600 8bit.
http://www.sourcekills.com/albums/ts...ne10_32bit.png
Let me know what else you want to see and I'll do it. The video is onboard, so 3D benchmarks at this point are worthless so don't even ask.
see attached.
Superpi run @ 42.219 seconds.
i'm not very trusting of CPU-Z right now, but whatever. :)
dave
cinebench R10 scores.
notice....same time to render as tsue but....less points...yippee.
cheers,
dave
Dave, what's the memory at on that SuperPI run?
a long time ago....there's no excuse for how poorly Tyan, et. al have handled this.Quote:
Originally Posted by cky2k6
dave
So that is it? 43s...
Disappointing, other non optimized programs will run slow too.
again, deriving system performance on a notably weak benchmark is...well, foolish.Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
in any case, here are some CrystalMark results.
Nice to se more benchs arriving :)
What does Tyan or AMD say about the issues/performance?
Still wondering about that memory, Dave. ;) And holy huge images, batman!
And I'm using a Supermicro, but I think Dave is on a Tyan...and our performance seems about similar except SuperPI, but considering the memory issues I'm dealing with that's not surprising.
Welcome to Barcelona :D You'll most likely have similar problems in 64-bit Windows as well. I was running 2k3 x64 R2 with my chips and had problems with memory detection as well. In my case, CpuZ saw all 8gb, but when I pulled the "drop down" menu to see which slots were populated, 4 out of the 8 slots showed memory inserted: 1gb in each slot. I was using 2gb sticks :rolleyes: You'll also notice that I was stuck @ 159mhz single channel.....Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
All chipsets aren't perfect upon release, but the Barcelona "compatible" chipsets are unusually bad. This may have to do with the fact that the prior socket F chipsets were designed with QuadCore AMD's already in mind. Chipsets were built according to AMD's guidelines which - in a perfect world - would have supported Barcelona as a "drop-in" upgrade. The reason C2D didn't have as many issues was due to the fact that the chipsets were designed SPECIFICALLY for that generation of cpu's and required users to purchase new mobo's -> something AMD wanted to avoid.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohannesRS
Although you said not to ask, I will anyways :D . I've been curious to see how well the cpu's will perform in 3d01. I think that your onboard graphics (ATI Rage or ES1000?) may just support the minimums for 3d01. Since 3d01 is cpu driven, it'd be interesting to see what would happen. I was planning to do this myself when I get the replacement mobo, but since you [sort-of] offered......;)Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
Oh BTW, everyone benching these CPU's should use 64-bit Cinebench as the 32-bit version basically tells nothing about what Barcelona's capable of.
Yup!Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
AMD squarely blames the platform guys and....well, the platform guys flip it right around.
cheers,
dave
I can't get 64-Bit Windows on there, sorry. ;) Confined to 32-bit for reasons out of my control, otherwise I'd give it a try. As for 3DMark01, meh, I suppose I can try, but it's going to be ugly. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
honestly, don't remember what CPU-Z said....it did miss the fact that only 2out of each 8 slots was populated (1GB sticks of Kingston DDr2-667)Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
i've got some 1Gb sticks of mushkin DDR2-667, so...we can try with those.
i'm using a Tyan 3992 and I've got a 3992-E on order.
dave
i can try it.Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
have Standard R2 X64 at work.,
dave
i'll try.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
dave
The 3DMark2001 Install gave me a "Could Not Create Direct3D Device" error, and asked me to use 16-bit color on my desktop (which it already does). Not sure what video is on this thing, but no drivers are installed. I'll see what I can do about it...
Hey Dave:
A stupid layman question.
Did AMD screw up trying to develop their own mobo chipset by witholding information from the main chipset manufacturer's ???
Just wonderin,
Bruno
You may have to install Dx as well, been a while since I ran 2003, but I believe it only has remnants of Dx. You'll probably also have to go into the Dx Diag and make sure all of the sliders are set to accellerate. You'll also may have to go to display properties and make sure its accellerated there also. That's about all I remember for running 2001 on 2003.Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
Has ANYONE run 3d06 yet? This is pretty lame :(
I don't think anyone has anything capable of running it here. There are workstation boards, with onboard video. I think they're at best running XGI Volaris...
3DM06 has nothing to do with new CPU architectures, and a Barcelona system will most likely not be indicative of either Phenom or QuadFX. Between the errata issue, ECC ram, and workstation chipsets there's little point in pursuing that one...
for amd's sake, i hope the chips and boards it sold to their actual customers function. cause, if their multi billion dollar clients are unhappy with how their new servers are running, amd is going to get eaten alive...
Not sure but I think that a lot of sales are for the entire server. I'm sure AMD will make sure they run before they get to the customer. They will probably also have a lot of drop in sales, just exchanging cpus. For those I'm sure the AMD field reps will be johnny on the spot and will undoubtably have made sure the configuration will run before they exchange cpus
All we want to see is the CPU test... barcelona will be the same thing as phenom. And what does this errata issue have to do with 06? And the chipset? Since when has chipset mattered with A64s?Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin
1) DirectX installed?Quote:
Originally Posted by tsuehpsyde
2) Hardware acceleration (right-click desktop, properties, last tab, advanced, fourth tab) fully enabled?
The issue is with the onboard graphics which doesn't meet the minimum specs in order to even run the bench on the K10 system.Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
Get not integrated graphics?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Well you can request that :),but it's up to the few who have access to the systems to reply.
LoL they should be fixing it instead of fliping around.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_graham
Asus is also having issues with the BIOS.
I think the best right now is that AMD can get RD790 out soon to see the potential of K10 at its max
tsuehpsyde: The x86 validation read single channel RAM, yup. :)
Dave: That CrystalMark score is double what someone else was getting with the the same CPU. Talk about buggy:
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1...sp1mdc6.th.png
And SPI 1M is basically the same as 2xK8 Opteron 2GHz:
http://img480.imageshack.us/img480/9...2cpudd9.th.png
Whatever you do, try to monitor all core frequencies if you can (RM CLock might give more accurate real time frequencies). I personally know if PLLs and BIOS are erring the frequencies shown in CPUZ or most software can be wrong, Franck and Samuel will also tell you this as many C2Ds also showed this problem. It seems these cores on these early platforms love running at different frequencies though. :D
ASUS did the exact same rash jobs on their quad father BIOSes for quite a long while.
You might aswell look at the Clovertown 2GHz Cinebench x64 score:
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5...0eg0me3.th.jpg
Good luck :up:
no it's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
Mate stop being so close minded.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardyMan
K10 is the main arch, most that AMD can do on phenom to improove performance (IPC) is to increase the mem controler speed and that is it.