Anand: PII vs. Q9550 vs. i7 crossfire, Phenom II = smoother

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

02-02-2009, 06:14 PM
iandh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mav451

Smoother and "stuttering" are not necessarily confined to AMD vs. Intel. It's also ATi vs. nVidia. Hell, bad drivers can make my GTX260 stutter like crazy.
I can understand someone saying AMD is smoother, but I never bought into this when I had my Opt146 setup. And I most certainly don't buy it now. I've had a buttery smooth TF2/L4D experience since upgrading to Core2/P35. Stuttering is a serious allegation. I'm not sure, but I think Anandtech is trying to pull an [H] and attract viewership by spouting controversial statements.

My Core2/P35 setup was a stuttery turd compared to my 790GX/9950 setup, so to each their own right?
02-02-2009, 06:20 PM
flippin_waffles

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

You guys do realize that this sort of talk, if it takes root, is only going to hurt AMD right?

I seriously doubt you believe that, else you wouldn't be trying to ridicule the fact that AMD system's are smoother, and even AnandTech of all places agree. And if AT says AMD systems offer a smoother experience, there should be no doubt about it. It must have killed them to utter those words. :D Anywho, I hope you enjoy your new, more expensive and erratic system! ;) It was just a matter of time before people caught on to the smoothness of AMD. Sorry about your luck! heh
02-02-2009, 06:26 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

You see Gary, this is where the problem lies:
People rush to conclusions very fast, sometimes ignoring the facts and common logic, and due to the blindfolded fanboyism can't even read the charts properly and start bashing the "intel/nvidia/via/cyrix biased site"... it's not a FFT calculation guys, it's a damn chart.

It doesn't take more than a few seconds to realize that the charts are sorted by the average FPS value people.
5 seconds...

Yeap, exactly that.

Not everybody, but the thread starter and some members did.
Well...

So... which side is the reviewer on in your opinion ?
First they do say that between the Phenom II and the Core 2 Quad the Phenom performed better and the gameplay was smoother.
Then they also say that the Core i7 performed better than the Phenom II, and that they were butter-smooth both except in C.O.H. where the Intel had some stuttering.

People tend to reject reality and lay off to a simple ( and lame ) excuse... call the author a fanboy and it's a done deal.

Nice.
You ( the readers ) doubt most if not all the reviewers on the web & the magazines.
You also doubt various consumers ( buyers, simple users, not reviewers or people affiliated with a company in any way ) and members of this and other forums.
So... who do you trust ? Let me answer this question for you ( generally speaking, not specifically for you ):
the one that comes to a conclusion that you like.

In this case the world would be better off without any hardware reviews websites & user reviews on the net.
Just stop posting reviews on the net. And have fun.

News flash!
Thread title = PII vs. Q9550 vs i7, Phenom II = smoother

Now everyone with common sense with some education ( third class ? :p: ) can figure out what the thread title means.

It's saying

"Phenom II against the Q9550 and the i7, the Phenom II is smoother".

^

Do you ?

So... in your own gaming experience, going from 50fps to 25fps is smoother than going from 50fps to 32fps ? [ just an example ].

Are you trying to convince yourself ?
Because AnandTech is saying:

QFTFT

I also find it funny that after all the yrs of AMD supporters saying AT is intel biased, & now suddenly he's their best buddy :rolleyes:
02-02-2009, 06:30 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss

QFTFT

I also find it funny that after all the yrs of AMD supporters saying AT is intel biased, & now suddenly he's their best buddy :rolleyes:

i have always heard people say anandtech to be intel biased but i have been happy with all their reviews. i think out of all the phenom II reviews theirs was the best. i don't know when or who started the intel biased thing. i think the reason why theres such an uproar is because the people think that even an intel biased site is saying amd is smoother now.
02-02-2009, 06:32 PM
Mav451

Quote:

Originally Posted by iandh

My Core2/P35 setup was a stuttery turd compared to my 790GX/9950 setup, so to each their own right?

Ok, since I used to be a total AMD fanboy (2001-2007), I'm gonna cut you some slack. But wtf. To each their own? Do you have any idea how many Core2/P35 users are out there and NOT ONCE has this issue come up? You want to know the only two times I've experienced stuttering?

1. Via KT133 board (AMD Tbird)
Promise ATA100 controller was a POS. Stuttering only went away when I went back to the native Via IDE controller.

2. A7N8X rev1.06 (pre 400FSB models);
Board did not like my Buffalo CH-5 in DIMM2 and 4. Stuttering blatantly obvious in CS:S.

The one time I didn't see stuttering was in my A64 system (surprise? IMC.)

On AT bias, for the last time, they changed their tune RIGHT before the release of Core2. Anyone reading the articles around that time would seen the subtle changing of teams happening right before their eyes. But yeah - before that, they were basically AMD apologists. They weren't blatantly fan boy the way Tom's was back in the day, but they weren't completely indifferent either.
02-02-2009, 06:33 PM
Titan7171

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

So... which side is the reviewer on in your opinion ?
First they do say that between the Phenom II and the Core 2 Quad the Phenom performed better and the gameplay was smoother.
Then they also say that the Core i7 performed better than the Phenom II, and that they were butter-smooth both except in C.O.H. where the Intel had some stuttering.

People tend to reject reality and lay off to a simple ( and lame ) excuse... call the author a fanboy and it's a done deal.

Nice.
You ( the readers ) doubt most if not all the reviewers on the web & the magazines.
You also doubt various consumers ( buyers, simple users, not reviewers or people affiliated with a company in any way ) and members of this and other forums.
So... who do you trust ? Let me answer this question for you ( generally speaking, not specifically for you ):
the one that comes to a conclusion that you like.

In this case the world would be better off without any hardware reviews websites & user reviews on the net.
Just stop posting reviews on the net. And have fun.

I dont think the reviewer is on any side. I think they gave an honest and eye opening opinion. That AMD and Phenom 2 can now closely compete with Intel not always winning and not always losing but providing a decent amount of performance this time around in a gaming environment.

For people with AM2+ mobos this is great news a nice performance boost without the huge expense of upgrading mobo and memory.

On the other hand If you already have one of many of Intels comparable products or a step higher, the I7 then theres no reason to look at Phenom 2.

But there has to be a reason why it was made a point throughout the article that the Phenom was very smooth. They liked the way the cpu did its job if they didnt Im sure they would have said so.

At the end of the day, I have mine it runs great and thats all I really care about.:)
02-02-2009, 06:38 PM
G0ldBr1ck

I would like to see the opinions of people here that actualy have a Intel quad and a AMD quad rather then from people who only have one or the other. what you say means nothing at all if you dont actualy have both, otherwise your just speaking out your ass.

Now on that note, the couple of people that I know off hand that are using both have claimed the smoother operation of AMD. Myself I have 2 Intel dual core systems but no quad to compare to my AMD Quads but with that the AMD system is smoother. Yesterday I ordered a I7 920 and a Gigabyte X58 board so I will soon find out for myself quad vs quad.
02-02-2009, 06:44 PM
daellum67

until you actually sit someone down on a phenom system, they will tell you that you are crazy if you try to tell them it's smoother. there is evidence that supports core 2 and i7's performance, but nothing that can be quantified as far as smoothness is concerned. i thought the K10 people were crazy with that claim.

when i bought one, and started to use the system for an extended period, i felt the same way - my intel system does things that involve a bar going across the screen faster, but the amd feels quicker in windows and in smoother in games.

additionally, when i compare the voltages that I have to run through my intel system (stable at 500 fsb) with my AMD voltages, i feel much more comfortable running my AMD system 24/7 than I do the intel, even though the intel core voltages are significantly lower.

im not going to argue with anyone, what i've said is just my opinion.
02-02-2009, 06:45 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by flippin_waffles

I seriously doubt you believe that, else you wouldn't be trying to ridicule the fact that AMD system's are smoother, and even AnandTech of all places agree. And if AT says AMD systems offer a smoother experience, there should be no doubt about it. It must have killed them to utter those words. :D Anywho, I hope you enjoy your new, more expensive and erratic system! ;) It was just a matter of time before people caught on to the smoothness of AMD. Sorry about your luck! heh

Quote:

When it came to actual game play experiences, we thought the Phenom II 940 was clearly the better choice in Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts and Crysis Warhead due to minimum frame rate advantages and fluidity of game play.

so in 2 games: PII > Q9550
then...

Quote:

In the five other titles, we could not tell any real differences in the quality of game play between the Phenom II 940 and Core 2 Quad Q9550.

so thats 5 games =

soooo.. the all this commotion over the PII *definitely* being smoother in 2 games

flippin_waffles: sorry ur out of luck, looks as tho ur game library is restricted to 2 games

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

i have always heard people say anandtech to be intel biased but i have been happy with all their reviews. i think out of all the phenom II reviews theirs was the best. i don't know when or who started the intel biased thing. i think the reason why theres such an uproar is because the people think that even an intel biased site is saying amd is smoother now.

well personall I dont know if they are biased or not - but I find A-Ok to come to the conclusion they did :up:
02-02-2009, 06:45 PM
Sparky

I had an AMD quad (phenom 9600BE) and I have an intel quad now (Q6600) but the AMD chip was defective, unstable at stock speeds, and most certainly slower than my q6600 so there isn't anywhere close to a valid comparison there :p:
02-02-2009, 06:52 PM
Brother Esau

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

No problem glad it wasnt one like Shintai's......"the future is not in L3 cache".......or that "another year of Nvidia dominance":p:

I got his dominance right here.........:hump::hrhr:
02-02-2009, 07:16 PM
iandh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mav451

But wtf. To each their own? Do you have any idea how many Core2/P35 users are out there and NOT ONCE has this issue come up?

I've seen it mentioned several times, especially in smoothness threads. ;)

I must not be included in the group of users that haven't had trouble since every intel CPU I used with my Gigabyte P35 DS3L and Lanparty P35 DK had gaming issues, and that is with several different ram sets, hard drives, and GPU's.

e: Just as a side note I had issues with my 939 nf4 board but not with my AM2 550 board... fwiw of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss

QFTFT

I also find it funny that after all the yrs of AMD supporters saying AT is intel biased, & now suddenly he's their best buddy :rolleyes:

Ummm, exactly when did I profess my love for Anand?

The fact that they seem intel biased makes this article that much more valuable for proving our point about smoothness...

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss

soooo.. the all this commotion over the PII *definitely* being smoother in 2 games

Of course there is commotion... before this smoothness didn't even exist. :rolleyes:

Now all of a sudden it does exist but isn't important because it isn't in all games (which almost none of us ever claimed in the first place)

Wow, what a turnaround.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparkyJJO

I had an AMD quad (phenom 9600BE) and I have an intel quad now (Q6600) but the AMD chip was defective, unstable at stock speeds, and most certainly slower than my q6600 so there isn't anywhere close to a valid comparison there :p:

Early Phenoms were turds. My 9950 125W however is a great match to my Q6600 in gaming.
02-02-2009, 07:22 PM
Brother Esau

1 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

Hey you should edit that sig so it shows curly throwing a shoe at Bush:rofl:......holy :banana::banana::banana::banana: it is Bush...........:ROTF:

How about this
02-02-2009, 07:25 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by iandh

Ummm, exactly when did I profess my love for Anand?

did I direct that comment at u? no :poke:

Quote:

Originally Posted by iandh

The fact that they seem intel biased makes this article that much more valuable for proving our point about smoothness...

Of course there is commotion... before this smoothness didn't even exist. :rolleyes:

I'm all for smoothness - but atm it looks like its 2 games :stick:
02-02-2009, 07:29 PM
iandh

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss

did I direct that comment at u? no :poke:

I'm all for smoothness - but atm it looks like its 2 games :stick:

Ok, I can wind the argument down a bit then I suppose.

I must say though, Crysis was one of the games in which I most noticed the difference between my AMD and Intel rigs which is interesting because:

1) That agrees with Anand's results

2) Crysis supposedly "plays best on intel Core2".... My Arse!!! :rofl:

Of all the games for intel to have no excuse for getting beaten by AMD that is A#1.
02-02-2009, 07:33 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by iandh

Ok, I can wind the argument down a bit then I suppose.

I must say though, Crysis was one of the games in which I most noticed the difference between my AMD and Intel rigs which is interesting because:

1) That agrees with Anand's results

2) Crysis supposedly "plays best on intel Core2".... My Arse!!! :rofl:

Of all the games for intel to have no excuse for getting beaten by AMD that is A#1.

now I want to play Crysis on a PII, a C2Q & a Ci7 :D :up:
02-02-2009, 07:37 PM
Brother Esau

whats up with the weird Monical get up?

I am Australian too and I would expect that from some punk kid in this country not a fellow Aussie.........its just weird man!

Kinda make you look like you begging for a Left:slap:
02-02-2009, 07:39 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother Esau

whats up with the weird Monical get up?

I am Australian too and I would expect that from some punk kid in this country not a fellow Aussie.........its just weird man!

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=192842
02-02-2009, 07:42 PM
Brother Esau

1 Attachment(s)

So what are you saying that's Marijuana in the Background and you want to keep your identity secret?:D:sofa:
02-02-2009, 07:47 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother Esau

So what are you saying that's Marijuana in the Background and you want to keep your identity secret?:D:sofa:

:rofl::rofl::rofl: :p: :rofl:

the neighborhood college kids call me 1-Eyed McWeedy! :p: :ROTF:
02-02-2009, 07:51 PM
shoota

I think what some of the intel fanboys are forgetting is that PII is a huge step in the right direction for amd. Users that already have an amd platform or want to upgrade are finally given a cheaper alternative. I like choices :)
02-02-2009, 07:52 PM
Zucker2k

2 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by iandh

Ok, I can wind the argument down a bit then I suppose.

I must say though, Crysis was one of the games in which I most noticed the difference between my AMD and Intel rigs which is interesting because:

1) That agrees with Anand's results

2) Crysis supposedly "plays best on intel Core2".... My Arse!!! :rofl:

Of all the games for intel to have no excuse for getting beaten by AMD that is A#1.

Ok let's see the veracity of your statement:

By the way this is platform cost for the test systems:

Ci7 = $1420
C2Q = $1155
PHII = $1149

Anand:

Quote:

Our Phenom II and Intel Core 2 Quad platforms are within $6 of each other. We fully realize the pricing of the Phenom II X4 940 competes with the Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400, not Q9550, but we are looking at platform costs here. Of course, we could debate the various component choices for several pages and yes, the platform costs could shrink on either side. We did not use rebates in our pricing and all costs were gathered from Newegg on 1/29/09. We think our selections offer the best blend of price, performance, compatibility, and quality right now.

1680x1050 - 2x AA

Quote:

At 1680x1050, all three platforms are clustered together in single card and CrossFire configurations. We also see why a single GPU card can be a better value than a dual GPU solution at this resolution in certain games. It is not until we overclock that we notice some separation between the platforms with the i7 taking a decent lead but its minimum frame rates do not improve compared to a single card setup. However, our Phenom II setup offers the best minimum frame rates when overclocked and actually offers a slight improvement over its single card scores.

Adding a second card for CrossFire operation improves average frame rates by 2% and minimum frame rates decrease 12% for the Phenom II. The Intel Q9550 has a decrease of 1% in average frame rates and 19% in minimum frame rates. The Core i7 average frame rates improve by 8% and minimum rates decrease by 20%. Overclocking our processors resulted in a 22%~36% improvement in average frame rates with the Core i7 benefiting the greatest.

1920x1200 - 2x AA

Quote:

Our 1920x1200 test follows a similar pattern with all three solutions equal in single card testing and CrossFire showing a slight advantage to the i7. The Phenom II is slightly ahead of the Q9550 when overclocked although it is at a 7% clock speed disadvantage. We have noticed the CryEngine 2 will respond to improved memory bandwidth and latencies as we clock up the processors. The i7 holds a 14% advantage in average frame rates while the Phenom II once again impresses us with the best minimum frame rates when overclocked. However, not having a 20fps minimum frame rate is a disappointment with our multi-GPU setups. The NVIDIA 260/285 solutions scale better in SLI than the ATI HD 4870 products. We hope that ATI can improve their drivers for this game.

Adding a second card for CrossFire operation improves average frame rates by 20% but minimum frame rates do not change for the Phenom II. The Intel Q9550 has an improvement of 17% in average frame rates and a decrease of 6% in minimum frame rates. The Core i7 average frame rates improve by 27% and minimum rates increase 18%. Overclocking our processors resulted in a 14%~22% improvement in average frame rates with the Core i7 benefiting the most.

After playing through the several levels on each platform, we thought the Phenom II 940 offered a better overall gaming experience in this title than the Intel Q9550 based on smoother game play. It is difficult to quantify without a video capture, but player movement and weapon control just seemed to be more precise. Of course, if you have the funds, we would recommend the i7 platform for best possible performance.

So is this what you mean by AMD beating Intel? Lol, how could interpretation be so lopsided? I mean, it's not difficult to relate the the data to the reviewer's remarks. Oh well.
02-02-2009, 07:55 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Ok let's see the veracity of your statement:

By the way this is platform cost for the test systems:

Ci7 = $1420
C2Q = $1155
PHII = $1149

u lost the context of his post genius - he meant beaten RE: smoothness :poke: :stick:
02-02-2009, 07:56 PM
iandh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Ok let's see the veracity of your statement:

By the way this is platform cost for the test systems:

Ci7 = $1420
C2Q = $1155
PHII = $1149

Yep, looks right to me... AMD has highest min fps in both graphs, and smoother gameplay was confirmed by both myself and Anand, so I would call that a win for AMD. :)

Of course if you feel the need to continuously fall back on the charts you cherish so much then by all means do so...
02-02-2009, 08:01 PM
tiro_uspsss

Quote:

Originally Posted by iandh

Yep, looks right to me... AMD has highest min fps in both graphs, and smoother gameplay was confirmed by both myself and Anand, so I would call that a win for AMD. :)

Of course if you feel the need to continuously fall back on the charts you cherish so much then by all means do so...

that plus the *only* number that the C2Q gets higher is the OC'd CF config @ max fps on the lower settings

all other numbers/configs PII wins

well done Zucker2k :clap: care to reload & shoot ur other foot now? :p:

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page