K10 Scores starting to surface

Printable View

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

08-30-2007, 06:07 AM
Dainas

Its too soon to muse over the failures of K10s, Capitan Jumduconclusions.... Still it would not be the first architecture to have a rough start to blossom for whatever reason down the road.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeardyMan

The clocks like hell doesn't matter in the OEM or other vendro bussiness..

When K10 and it wil be most likely, beats c2d/quad, at stock then amd has succeeded in their goal.

I concur, people do love the Athlon 6000+ for good reason today. Allot of people don't give two licks about what something can do overclocked and buy it for the stock performance. Case in point the X1950pro 512mb AGP I got my sister months ago, so she could has no hassle great performance(well for $170) in her fav game Oblivion. Like it so much I got another one for old system.
08-30-2007, 06:12 AM
gallag

It still clocks like hell though at stock, If peny gets to 3.3ghz at launch and AMD is 2.0-2.4ghz then it will just be a slaughter
08-30-2007, 06:20 AM
alayashu

do you know how K10 will perform to tell this?
reputed guys that tried the CPU told it will be a great performer, AMD officials said that too.
i preffer to trust them instead of suspicious posts on various sites.
08-30-2007, 06:33 AM
kl0012

Quote:

Originally Posted by alayashu

reputed guys that tried the CPU told it will be a great performer, AMD officials said that too.
i preffer to trust them instead of suspicious posts on various sites.

Actualy we doesn't seen any benchmark from those "reputed guys". Still I believe them :). (For example I believe to SUN about 15% IPC improvement of K10 over K8).
08-30-2007, 06:38 AM
zabomb4163

Coolar is reliable...
08-30-2007, 06:39 AM
Enoc

zaarath since you are in that thread over a coolalers...can post that that he can download cpuz 1.41..since it detects the X4 correctly..and then we can see the revision that he has...

http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/CPUZ...ctly/5208.html
08-30-2007, 06:40 AM
Think

Price estimate?
08-30-2007, 06:42 AM
zaarath

delete
08-30-2007, 06:42 AM
zaarath

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoc

zaarath since you are in that thread over a coolalers...can post that that he can download cpuz 1.41..since it detects the X4 correctly..and then we can see the revision that he has...

http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/CPUZ...ctly/5208.html

Enoc, the cpu-Z in the 1m-spi test screenshot is already 1.41, which shows info consistent with vr-zone. Check it again.
08-30-2007, 06:50 AM
Think

Quote:

Originally Posted by Think

Price estimate?

Well, anyone??
08-30-2007, 06:53 AM
Enoc

Quote:

Originally Posted by zaarath

Enoc, the cpu-Z in the 1m-spi test screenshot is already 1.41, which shows info consistent with vr-zone. Check it again.

did not see that one...my bad...wonder why does not show the revision?
08-30-2007, 07:06 AM
Lightman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoc

did not see that one...my bad...wonder why does not show the revision?

Either it is A1 revision and CPU-Z can't recognize it or it is B1/C1 and same apply!

Pics from VR-Zone are showing Stepping 0, these pics are showing Stepping 1 so definitely both CPUs are different.
I'm afraid guy on Coolalers forum has final B1 rev, but that only time will tell...
08-30-2007, 07:25 AM
informal

The CPUs @ coolaler's forum are not DVT...
They are EVT B0's just like VR-zones...

Quote:

This Agena processor is clocked at 1.8GHz and is B-0 revision which is an EVT sample for SVID testing only

All the intel fans jumped to early.
08-30-2007, 07:27 AM
FghtinIrshNvrDi

here's to hoping it's broken...

Ryan
08-30-2007, 07:27 AM
Shadowmage

Hopefully coolaler is reading this thread. If not, zaarath:

If I can get TWO (yes just two) data points at different clock speeds with constant FSB, I can do an Amdahl's Law curve fit and predict performance at 3GHz (or any clock speed) within 1-2%, depending on the quality of the two points (ie variation between runs).

Please ask coolaler for 1.8GHz and 2.0GHz, same FSB and mem, for a benchmark (eg Cinebench 10R).

Also, core scaling obeys Amdahl's Law as well, so this may be interesting too for 4core and 8 core data points.
08-30-2007, 07:41 AM
Shadowmage

Also, I'm wondering the reasons why K10 loses, when it meets or exceeds C2D except in a few areas (cache size, cache latency, issue/retire width, slightly stronger branch predictor).

How sensitive are these benchmarks to cache size? Does anyone have C2D 2M vs 4M comparisons?

EDIT:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...o-e6420_5.html

Looks like Cinebench 10R is NOT sensitive to cache size or memory bandwidth.
08-30-2007, 07:41 AM
FlawleZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by mAJORD

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

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.

Wouldn't it be optimal to have this comparison in 1T? Nothing else just to rule out any other variables...
08-30-2007, 07:44 AM
terrace215

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

The CPUs @ coolaler's forum are not DVT...
They are EVT B0's just like VR-zones...

B0's show up as "Model 2, Stepping 0"

These results are "Model 2, Stepping 1", i.e., they are B1 results.
08-30-2007, 07:51 AM
Donnie27

Wow, known Spinner vs. Coolater + Members and the Spinner trusted more, just frackin' wild:D Coolater and folks posting there proved they know their stuff. Subsequent C2D tests and owners backed up just what they said with early samples.

I disagree with at least 3 posters here. No matter if Barkie sucked, there is a hardcore 12 to 13% (across all markets) that would buy AMD no matter what it did performance wise. No threat of death to the Core of AMD's company either BTW. If they didn't die as bad as K6 sucked (processor and platform) they'd not die now. They didn't die when the PR-150 was slower than a Pentium 133 and so on.

IF not this round and that's still not truly NOT certain yet, AMD will have another K7 sooner or later. The other poster is right, even Intel Fans wants AMD to ship something that keeps Intel working to get better and keeps prices down. Can't have either if AMD is stinking up the place.

Just as the excellent A64-X2 didn't stop folks from buying P4, C2D didn't stop folks from buying X2, it will make no to little difference how Barkie and PhenomX4 perform, they'll still get loved. I'd still bet there'll be apps k10 will run faster and others it will run slower. SSE4 will still offer Intel a big time advantage.
08-30-2007, 07:52 AM
StealthyFish

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slay0r

You on the other hand were graced with foresight on birth ?

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" .

AMD execs had gloated about these benchmarks and if these benchmarks are true and really benched on a K10, AMD looks to have failed the enthusiastic outlook people held for them. But I'm going to wait for the retail chips before I solidify a conclusion about K10.
08-30-2007, 08:01 AM
[XC] hipno650

Quote:

Originally Posted by zaarath

SPI 1M
http://img.coolaler.com.tw/images/zm...mlwemyzmzk.jpg

i would hope thats not true. cuz form my personal experience a 2.3ghz core 2 is 20sec faster and my P4 will do 30sec
08-30-2007, 08:01 AM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrace215

B0's show up as "Model 2, Stepping 0"

These results are "Model 2, Stepping 1", i.e., they are B1 results.

So,all pre-B2 were buggy.
Here you go:
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/BA-S...Sept/5196.html

Quote:

We heard that AMD partners has gotten B1-step Barcelona for compatibility testing with better and newer AGESA code compared to the B0-step Barcelona. There is also B2-step Barcelona which is bug free and then BA-step Barcelona for mass production
08-30-2007, 08:04 AM
BeardyMan

Superpi is L2 cache loving...
08-30-2007, 08:05 AM
terrace215

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

So,all pre-B2 were buggy.
Here you go:
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/BA-S...Sept/5196.html

AMD is LAUNCHING the K10 on the B1 stepping, per everyone else. Then B2 in Q4. At any rate, it is unlikely that B1 has any huge performance bugs. These results fit precisely with what AMD themselves claimed.... up to 10-15% better IPC than the K8. About in the ballpark of Conroe/Kentsfield per clock. Better on some bandwidth-heavy server stuff & HPC, worse on desktop apps.
08-30-2007, 08:06 AM
Enoc

there are details that are still missing here...what motherboard(chipset), what ddr2 ecc single or dual channel? etc...
a lot of people giving opinions but what's the platform that this was tested...

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