Printable View
First of all they look near GPU limited. See the very small scaling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardyMan
Secondly, the Q6600 uses high latency DDR3. DDR3 is first useful for Intel with high OCs or Nehalem. You could have used DDR2-533/667 with about same effect.
Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 (1GB x 2) Phenom
Corsair XMS3 DDR3-1066 7-7-7-20 (1GB x 2) Core 2
What happened to the Mighty Power Envelope that AMD has been pushing with K10 development:shrug:
Wow, that's some doctoring.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
Actually,i was right saying K10 is buggy :).From the recent (now official) news we know it is the L3/NB that has speed path problems-hence the delay for >2.3Ghz versions.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Also,AMD originally planed to run IMC and cores at the same clocks,but we know now they had to settle down with rather large clock deficit wrt NB clocks.
And,actually it's quite funny to see you intel fanboys/marketeers here gloating over 2 low clocked Phenoms and their performance :).Quite a few Prescott-like/clueless comments made me laugh hard :D.
Savantu,you are quite a knowledgeable guy,such a shame you are so heavily intel biased that it overshadows that quality of yours :p:
Holy shiite theres alot of negativity surrounding this new cpu! Slower than intel lol whats new? Phenom will still sell and probably sell well.
Phenom is still a nice drop in replacement for any dual core am2 machines out there that will benifit from more smp power without a complete rebuild and it only stands to get better bottom line. I commend AMD for moving towards scalability and power considerations. Phenom will get faster, the new platform ROCKS and the new ATI products are awesome!! I think ALL of you naysayers are jumping the gun here.
I think AMD could have some nice things in store for me personally since i dont care about getting a quad and all! Im very excited (and in no rush) to upgrade to this new 700 series chipset, 3800 graphics and a next gen am2 part. Applly water cooling some serouis volts and voila compared to my current via based 939 setup it'l prolly knock me socks off! Mmmm SPIDER!!!! I may be in a minority but i simply cannot wait to try out that new overdrive software!
Since i've never owned a c2d system b/c there so dam expensive i wont know what im missing !!!!
However much slower ill be then a pricier Intel system, i'll still be folding, browsing and kicking your azz in some game some where just fine! Tis a great time to be a geek!!! Even an AMD one.
:)
WTF! When I saw blogs.zdnet in the link I was thinking "Oh, George Ou is gonna have a field day with this" but its not even him!!! :eek: :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Who the hell is Adrian Kingsley-Hughes, get the n00b out and get George back, LOL! :up:
Really?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
http://techreport.com/articles.x/13628
Quote:
Despite being the first new enthusiast chipset for AM2 processors in more than a year and a half, the 790FX relies on a dated SB600 south bridge chip whose limited connectivity options hardly befit a cutting-edge enthusiast platform. The SB600's comparatively poor PCI and USB performance only make matters worse. With a new SB700 south bridge due to arrive early next year on a second wave of 790FX boards, it's hard to get excited about current implementations.
The first crop of 790FX boards certainly has its share of problems, too. Gigabyte's GA-MA790FX-DQ6 suffers from a number of BIOS-related issues that really need to be fixed before we would even consider recommending the board. And it's not like this is a pre-release product whose kinks are still being worked out; the DQ6 was selling online before the 790FX officially launched. The DQ6 also suffers from a poor graphics slot layout and alarmingly high power consumption given the 790FX's 10W TDP. It's not cheap, either. With street prices currently hovering around $270, the DQ6 costs nearly as much as the fastest Phenom you can buy.
Our problems with 790FX motherboards haven't been limited to Gigabyte, either. We haven't yet had the opportunity to test MSI's riff on the Spider platform, but we've found Asus' M3A32-MVP Deluxe to have numerous BIOS-related issues and questionable stability. The fact that the top two mobo makers can't get their initial 790FX offerings dialed for the chipset's launch doesn't give us a lot of faith in the platform.
I'm not even convinced there will be much demand for a high-end Phenom chipset. The processor's performance isn't compelling enough to inspire current Core 2 users to jump ship, and those running Socket AM2 processors will probably be more inclined to drop a Phenom into their existing motherboards rather than going out and buying new ones.
In the end, the 790FX is a bandwidth-rich new north bridge chip held back by a dated south bridge and flaky motherboard implementations. AMD will have to do better if it expects the Spider platform to take off with enthusiasts. In its current state, we simply can't recommend the 790FX.
LOL @ Gigabyte and Asus. Wait for the real manufacturers to release ther boards. DFI & Biostar ;)
Hehe,i think Georgie boy is currently busy writing his new essay on Phenom :p: .Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon84
We should be expecting it shortly,with all the "powerpoint slide analysis" from the official presentation :p: .
Stay tuned :D
ZOMG the first revision with a DATED southbridge sucks kind of.. Still better then what i got by a mile even if i dont wait for the other then first revision boards... Bleh.. Techreport are very biased to IMO.
Man, what are you smokin'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
Intel stuff to expensive? But you want a new 700 series motherboard, 3800 GPU and a Phenom (AM2+) processor? Not to mention water cooling? AND your interested in Spider? Wow.
Intel parts are a bargain for how long their performance has held up. If you were truly interested in and concerned about price, you should have invested in a C2D system at launch so you didn't have to worry about AM2 and Phenom.
Of yes , you've seen K10s true problems months ago.Too bad you failed to pass them to us...IMO , it's not the IMC , nor the NB.The process is to blame along with the slow L3.Probably other trade offs are involved , we'll see those when they test latencies/through output for various instructions.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Haven't they invented a pill for the Fanboy Denial Syndrome yet ?
As for your last comment , it equally applies to you.Leave apart the fanboyism and look at the real situation.
If intel guys are so content with there systems why to the feel so compelled to have 1000's of post in AMD forums? Bored?
I DIDNT buy c2d b/c it was pricey but also because nothing i've been doing with my box has been to slow. I need more ram for cad now and a new vid card for some of the newer games now so im compelled to upgrade. SPIDER will suit just fine and when the dust settles prolly be cheaper yet.
Ultimately it will be a plenty FAST setup for my needs. Im sorry that you dont agree with me not giving a ratz azz about 10% +/- I wan't FUTURE proof a scalability! With AMD i dont have to worriy about buying a new motherboard whenever a new CPU comes out lol. I've had 3 cpu's in my current board over the course of 2 years. Thats along time to have the same board/platform!
Wow ... these "benchmarks" are truly awful for AMD ... what happen to all the claims about 10 - 20 % higher IPC, 40% higher FP performance, dancing in the aisles, etc. This actually looks worse then the 2900XT launch. I had hoped for at least parity in IPC but we have 10-15% less IPC and can't even ramp beyond 2.3 right now. For the foreseeable future I will have to (continue to) recommend Intel to anyone who want to build or upgrade. As soon as the slower Intel 45nm quad parts (2008 Q1?) are out the slaughter will become a total massacre. This may serious injure AMD to point of never being competitive again. Perhaps not even in the budget range as that would just bleed them dry until they are dead. I feel like AMD has not being honest with the public for the past year and it doesn't feel good. I had uneasy feeling ever since they were so tight lipped about the K10 performance when Intel openly invited people to check out their systems. Too bad, continued competition would have been good for the consumers. Perhaps AMD can scratch out a living making budget graphics card and specialized embedded processors. Wait, Intel can't let them die; they'll really be accused of being a monopoly. Maybe they'll be like Bill Gate when he gave Apple a lifeline. Or they'll just enjoy cutting the heart out of AMD and fend off the feds with all the profits they'll make (buy lawyers.) AMD had their chance and blew it. What have they been doing for the last 3 years? Firing Hector will be like shooting the pilot of the plane after it has already crashed and killed everyone onboard.
I think you need to wake up from your AMD pipe dream. I wish for the same things as you but lets be realistic here. AMD has no place in the enthusiast market ATM. They lose in all major categories: price/performance, performance, power/performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
I don't care about this "SPIDER" technology either. Some neat features perhaps but mostly marketing IMHO. They can call it Uber Duper Super Snake Slaying @$$ Kicker and I still wouldn't buy it.
So basically you're willing to spend more money on an AMD platform vs an Intel platform even though it will have maybe less performance? (10% according to you). Do you know what that equals? Truest fanboy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
Also, I have 0 posts in the AMD section.
Oh yeah, I've had my board/CPU for about a year and half. You've gone through three CPU's in that time (+6 months) and you're saying Intel is too pricey? And I wonder who's performs better.. (your 3 vs my 1).
Come back down to earth man.
QFT.:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
To get that 10% perfomance gain intel claims you need latest mobo, ram and software, way too expensive.
Amd :down:
That's not true... I bought a MB 6 months ago that will accept the 1333 Mhz proc... drop in. In fact I have two boards that will take it... both Asus, purchased shortly after C2D launched. And compared to the Phenom I can expect a heck of alot more than 10%Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
I also bought an AM2 board with a 60 dollar throw away 3600+, but heck I can overclock that 3600+ to out perform the Phenom in most DT, so that drop in will not occur.
And the software that is getting the 4-10% (we have ahd this discussion) has been on the market now for almost a year in some cases (CS3 launched several months ago, and was purchased then when it launched).... The ones I am interested in of course I already own.
You are blowin' a lot of smoke in the forums.
I didn't know Q6600 @ 3.6GHz or Yorkfield @ 4GHz+ was only 10% faster than a buggy Phenom @ 2.6 - 3.0GHz max. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
:rofl: :ROTF: mine is 16 months old and compat with Q6600 and Penryn. No, there isn't a performance hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by justapost
QFT.
To get that 10% perfomance gain intel claims you need latest mobo, ram and software, way too expensive.
QFT!Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon84
No, the reason AMD couldn't put more transistors (more cache) is because the barcelona is already consuming too much power @ 2.3 GHz (leakage) as it is. Their process technology has more leakage than Intel's at 65 nm. YOU are wrong about the cache, and you have not backed up your statement at all. Intel has put lots of cache on core 2 based cpu's because they CAN while remaining within their target TDP, and AMD CAN NOT. IMC does NOT alleviate the need for good/large caches to any significant degree. IMC helps in FAR LESS cases than a large and fast cache. The only good thing about K8/K10 is that the cores can communicate with each other at full speed, although it seems that isn't quite true either. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
spider isnt a technology,its a platform :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Yukon Trooper
it doesnt have any features,its a cpu + mobo + gpu
Yea, especially since AM2 is only about 2 months older than 965 LOL! I got a local bud saying the thing but bought about 3 AMD based since systems since I bought Conroe. He went from 939-->AM2--->AM2+ and he'll get less performance after spending a lot of money. He's not bitter says he can't wait for shipping Phenom, slower or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by John600rr
No processors have been more expensive than X2 and FX across the board prior to Conroe changing that trend=P I do fear that Supply and Demand will dictate that Intel or the VAR's will have to raise prices. I'd hoped AMD would make a better showing:(
I wonder why AMD could find a way to get away with axing all thier 1megx2 processors early on?? Several benchmarking runs have shown that the IMC allows smaller caches... makes sense as the IMC addresses the very short fall that cache is intended to buffer...Quote:
Originally Posted by JVguest
Shantai is not wrong, you are not quite wrong either... but AMD's IMC and cache size were design decisions to balance out larger cache against more cost effective smaller die (as they cannot keep up in terms of shrinks and nodes with Intel). It worked for a while.