So how does mid-range become "slowest"? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by accord99
Printable View
So how does mid-range become "slowest"? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by accord99
he said slowest quad. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyJJO
not slowest overall.
No no. Look at the quote again:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
And accord99 then says:Quote:
it's very easy to match the performance of a mid range quad core Intel machine with an AM2+ one.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by accord99
Oh I see. Since it was true in Europe then it is an undeniable truth even if it wasn't true everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Priceless.
Some have speculated that given the phenom underlining architecture is the same in Phenom II that you would see high current leakage as you overclocked to 4.0. On the XS AMD forum, RiverRicer found HERE that there are significant architecture changes in AMD's 45nm chip.
The above would seem to imply that should AMD migrate to HKMG (High_K_Metal_Gates) you would see still more improvement. HKMG is forecast for AMD chip construction later in 2009.Quote:
The transistor drive current for AMD's 45-nm devices is much lower than that of the Intel HKMG transistors. But power consumption is quickly becoming a high priority for server chips. AMD's transistors exhibit very low channel leakage. Our transistor benchmarks indicates that leakage current is less than one-third of the value measured on AMD's 65-nm process. It's also significantly lower than the Intel 45-nm HKMG process. In fact the Ion/Ioff ratio for AMD's PFET is nearly 10 times better than that for the Intel PFET.
In my opinion, this technology innovation would seem to suggest that later Phenom II chips could clock well above 4.0Ghz.
For those of you technically inclined, here is an explanation of the specific design innovations:
Quote:
On the NFET side, stress memorization stretches the n-channel, which is enhanced later in the process flow by the addition of a nitride tensile stress liner. The liner itself is scaled down at 45 nm to ensure the required strain is adequately supplied to the transistor channel to enhance electron mobility and subsequently increase the drive current. The gate-stack design is modified as well, with a new sidewall spacer design for 45nm.
The PFET performance improvement is more dramatic with drive current now up to 660 µA/µm compared with 510 µA/µm on 65-nm transistors. Again, this increased output current is the result of optimized compressive strain for the p-channel device. The new design of the PFET moves the embedded silicon-germanium source/drain regions closer to the channel to maximize the transfer of stress, thereby increasing hole mobility. Although shorter gate lengths are not driving the improvements, it is a reduction in dimensions that allows increased channel stress to provide the performance scaling. AMD 45-nm PFET design reduces the space from embedded silicon-germanium to the channel edge by half.
So Stargazer, what does Phenom under performing Core 2 have to do with Phenom II? Why did you have to pull the trigger on the Intel gun? I believe the credits for yet an other ruined AMD thread goes to you. Of course Hornet331 shouldn't be forgotten either. Good work.
Haven't we discussed this matter enough?
I think that's what he does best. It's not only AMD or Intel for that matter, I'm beginning to suspect he is in it for the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eson
All Brother Esau's post and this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eson
Oh wait, they are the ones talking about Intel in an AMD thread. Now some of us answer them and what? We are called thread ruiners. Good work for another call to the whaaaambulance with no reason :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
damn you beat me. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
i was going to say the same, if Brother Esau wouldn't have commented in such a dismissive way, this thread would have been already buried in the deepest of this forum.
This thread went off the rail's at page five and Intel fans had nothing to do with it, If you read it started with a few comments about hot nehelams and Intel's only being good for spi and fanboys thinking there epenis etc etc
As per usual its the same wee hardcore click of AMDfanboys complaining and being mega sensitive about everyone not thinking AMD is the best thing since sliced bread that has ruined this thread.
Can you not all just get along? Read from page five and honestly say where you thought it started.
It takes two to make a fight. You could have just ignored him. Typical "he started it" defense. Doesn't mean you have to finish it.
So how about everyone just drop it then and get back on the original topic ;)
I must have missed Brother Esau's Core 2 vs. Phenom comment. I thought he was talking about how tired he was of Intel fanboys destroying AMD threads and that there are nothing wrong with the Phenom. And Tony mentioned the name i7. I am very sorry for being stupid, i must have overreacted.
There is no reason to be sorry :up: It's always the same. The funny thing is that the "Intel fanboys" including myself have already said several times that Phenom 2 can be a bomb, and probably will, before the crapping.
I see a lot of "Intel fanboys" also saying that if deneb pans out like it looks like it will it might be there next system. Strange that.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
It doesn't matter how many good things you say, one "bad" word and its like in left4dead when a boomer pukes on you, the hord is going to rape you. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
eidt:
btw. if thers gona be a quad core with ~65W TDP -> super cheap cruncher here i come. :D
right now, I could build a phenom cruncher for 250€ but the power consumption for 24/7 is a nogo for me right now. (Yorkfield system costs me 60€ more but saves that in less then a year) :(
Yesterday I did a report for a customer having a large database. The report took about 40 minutes to complete in debug mode. When you do this kind of work you don't sit and wait for the report to be ready, you plan it and do other work while the report is being created. On the AMD you will not notice that the computer is working but I on the Intel, the computer slows down considerably.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
Come on man, you can do better than that. I don't know any systems, or any system configurations, for that matter, known by "on the AMD" and "on the Intel." Maybe next time list some system specs and Ocs IF they apply. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
I think you miss the point, If you remember when the first gossip of phenom started and then with AMD pimping it themselves expectations were high, When phenom launched it was not a bad cpu, It was just worse that the competition. It was slower clock for clock, Max stock clocks and oc potentiol AND used more power. This made it a failure in many of the enthusiasts eyes just like the pentium dual cores were compared to the x2 (i.e x2 3800 beating a extreme edition with hyper threading pentium lol)Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
So don't get upset when someone calls the first phenom a failure, Sure it is a better option in some cases and with later revisions and new chipsets etc it made its self a valid option in more and more scenarios but at the end of the day extreme systems is 99% guys with a hardware hobby and to them the phenom was a flop. So when Zytek_Fan says that phenom was a failure he is not talking about severs vmware etc, He is just giving a opinion on what phenom was to him.
Deneb will be what phenom1 was meant to be anyway and we can all just forget about phenom1 like we did the p4d.
Very well said:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Absol-Frakkin"-lutely! QFT!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Tell me, when are you an Intel or an AMD 'fanboy'? Only a very few can be considered to be a 'fanboy', most are not. I think pretty much everyone is a 'fanboy' of their wallet or a performance 'fanboy', for the latter you will most likely have to choose Intel and for the former it depends a bit on what you expect of you system.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Actually I'm surprised that it took 5 pages to happen. People get too emotionally invested in their hardware and it becomes impossible to discuss anything rationally.
I would say you're a fanboy when you are so obsessed with a company that you find yourself purposely posting in threads about the team-other-than-the-one-you-like and flamebait. We've been seeing a lot of this on the AMD side. When I cruise the Intel stuff I don't see much of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmore
But no matter which side they like, people like that are fanboys.
Hahaha, clueless:clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
If you would have read several arguments correctly according this issue, you would see benchmark results were often not even being crapped with but something else. But since you couldnt care to read those arguments back then, Ive no single reason to post them right now:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Anyway, cut it. Either do care or do not care, but dont talk a bit here and be ignorant a bit there.
Oh wait, so SuperPI actually does care?Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Ah, now I get it. Some numbers are apparently 'the' justification not to get a K10? Besides that, there's still a huge difference between underperforming and performing less really. Ive ran my 9850BE stock for several months, and Ive yet to discover any performance issues. Of course higher clocks are very welcome, but dont act like it's crap because the numbers how it performs less:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
No, Tony has to be independed, so he actually cant just go spread out lies really. Also the chance he's right is a lot higher than the average poster in this thread:shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
SuperPI is only... relevant when you compare eventual steppings or what so ever. Then still it's questionable. When AMD ran faster it wasn't of any performance for me really. Also Ive yet to see any proof of the group of people you're aiming at:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Either way, I'm hoping AMD has it right and they are NOT just blowing smoke. IMHO, AMD doesn't have to *win, they just need to play a great game. Sorry guys, I don't see folks posting that Phenom II sucks. Slower doesn't mean slow at all. Phenom is a very good processor that was born at the wrong time. Only Fanboys think AthlonXP was faster than the Northwoods or that Northwoods where faster than Athlon64 when most of the time they weren't. Neither of the slower processors sucked=P
Phenom and the Nehalem fights are just starting and folks are already at each other's throat. I personally like the Phenom II but I have a problem calling it P2 or P-II, sorry! Maybe call it Ph-2 or PhII. Folks have the right to think it will overclock just as others think it will not. Please folks, accept the others opinion as nothing but that. This, "I must attack folks for saying blank about blank" is a JOKE, a very bad JOKE!
Some of us said Nehalem would overclock, others said it wouldn't. Now whatever happens with Ph-II, I hope the Nay Sayers don't slip off and hide as they did with Nehalem:wink:
That can be said about all benchmarks. But check this out? I've NEVER been a proponent or fan of SuperPi=P You see whatever you want to see or not. No need to roll you eyes LOL! You are one of the people you seem to not see and that my friend is absolutely you're biggest problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammsteiner