AMD Phenom II 920 & 940 Full Review [UPDATED with more tests]

Printable View

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

12-31-2008, 11:59 AM
gamervivek

http://translate.google.com/translat...istory_state0=

Quote:

If using Prime95 then a load situation creates so yawning almost 70 watts between the tactful Boliden same AMD. Der Realverbrauch des auf 2,6 GHz reduzierten Phenom II bewegt sich bei etwa 50 Watt, während sich der Phenom X4 9950 BE knapp 120 Watt gönnt, dabei jedoch noch im Rahmen seiner TDP-Grenze verbleibt (140 Watt). The real consumption of reduced to 2.6 GHz Phenom II moves at around 50 watts, while the Phenom X4 9950 BE Irin nearly 120 watts, while still under its TDP-border remains (140 watts).
12-31-2008, 12:03 PM
OverClocker_gr

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

Weird that this review don't have any overclocked results for the PII's. Especially the 940 that can be easily overclocked via multi. This way we can see how it scales. I'll wait to a more in depth review is done. Thanks for the tid bit anyway though.

have you even read the first post?
12-31-2008, 12:19 PM
Caveman787

So how much longer till you have the clock to clock, overclock and power consumption tests up?

We're greedy impatiant people here in the tech world.
12-31-2008, 12:28 PM
Throwed

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

have you even read the first post?

Nope, I just thumbed through the charts and none of the charts have overclocked results. Either way I will wait for more professional/in-depth reviews. Thanks. Clock for clock is ok, but most people will run these overclocked....Especially the people that purchase the 940. So, if there is no figure telling me the difference between a stock clocked 940 verse a overclocked one then the review is useless to me. I am not buying Intel reguardless so those comparisons don't tell me much.
12-31-2008, 12:36 PM
qurious63ss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

I am not buying Intel reguardless so those comparisons don't tell me much.

:ROTF: Looks like you already made up your mind regardless of results so why bother with reviews.:shakes:
12-31-2008, 12:40 PM
BenchZowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

Nope, I just thumbed through the charts and none of the charts have overclocked results. Either way I will wait for more professional/in-depth reviews. Thanks. Clock for clock is ok, but most people will run these overclocked....Especially the people that purchase the 940. So, if there is no figure telling me the difference between a stock clocked 940 verse a overclocked one then the review is useless to me. I am not buying Intel reguardless so those comparisons don't tell me much.

Then you should read the first post and the replies.
Your post looks like the kind of posts people describe as "flame-starters".
As you COULD've seen if only you'd read the whole thread, there will be "two" reviews.
One with the Phenom I & the Phenom II clocked at 3GHz, and one with the Phenom II, Core 2 Quad Q6600, Core 2 Quad Q9450 and the Core i7 clocked at 3.7GHz.
So you can... compare the results from the 3.7GHz tests with the 3GHz tests from the Phenom I vs Phenom II part, and also use the numbers from the normal review of the Phenom II's that is also hosted at HWbox.gr

Read the whole thread and the first thread in the XS News section and behave.
12-31-2008, 12:55 PM
OverClocker_gr

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

Nope, I just thumbed through the charts and none of the charts have overclocked results. Either way I will wait for more professional/in-depth reviews. Thanks. Clock for clock is ok, but most people will run these overclocked....Especially the people that purchase the 940. So, if there is no figure telling me the difference between a stock clocked 940 verse a overclocked one then the review is useless to me. I am not buying Intel reguardless so those comparisons don't tell me much.

so,maybe you should read this post first.....

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...06&postcount=1

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

As i had mentioned at the locked thread, there is a clock to clock comparison in progress, on deneb vs agena@3000 and deneb vs bloomfield vs yorkfield vs kentsfield @ 3700mhz.

Stay tuned for more :)

Plz keep it clean :)

@Caveman787

maybe tomorrow,or the day after tomorrow tops :)
12-31-2008, 01:02 PM
Yokozuna

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smalltimer

Well this is very helpful...
I have to say, that I am very impressed with the Phenom II 3DSMax rendering marks against the competition. Especially considering it seems to trail(or match) a Core i7 940 in some spots :eek:

Any chance at all you will do some POVRay rendering tests?
Also... what are the chances that we will see some benchmarks to show scaling(OC"ing).

Thanks very much for your efforts.
I've been contemplating picking up a Phenom 940 and I think this just did it for me :)

Coolice got 2491.79 PPS in POV Ray with a Phenom II 940 @ 3GHz:

http://www.breakthelimit.net/coolice.../stock/pov.PNG

http://forum.breakthelimit.net/index.php?showtopic=220
12-31-2008, 01:53 PM
OverClocker_gr

a gift from me for the new year.(here in greece the time is 11.53PM 31/12/2008)

Power consumption tests uploaded :)

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=3189&garpg=32
12-31-2008, 02:19 PM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

a gift from me for the new year.(here in greece the time is 11.53PM 31/12/2008)

Power consumption tests uploaded :)

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=3189&garpg=32

Thanks for the extra info.....it must be 2009 where you are now...
12-31-2008, 02:34 PM
Throwed

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

so,maybe you should read this post first.....

Thanks, but I'll wait. Have fun with the CPU though.:up:
12-31-2008, 02:42 PM
OverClocker_gr

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

Thanks for the extra info.....it must be 2009 where you are now...

Yes,so, from greece, happy new year to all of you :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

Thanks, but I'll wait. Have fun with the CPU though.:up:

wait but nothing is gonna change :(
12-31-2008, 03:05 PM
YukonTrooper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Throwed

Thanks, but I'll wait. Have fun with the CPU though.:up:

I don't see what the problem is. He's politely pointing you towards his first post, which indicates there will be a clock-per-clock comparison of some chips. You'll notice that Agena and Deneb will be compared at 3.0GHz, while Deneb will also be put through the same tests at 3.7GHz. From what I can tell, this review should be very relevant to you.

If you want my opinion, your attitude about this man's hard work has been very disagreeable.

Good work, OverClocker_gr!
12-31-2008, 03:33 PM
Caveman787

How was that power consumption done?

I can't read greek and to me after hearing all the power consumption praise for phenom II I can't comprehend how it can consume more then all the others and almost match i7.
12-31-2008, 03:47 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by qurious63ss

:ROTF: Looks like you already made up your mind regardless of results so why bother with reviews.:shakes:

there are many intel fanboys that post even tho they aren't getting the cpu at all.

@caveman its the power consumption of the entire system.
12-31-2008, 05:04 PM
PetNorth

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

a gift from me for the new year.(here in greece the time is 11.53PM 31/12/2008)

Power consumption tests uploaded :)

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=3189&garpg=32

Good power consumption numbers for Deneb, specially keeping in mind nForce 780a is a power hungry chipset. For example, it consumes ~10-15w more in load than 790FX and much more in idle http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/14661/12
12-31-2008, 05:20 PM
TL1000S

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

Yes,so, from greece, happy new year to all of you :)
(

Happy new year OverClocker_gr.

Thanks for a great review.

Power consumption look OK for PHII, particulary under full load compared to PHI (from other reviews showing difference to Kentsfield/Yorkfield).
12-31-2008, 07:19 PM
roofsniper

would be nice if you could see power consumption for the cpu alone since the numbers are going to be a lot different from review to review based on different hardware. and a 790fx will be a lot cooler.
12-31-2008, 08:16 PM
OverClocker_gr

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caveman787

How was that power consumption done?

I can't read greek and to me after hearing all the power consumption praise for phenom II I can't comprehend how it can consume more then all the others and almost match i7.

this is a total system power consumption.

So with a watt meter at the psu its easy to have some numbers.
If you like,take the ~82% of that to be the actual power consumption without the psu ;)
12-31-2008, 08:25 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

this is a total system power consumption.

So with a watt meter at the psu its easy to have some numbers.
If you like,take the ~82% of that to be the actual power consumption without the psu ;)

is it hard to find out what just the cpu consumes?
12-31-2008, 08:27 PM
OverClocker_gr

do you have in mind any way to do that? :p:
12-31-2008, 08:34 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

do you have in mind any way to do that? :p:

really no but i know it can be done. i have never tried it but it seems like you could do a ghetto multimeter thing with the cpu power connector. :shrug:
12-31-2008, 09:46 PM
justapost

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverClocker_gr

do you have in mind any way to do that? :p:

Clamp meter on 12V rail. :D
Thanks for sharing but that foxconn destroyer board is a power hog as petnorth has already mentioned.
Few questions.
Have you had CnQ/EIST/Speedstep enabled ?
And what tool did you use for the load test?
12-31-2008, 09:58 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by justapost

Clamp meter on 12V rail. :D
Thanks for sharing but that foxconn destroyer board is a power hog as petnorth has already mentioned.
Few questions.
Have you had CnQ/EIST/Speedstep enabled ?
And Wwhat too did you use for the load test?

i agree that that board uses a lot of power as well and most people use a 790fx that uses a lot less power. but there are other reviews for this. there is no cnq EIST or speedstep enabled and im guessing he used prime 95 for load but im not sure.
12-31-2008, 09:58 PM
Macadamia

No, total system consumption is still the best way to measure CPUs, now that Phenom and i7 have seperate power rails that don't just use +12V alone (IIRC).

Great job on the power info, with some images from the Tech Report comparing 790FX and 780a (Asus board) we can remove some wattage, and the results are surprising. :)

http://techreport.com/r.x/nvidia-nfo...power-idle.gif
http://techreport.com/r.x/nvidia-nfo...power-load.gif

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