AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

Printable View

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

12-20-2008, 04:42 PM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

Here's a great source for comparison
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles...521&cid=2&pg=8
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles...521&cid=2&pg=9

CPU bound benchmarks on stock clocks...

CineBench 10 32-bit
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 ... 11165
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 ... 10506
Phenom II X4 ................. 9754

3Mark06 CPU score
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 .... 4783
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 .... 4483
Phenom II X4 ................... 4483

Aquamark3 CPU score
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 .... 19129
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 .... 18117
Phenom II X4 ................... 15745

Those Expreview leaked AMD slides are for real after all. ;)

I get around 9500 in Cinebench with my 9950@3GHz. :rolleyes:

Check this:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1228958064

vs.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/n...4358/17765.png

source
12-20-2008, 04:43 PM
informal

^^ What Macadamia said.

BTW check justapost's results at the same clocks/settings and in the same apps here:
http://www.ocxtreme.org/forumenus/sh...&postcount=131 (thanks justapost ;) )

Some very noticeable improvements per clock,north of 12%,except in wprime(dunno what's up with that).Phenom II works on that board although it's not properly supported yet.Note the 1.8Ghz L3 clocks.
Also notice the huge jump in Aquamark CPU score when going from Phenom I to Phenom II :eek: (both at exactly the same settings/clocks-3Ghz/1.8Ghz same memory timings):
Phenom I : 11093
Phenom II: 15745.
That's 41% better score per clock :up: .Seems like a very cache sensitive CPU test.

I would rather focus on Phenom I vs Phenom II results,until the official launch and reviews are out ;). Then we can compare it to Q series and i7 since all will be polished and ready .
12-20-2008, 04:44 PM
noki

Yes but OCW test was with a Radeon HD4850...
12-20-2008, 04:44 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashraf

Keep AMD vs Intel discussions or "AMD can't beat Intel" out of this thread.

Please stay on topic.

i would really like to avoid having anything else happen.
12-20-2008, 04:51 PM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliverda

I get around 9500 in Cinebench with my 9950@3GHz. :rolleyes:

Well, you're running 64bit Cinebench. Check.
12-20-2008, 05:07 PM
informal

@Ghostbuster

I just checked some Q9xxx 3dmark06 CPU scores at the ORB.It looks like Phenom II and Q9x50 are pretty much even at the same clocks in this test :shrug:
PhII 4Ghz : 5846
Q9550 @4Ghz : 5766 (Phenom wins by a small margin-80pts which is within margin of error-so they are the same per clock)
Q9650 @ 4.05Ghz : 6033 (Q9650 per clock wins by 1.1%,within margin of error).

I say again all these Phenom II previews are just that-previews.We should wait for final reviews with proper bios versions and final platform to make up our mind where it sits exactly vs Q9xxx series.By the looks of the latest info it's quite competitive ,both per clock and in OCing abilities.
12-20-2008, 05:09 PM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Well, you're running 64bit Cinebench. Check.

Unfortunately I can't run 64bit Cinebench on my 32bit Win XP SP3. :D
12-20-2008, 05:14 PM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliverda

Unfortunately I can't run 64bit Cinebench on my 32bit Win XP SP3. :D

Oh that screenie isn't yours? Post a screenie of your 32bit XP SP3 run. :up:
12-20-2008, 05:15 PM
demonkevy666

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

@Ghostbuster

I just checked some Q9xxx 3dmark06 CPU scores at the ORB.It looks like Phenom II and Q9x50 are pretty much even at the same clocks in this test :shrug:
PhII 4Ghz : 5846
Q9550 @4Ghz : 5766 (Phenom wins by a small margin-80pts which is within margin of error-so they are the same per clock)
Q9650 @ 4.05Ghz : 6033 (Q9650 per clock wins by 1.1%,within margin of error).

I say again all these Phenom II previews are just that-previews.We should wait for final reviews with proper bios versions and final platform to make up our mind where it sits exactly vs Q9xxx series.By the looks of the latest info it's quite competitive ,both per clock and in OCing abilities.

1.8ghz nb lol 1.1% 200mhz Nb/L3 = what like % ? 0.7% ( Idk)
12-20-2008, 05:28 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by demonkevy666

1.8ghz nb lol 1.1% 200mhz Nb/L3 = what like % ? 0.7% ( Idk)

"Q9650 per clock wins by 1.1%,within margin of error" means that instead of 4.05Ghz ,the score for Q9650 at 4Ghz would be ~5958pts which is 5958/5846=~1.9% better than Phenom II at the same 4Ghz clock (I made a mistake,wrote 1.1% vs 1.9% ;) -still practically the same score). The scaling with clock is 97% for Phenom II,going from 3Ghz to 4Ghz in CPU subtest of 3dmar06.The L3 speed seems to play less of a role here.
12-20-2008, 05:33 PM
Caveman787

The one site with benches supposedly had near perfect scaling with clock throughout there tests.

That might sound odd but AMD did have overclockers in mind when making these chips.
12-20-2008, 05:59 PM
demonkevy666

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

"Q9650 per clock wins by 1.1%,within margin of error" means that instead of 4.05Ghz ,the score for Q9650 at 4Ghz would be ~5958pts which is 5958/5846=~1.9% better than Phenom II at the same 4Ghz clock (I made a mistake,wrote 1.1% vs 1.9% ;) -still practically the same score). The scaling with clock is 97% for Phenom II,going from 3Ghz to 4Ghz in CPU subtest of 3dmar06.The L3 speed seems to play less of a role here.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...x4-9850_4.html

In there 0.40-3% with 200mhz NB. so going up on NB from 1.8...2.6ghz max for AM+...3.2ghz for AM3...
12-20-2008, 06:11 PM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Oh that screenie isn't yours? Post a screenie of your 32bit XP SP3 run. :up:

well here is my 3.3ghz run on 64bit and 32bit ...system is tweaked a lil and still lower then the Phenom II @ 3.2ghz.
(64)
http://3800z24.info/Phenom/9950/winx...ench64_3.3.JPG
(32)
http://3800z24.info/Phenom/9950/32bi...e_unganged.JPG
12-20-2008, 06:18 PM
Ghostbuster

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

I just checked some Q9xxx 3dmark06 CPU scores at the ORB.It looks like Phenom II and Q9x50 are pretty much even at the same clocks in this test :shrug:
PhII 4Ghz : 5846
Q9550 @4Ghz : 5766 (Phenom wins by a small margin-80pts which is within margin of error-so they are the same per clock)
Q9650 @ 4.05Ghz : 6033 (Q9650 per clock wins by 1.1%,within margin of error).

Yours is slightly flawed because that was on Windows XP 64-bit. The reference 4GHz Phenom was on Windows XP 32-bit. I can find better scores then that, for example Q9550 @ 3.739GHz scores 6013 on Windows XP 32-bit :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

I say again all these Phenom II previews are just that-previews.We should wait for final reviews with proper bios versions and final platform to make up our mind where it sits exactly vs Q9xxx series.By the looks of the latest info it's quite competitive ,both per clock and in OCing abilities.

Anyway, I've made my prediction many moons ago.. As for the finale vs Q9xxx, I've already saw early on that it will be behind Q9550 as all clues are pointing towards that. I compare with stock clocks, and again all results pointing to that conclusion again. Well, now you can predict the pricing... ;)
12-20-2008, 06:28 PM
roofsniper

there are no clues since there are no benchmarks that can be trusted. this entire thing is still up in there air. no one really knows how it will perform against intel cpus but we know its at least better than the first phenom. :D i would like to keep the whole intel thing out of this until official benchmarks are released since it will only start an argument that can't be ended since there is no proof of anything. and you really can't compare benchmarks from different sources together since all the parts aren't the same and the systems are not tweaked the same.
12-20-2008, 06:37 PM
Ghostbuster

Update... Q9550 @4.038GHz CPU score = 6316 on Windows XP 32-bit This is the nearest score I can find, almost the same GPU scores, also its a HD4870... :cool:
12-20-2008, 06:40 PM
AbelJemka

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

Yours is slightly flawed because that was on Windows XP 64-bit. The reference 4GHz Phenom was on Windows XP 32-bit. I can find better scores then that, for example Q9550 @ 3.739GHz scores 6013 on Windows XP 32-bit :)

Anyway, I've made my prediction many moons ago.. As for the finale vs Q9xxx, I've already saw early on that it will be behind Q9550 as all clues are pointing towards that. I compare with stock clocks, and again all results pointing to that conclusion again. Well, now you can predict the pricing... ;)

Phenom II already scoring 5846 at 4GHzwith a beta bios on non optimized system (400MHz memory cas 5) is for me on the same range as Q9xxx scoring around 6000 at +3,8GHz :up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

Update... Q9550 @4.038GHz CPU score = 6316 on Windows XP 32-bit This is the nearest score I can find, almost the same GPU scores, also its a HD4870... :cool:

Heavily optmized system versus unoptimized system with beta bios. I don't know what u search to prove?
12-20-2008, 06:43 PM
Ghostbuster

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

Phenom II already scoring 5846 at 4GHzwith a beta bios on non optimized system (400MHz memory cas 5) is for me on the same range as Q9xxx scoring around 6000 at +3,8GHz :up:

Now what's left is how well it can run in air or water cooling in normal setups, then we will see how competitive it can be... :up:
12-20-2008, 06:47 PM
AbelJemka

I see quite a bunch of overclocking with normal setup on aircooling already but i prefer to wait for final review.
12-20-2008, 06:51 PM
Ghostbuster

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

Heavily optmized system versus unoptimized system with beta bios. I don't know what u search to prove?

The 4GHz Phenom II system was using ASUS HD4870 Toxic.. so that is pre-factory overclocked for sure. Thus I look for a similar card (thus similar GPU scores) and a similar clocked Q9550 processor. :)
12-20-2008, 07:41 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

Now what's left is how well it can run in air or water cooling in normal setups, then we will see how competitive it can be... :up:

there have been plenty of times that it has been on an air or water cooling setup. it is a known fact that it can get 4ghz on air and 6 ghz on ln2 so most of the time when you are seeing a 4ghz phenom II it is on air.
12-20-2008, 08:18 PM
Caveman787

So anybody know how well its gonna perform gaming wise?

Apparantly i7 is better for games then core2 because it gets better minimum framerates.

At one of the events in the video they said the minimum framerates were doubled.

Can anyone verify them being the good?

Like everyone else I can't wait for more benches and details other than ln2 since I'm not gonna be running more than air.
12-20-2008, 08:21 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caveman787

So anybody know how well its gonna perform gaming wise?

Apparantly i7 is better for games then core2 because it gets better minimum framerates.

At one of the events in the video they said the minimum framerates were doubled.

Can anyone verify them being the good?

Like everyone else I can't wait for more benches and details other than ln2 since I'm not gonna be running more than air.

well i have always thought that a phenom was smoother for gaming than a core 2 was in the first place even tho the core 2 got higher frame rates. this could be the fact that the phenom keeps the fps being about the same instead of having it go from high to medium and from high to medium. i can't say how it will be for gaming for sure but im sure it will be amazing.
12-20-2008, 11:23 PM
Morais

oh no, not again
12-20-2008, 11:25 PM
mongoled

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashraf

Chad Boga is temporarily banned. This is not the place to troll and flamebait. Keep AMD vs Intel discussions or "AMD can't beat Intel" out of this thread.

Please stay on topic.

How hard is it for peeps to stay on topic????

Its quite clear what is happening, AMD peeps are trying to keep on topic, then someone posts info regarding Intel CPU v the Phenom II CPU's and the AMD peeps have to counter.

Now.......the peeps posting the Intel info are consistant, one of them has already been banned, I will be contacting Ashraf directly if the other peeps (you know who you are, the usual suspects) continue in trying to derig this thread.

There are other threads making comparissons between PII and Intel CPU's

GO AND POST ON THOSE

Leave this thread to be as title says

'AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread'

PI vs PII comparissons very welcome as they are both AMD and relevant

PI vs PII vs Intel counterparts

Unwelcome........

-- ON TOPIC --

Peeps posting info regarding PI vs PII, try to post comparissons using similar OS's, been many people posting 32bit vs 64bit scores and not initially realising this. In this way a more realistic picture can be gained of what to expect.

Also, this is Xtreme Systems, we are ofcourse happy to see default clocks vs default clocks. But its not like we are going to be running our CPU's at default clocks, LOL

I am very interested in scaling of NB clocks as are many with CPU speeds, this will be the rabbit in AMD tweakers hats to getting better scores. Hopefully the info regarding PII reviews will increase.....

Final words

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC
12-20-2008, 11:50 PM
LC_Nab

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

The 4GHz Phenom II system was using ASUS HD4870 Toxic.. so that is pre-factory overclocked for sure. Thus I look for a similar card (thus similar GPU scores) and a similar clocked Q9550 processor. :)

Like we are all saying the phenom II is runing on beta bios so im pretty sure it will perform even better with the true bios and mostly on the true am3 boards . Time will tell :up:
12-21-2008, 12:41 AM
Pt1t

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoF

Here is my 5.6 :D http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=466799

:)

it 's -195° ?
12-21-2008, 12:45 AM
amdcian

Another validation of our boy, this time is 6.1GHz :up:, a tiny pity...2 core are disabled :(

Anyway, thank dread77 for this :up:

http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/screenshot/466047.png
12-21-2008, 01:25 AM
AbelJemka

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster

The 4GHz Phenom II system was using ASUS HD4870 Toxic.. so that is pre-factory overclocked for sure. Thus I look for a similar card (thus similar GPU scores) and a similar clocked Q9550 processor. :)

Time wasting for you!
On Orb it's too hard to know if videocard are overclocked, so busting such score will indicate a lot but so little in the same time :shrug:
Same for CPU score with 06, so influenced by subsystem optimization is hard to compare.
12-21-2008, 01:35 AM
ajaidev

Hey i was looking through coolices benchs and i saw something really nice. In 3dmark 06 the cpu score is 4483 and i know the cpu score for i7 920 was 4609. So not that much difference!!

Also at stock Wprimes was done in 13 secs on a Ph II while it took 10 on an i7
12-21-2008, 02:02 AM
SoF

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pt1t

:)

it 's -195° ?

no it's -155°C 1.85V - A79A-S can't run HT Link 1.0 yet but with 6x multi and 1320 MHZ I was doing not too bad I think. with 1.0 and 5x there should be room for maybe 6gig validation :) my friends from benchbrothers could run both of their chips -195°C with 1.0 on Destroyer and Gigabyte board.
12-21-2008, 02:15 AM
knopflerbruce

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

Intel users have done that a loooooong time already, to max out their chips. I don't see why it's useless when the whole Intel-batallion does the same:D It tells something about the potential of these chips. At least that's what it tells me.
12-21-2008, 02:16 AM
Morais

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

Try to do it then :shakes:

and Welcome amdcian!
12-21-2008, 02:17 AM
AbelJemka

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=465848
For you Mister Fake!
12-21-2008, 02:28 AM
annton

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=465848
For you Mister Fake!

Is HT at around 1000MHz a must for Phenom II overclock?
12-21-2008, 02:35 AM
Morais

Not really...
Take a look here...
12-21-2008, 02:39 AM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2 cores only ?

useless !!!!

Your posts are more useless. :rolleyes:
12-21-2008, 03:54 AM
Hornet331

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

oliverda what do you want ?
do you want dream ? or look the realilty face ?

What is the utility of a cpu-Z validation with quad core but only 2 core enable ?
Do you like 2 cores ? BUY a dual core ! and don't break the testes !

in Quad core processor i LOOK the overclock with all cores enable !!!!!!!
ENABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or look directly a dual core 7750 BE overclock.

:ROTF:

you clearly have no clue what or how overclocking works and whats legit and whats not. :ROTF:

Running one core on a quadcore is fine for getting max frequency or running SPI or any other singel threaded benchmark to get the best score. :yepp:

Striving for records is a whole other ballpark then trying to get a 24/7 stable config.
12-21-2008, 03:57 AM
The PyroPath

I lose about 2 IQ points everytime I read a post from that guy, soon I'll be lobotomised by only reading forum posts:(....
12-21-2008, 04:17 AM
leoy

Oktabit team did the 6120 with two core, 6020 with all 4 cores. Currently they hold the two top records in amd validated offcourse.
12-21-2008, 04:23 AM
donitsi

Quote:

Originally Posted by leoy

Oktabit team did the 6120 with two core, 6020 with all 4 cores. Currently they hold the two top records in amd validated offcourse.

Pretty awesome, only 100mhz decrease goign from 2 cores to 4 cores :up:
12-21-2008, 04:27 AM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

oliverda what do you want ?
do you want dream ? or look the realilty face ?

What is the utility of a cpu-Z validation with quad core but only 2 core enable ?
Do you like 2 cores ? BUY a dual core ! and don't break the testes !

in Quad core processor i LOOK the overclock with all cores enable !!!!!!!
ENABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or look directly a dual core 7750 BE overclock.

What do I want? I want you to take some english lessons and stop the stupid posts in this forum. http://prohardver.hu/dl/s/ul.gif
12-21-2008, 04:29 AM
justapost

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

^^ What Macadamia said.

BTW check justapost's results at the same clocks/settings and in the same apps here:
http://www.ocxtreme.org/forumenus/sh...&postcount=131 (thanks justapost ;) )

NP, problem is coolice ran many benchmarks on windows 7. I can not get that here atm. Maybe that's why wprime results are so low. We've already seen em beeing ~7% faster.
I get 12.5s under winxp 32bit and 12.9s undr vista 64bit, never compared winxp 32bit with vista 32bit. Can be the results are even lower on the 32bit version.
Most valuable new piece of information is the high nb speed coolice reached benchable.

I'd prefer previewers would focus more on pI vs. pII comparison and leave overclocking to the users.
12-21-2008, 04:32 AM
knopflerbruce

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

oliverda what do you want ?
do you want dream ? or look the realilty face ?

What is the utility of a cpu-Z validation with quad core but only 2 core enable ?
Do you like 2 cores ? BUY a dual core ! and don't break the testes !

in Quad core processor i LOOK the overclock with all cores enable !!!!!!!
ENABLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or look directly a dual core 7750 BE overclock.

Well, you may look after validations with 4 cores enabled, but it seems a you're the only one:D

It's not THAT much of a difference between 1,2 and 4 cores anyway... (I'm talking about max frequency here).

And no, it's not "wrong" to disable and validate. That's how we do it. In fact, NOT doing it would be noobish (if you're going for the highest possible clock, of course) - as you may earn a little bit on it.
12-21-2008, 05:50 AM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by mongoled

How hard is it for peeps to stay on topic????

Its quite clear what is happening, AMD peeps are trying to keep on topic, then someone posts info regarding Intel CPU v the Phenom II CPU's and the AMD peeps have to counter.

Now.......the peeps posting the Intel info are consistant, one of them has already been banned, I will be contacting Ashraf directly if the other peeps (you know who you are, the usual suspects) continue in trying to derig this thread.

There are other threads making comparissons between PII and Intel CPU's

GO AND POST ON THOSE

Leave this thread to be as title says

'AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread'

PI vs PII comparissons very welcome as they are both AMD and relevant

PI vs PII vs Intel counterparts

Unwelcome........

-- ON TOPIC --

Peeps posting info regarding PI vs PII, try to post comparissons using similar OS's, been many people posting 32bit vs 64bit scores and not initially realising this. In this way a more realistic picture can be gained of what to expect.

Also, this is Xtreme Systems, we are ofcourse happy to see default clocks vs default clocks. But its not like we are going to be running our CPU's at default clocks, LOL

I am very interested in scaling of NB clocks as are many with CPU speeds, this will be the rabbit in AMD tweakers hats to getting better scores. Hopefully the info regarding PII reviews will increase.....

Final words

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC

Well, you did a very good job of staying on topic yourself :clap: Yes this is the Deneb review thread, problem is reviews are not here yet and we're on 30 pages :shrug:

About PH1 vs PH2: PH1 is not going to be PHII's main competitor, the competitors are on the other side. We all know when the reviews start streaming in, it's going to be 45nm vs 45nm. This is always the way it is. This is what makes sense! PHII is going to be tested against the competition. It is going to be reviewed, it has to be tested against something? For example, ALL the Shanghai reviews on the first page, pit it against products from Intel. Even the previews of Deneb do the same except for a couple. So it is inevitable, we'll see it. If you prefer to discuss exclusively Deneb without pitting against other processors, create your own thread because you're in the wrong thread. It's obvious that the OP (Original Poster) had a different idea from all those links on the first page, you can look it up if you're in doubt.

Now, On Topic: It seems there isn't much that'll be accepted by either side until we start seeing the hard facts. Maybe this thread needs to be closed till reviews start streaking in, otherwise we're on topic by discussing Deneb (as per the OP's post) against the competition. Some choose to see it as Intel vs AMD, I choose to see it as the reality.

Sorry for going off topic, but with the way things have gone so far, someone needed to remind everybody what this thread is truly about. Thanks.
Maybe let's all wait till the reviews start coming in and then we can start talking about what chips are included in the review?
12-21-2008, 05:56 AM
TL1000S

Quote:

Originally Posted by justapost

NP, problem is coolice ran many benchmarks on windows 7. I can not get that here atm. Maybe that's why wprime results are so low. We've already seen em beeing ~7% faster.
I get 12.5s under winxp 32bit and 12.9s undr vista 64bit, never compared winxp 32bit with vista 32bit. Can be the results are even lower on the 32bit version.
Most valuable new piece of information is the high nb speed coolice reached benchable.

I'd prefer previewers would focus more on pI vs. pII comparison and leave overclocking to the users.

Yes, I agree.
(Not the last part though).
I thought the sreenies from coolice showed XP as OS, but it could have been 64-bits.
CPU score i 3DM06 varies too much to be used as reference for performance I see (I only use XP 32-bits for my use/benches).
So I am a little bit more optimistic for the "real" reviews (after NDA). :D
12-21-2008, 06:26 AM
justapost

Quote:

Originally Posted by TL1000S

I thought the sreenies from coolice showed XP as OS, but it could have been 64-bits.
CPU score i 3DM06 varies too much to be used as reference for performance I see (I only use XP 32-bits for my use/benches).
So I am a little bit more optimistic for the "real" reviews (after NDA). :D

I asked him and he said he had used windows 7 and vista. First impression was winxp 32bit (because CB10 ran as 32bit version).
He said he had to use vista to access the full 4GB so windows 7 must have been 32bit.
12-21-2008, 07:33 AM
TL1000S

Quote:

Originally Posted by justapost

I asked him and he said he had used windows 7 and vista. First impression was winxp 32bit (because CB10 ran as 32bit version).
He said he had to use vista to access the full 4GB so windows 7 must have been 32bit.

Thanks. :up:
Then I am confident in Phenom II.
It will kick ass. :)
12-21-2008, 08:06 AM
coolice

Quote:

Originally Posted by justapost

I asked him and he said he had used windows 7 and vista. First impression was winxp 32bit (because CB10 ran as 32bit version).
He said he had to use vista to access the full 4GB so windows 7 must have been 32bit.

bro..u misunderstand me:D
the reason i swap to vista because i cant install overdrive in windows 7 ultimate
i can bench at 4ghz but not booting into windows, so wat i did is boot at 3.9ghz and push little more with AOD
all OS are 32bits;)

Edited:
and yeah,mem are not optimized
12-21-2008, 08:09 AM
AbelJemka

So your screenshot with XP GUI is Windows 7?
12-21-2008, 08:13 AM
coolice

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

So your screenshot with XP GUI is Windows 7?

nop
windows 7 for pcmark and 3dmark vantage
the rest was under winxp
12-21-2008, 08:22 AM
justapost

Quote:

Originally Posted by coolice

nop
windows 7 for pcmark and 3dmark vantage
the rest was under winxp

Ups, so i missunderstood you yesterday. Thanks for clarifying.
12-21-2008, 08:52 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by mongoled

How hard is it for peeps to stay on topic????

*snip*

i have already said this myself a few times but its not gonna happen. even if you remove the few that are starting all this more will come and amd users will most likely post info about it as well. all you can do is just not respond to the info being posted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Well, you did a very good job of staying on topic yourself :clap: Yes this is the Deneb review thread, problem is reviews are not here yet and we're on 30 pages :shrug:

About PH1 vs PH2: PH1 is not going to be PHII's main competitor, the competitors are on the other side. We all know when the reviews start streaming in, it's going to be 45nm vs 45nm. This is always the way it is. This is what makes sense! PHII is going to be tested against the competition. It is going to be reviewed, it has to be tested against something? For example, ALL the Shanghai reviews on the first page, pit it against products from Intel. Even the previews of Deneb do the same except for a couple. So it is inevitable, we'll see it. If you prefer to discuss exclusively Deneb without pitting against other processors, create your own thread because you're in the wrong thread. It's obvious that the OP (Original Poster) had a different idea from all those links on the first page, you can look it up if you're in doubt.

Now, On Topic: It seems there isn't much that'll be accepted by either side until we start seeing the hard facts. Maybe this thread needs to be closed till reviews start streaking in, otherwise we're on topic by discussing Deneb (as per the OP's post) against the competition. Some choose to see it as Intel vs AMD, I choose to see it as the reality.

Sorry for going off topic, but with the way things have gone so far, someone needed to remind everybody what this thread is truly about. Thanks.
Maybe let's all wait till the reviews start coming in and then we can start talking about what chips are included in the review?

yes i know that it is pointless to compare phenom I against phenom II but its the only thing you can do without starting a fight. it doesn't mean much comparing the two but it will show us what can be done that couldn't be done before. and since there are no official benchmarks out yet and it hasn't even been released you can't compare it against the intel cpus it will be competing against. why? because it will start fights that can't be ended cause there is no definite proof. as much as i think phenom II will be successful i can't prove it yet and no one else can disprove it.

@ lo squartatore sigh you are acting pretty immature right now when people are just trying to point out obvious facts. i think it would be in the best interests of you and others to just stop posting in the amd forum unless you can actually say something meaningful. and you keep disproving all information people are posting. saying that its fake, or not possible when you yourself can't prove that in anyway. plus your sig is just halirious. do you know what a quote is? a quote is when you repeat something that someone else said. when was the last time people here talked in italian so you can quote them?
12-21-2008, 09:09 AM
imsochobo

1 Attachment(s)

you can use overdrive in win7!

Its easy. Grab it from another install!
(not to be rude or anything, havnt you done enough transitions to beta os's to know you have to do this alot ?. )

My od in win7!
12-21-2008, 09:55 AM
Jazzman

Is NB >2600mhz the Difference?

Is the ability of Phenom II to oc NB beyond 2600mhz the difference maker in games when compared to other processors? Is this why the Dragon platform solution has the "potential" to best any other combo?

Or did my wife slip something in my coffee this morning? :shrug:
12-21-2008, 10:24 AM
QuietIce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazzman

Is the ability of Phenom II to oc NB beyond 2600mhz the difference maker in games when compared to other processors? Is this why the Dragon platform solution has the "potential" to best any other combo?

Or did my wife slip something in my coffee this morning? :shrug:

NB > 2600 is rare but certainly possible even with a Phenom I and the right tweaks. The HT Link has more influence over CPU video processing than the NB by itself but the NB does determine the total possible I/O of the CPU.

I didn't really get the rest of the question - I guess I'm dense today ... :brick:
12-21-2008, 10:31 AM
Caveman787

I think so. But it's a combination of high northbride and hypertransport speeds that lead to an increase in performance.

And I believe the northbridge and hypertransport is why phenom users claim smoother gameplay.
12-21-2008, 10:41 AM
Jazzman

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuietIce

NB > 2600 is rare but certainly possible even with a Phenom I and the right tweaks. The HT Link has more influence over CPU video processing than the NB by itself but the NB does determine the total possible I/O of the CPU.

I didn't really get the rest of the question - I guess I'm dense today ... :brick:

It has been postulated in XS that the integration of cpu, memory, chipset, video card, and drivers results in a synergy producing superior performance. This is the AMD fusion marketing position. After the AMD event in Boston, some peeps reported Phenom II beat an i7 965 in a Crysis demo.
12-21-2008, 10:45 AM
Caveman787

We don't know about that yet, hasn't been any details on if that'll make a difference and I don't see how it could really.
12-21-2008, 11:14 AM
Ghostbuster

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbelJemka

So your screenshot with XP GUI is Windows 7?

The clue was in the GPU-Z window.. ;)

More Phenom II benchies from http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1376983 :)
12-21-2008, 11:24 AM
roofsniper

nice i guess he did get it although it appears like an old one. i just hope i can get mine soon.
12-21-2008, 11:32 AM
ownage

http://i42.tinypic.com/33wa4h4.jpg

Thats really bad lol
C2Q @ 4ghz can hit 6k cpu score.
The phenom2 at 4ghz should do around 5400 - 5500 I think.
12-21-2008, 11:41 AM
ajaidev

This shows the CPU scores around 4483

http://www.breakthelimit.net/coolice...stock/3d06.PNG

and this shows 4091 and they ran the bench at the same resolution??

OK SEEN THE DIFFERENCE - The new screen is an ES where as the 4483 is a retail one also one is Vista and the other one is XP.
12-21-2008, 11:46 AM
roofsniper

anyone know what the stock voltage is? cause i keep seeing pretty high numbers for voltage when its at 3ghz.
12-21-2008, 11:50 AM
charged3800z24

you cannot do like comparisons when they are not "like". I have not seen a 1066mhz ram with decent timings, etc. Until we see a decent review that compares systems with like compontents (besides board and CPU) can you judge a "like" comparison.
12-21-2008, 11:51 AM
ajaidev

Ya it is a bit i seen most 3Ghz PhII's at 1.352 but this one was at 1.368 i think...!!!
12-21-2008, 11:51 AM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

anyone know what the stock voltage is? cause i keep seeing pretty high numbers for voltage when its at 3ghz.

1.35v is what stock Phenom II stock v's are supose to be. Is that what you were asking? I sometimes get lost in these threads...
12-21-2008, 11:53 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

you cannot do like comparisons when they are not "like". I have not seen a 1066mhz ram with decent timings, etc. Until we see a decent review that compares systems with like compontents (besides board and CPU) can you judge a "like" comparison.

we will not see an even benchmark until am3 is released. then the only differences between the intel cpus and amd cpus will be the motherboards and the cpus. :up:
12-21-2008, 11:54 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

1.35v is what stock Phenom II stock v's are supose to be. Is that what you were asking? I sometimes get lost in these threads...

yea thats what im asking its just a little odd that for moving to 45nm the voltage actually goes up another .1v.
12-21-2008, 11:55 AM
ajaidev

Not even an AM3 motherboad will use the same components than say a x58 uses so you cant compare alike intel and amd systems...
12-21-2008, 11:59 AM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Not even an AM3 motherboad will use the same components than say a x58 uses so you cant compare alike intel and amd systems...

no but that will at least come down to having better platforms which matters too. its different than comparing a ddr2 800 cpu to a ddr3 1600 cpu when the people that make the ram have nothing to do with either company that makes the cpu.
12-21-2008, 12:07 PM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Not even an AM3 motherboad will use the same components than say a x58 uses so you cant compare alike intel and amd systems...

I said besides CPU and Motherboard. Same Hard,drive, ram, video, psu .... this is the best was to compare them. Of course you cannot stick an AMD chip into a Intel socket...so that is irrelevant. :p: It is like putting a HD4850 with the Intel and then a HD4870 x2 in the AMD and saying the AMD is faster because it had the highest overall score in 3dmark06....
12-21-2008, 12:16 PM
Jazzman

Quote:

Originally Posted by ownage

http://i42.tinypic.com/33wa4h4.jpg

Thats really bad lol
C2Q @ 4ghz can hit 6k cpu score.
The phenom2 at 4ghz should do around 5400 - 5500 I think.

Well, Coolice got cpu=5846 at 4.0Ghz. But his NB was 2600mhz. SOURCE
12-21-2008, 12:30 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2.6Ghz NB is bigger !

No wai!1!1! :eek: 2.6Ghz is "bigger" than 1.8GHz?1? Who would have think of that? :p:

Newsflash for you: The chip is fully unlocked and you can set Northbridge frequency as high as chip lets you.If you read up about BIOS on K10 and know what you are doing,you can get as high as 2.7Ghz stable on Phenom II's Nortbridge.And then you can move on the core clocks.
12-21-2008, 12:56 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo squartatore

2.6Ghz NB is bigger !

this is exactly what i am talking about. the northbridge is overclockable. yes thats true i said it. now show me a penryn running on stock fsb.
12-21-2008, 12:59 PM
QuietIce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazzman

Well, Coolice got cpu=5846 at 4.0Ghz. But his NB was 2600mhz. SOURCE

That's one of the biggest issues and few people look at it or bother to take it into consideration. If you could crank up both the NB and HT Link you'd likely see very different results than stock clocks.

Of course, the biggest problem with NB speed is CPU-Z doesn't display it on validation nor the first tab ...
12-21-2008, 01:56 PM
charged3800z24

Here is a comparison I just did with one of my mild OC'd 4850's. I ran loose timings @ 800mhz Ram, 1800mhz HT/1800mhz NB 3.3ghz CPU. I ran another test with same 3.3ghz CPU and 2400mhz HT/2400mhz NB, 1066mhz and a lil tighter timings. notice the scores...CPU changed a lil, but the overall went up a lot more.

http://3800z24.info/Phenom/9950/3d_c...800nb_full.JPG

http://3800z24.info/Phenom/9950/3d_c...400nb_full.JPG
12-21-2008, 02:38 PM
Progerien

Quote:

Originally Posted by ownage

Thats really bad lol
C2Q @ 4ghz can hit 6k cpu score.
The phenom2 at 4ghz should do around 5400 - 5500 I think.

Under Vista with 400MHz memory ? I doubt :/
But I prefer waiting for the real Phenom 2 ^^

Phenom 2 seems to be good under 3dmark, I am waiting for its real price in market ^^

Charged3800z24, can you try with more bus speed, and 1:2 FSB:DRAM ?

Cordialement,
12-21-2008, 02:47 PM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

this is exactly what i am talking about. the northbridge is overclockable. yes thats true i said it. now show me a penryn running on stock fsb.

How's that a fair comparison, when you mention "overclockable" for one chip, and "stock" for the other? Wouldn't a fair comparison be a stock vs stock scenario? :shrug:
12-21-2008, 03:06 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

How's that a fair comparison, when you mention "overclockable" for one chip, and "stock" for the other? Wouldn't a fair comparison be a stock vs stock scenario? :shrug:

:yepp:so if you are gonna compare an overclocked penryn with an overclocked phenom why is it wrong to have an overclocked northbridge on the phenom when the penryn has it as well?
12-21-2008, 03:10 PM
QuietIce

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

Here is a comparison I just did with one of my mild OC'd 4850's. I ran loose timings @ 800mhz Ram, 1800mhz HT/1800mhz NB 3.3ghz CPU. I ran another test with same 3.3ghz CPU and 2400mhz HT/2400mhz NB, 1066mhz and a lil tighter timings. notice the scores...CPU changed a lil, but the overall went up a lot more.

Thanks for performing that test and posting the results! :up:

Not as much as I expected but more than most people probably figured on ... ;)
12-21-2008, 03:14 PM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

:yepp:so if you are gonna compare an overclocked penryn with an overclocked phenom why is it wrong to have an overclocked northbridge on the phenom when the penryn has it as well?

Why do you single out the fsb to run at stock? You know very well the NB functions differently on the AMD platform.
12-21-2008, 03:17 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Why do you single out the fsb to run at stock? You know very well the NB functions differently on the AMD platform.

sigh just forget it. i was referencing towards the fact that lo squartatore was mad that the nb was running at 2.6. which i don't understand why. if it can do it why not? but if amd cpus are not allowed to overclock the hypertransport and nb then i think it would be fair to not allow the penryns to overclock the fsb for a fair comparison.
12-21-2008, 03:20 PM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

sigh just forget it. i was referencing towards the fact that lo squartatore was mad that the nb was running at 2.6. which i don't understand why. if it can do it why not? but if amd cpus are not allowed to overclock the hypertransport and nb then i think it would be fair to not allow the penryns to overclock the fsb for a fair comparison.

Touche.
12-21-2008, 03:25 PM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Touche.

hey, it is not our fault the Phenoms have a nice tweakable feature when OCing.
12-21-2008, 04:09 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

hey, it is not our fault the Phenoms have a nice tweakable feature when OCing.

Yeah,even though you can tweak it to heaven and it will even let you :D,we shouldn't do it.Who needs all the unlocked goodies when you can even underclock it :D
12-21-2008, 08:14 PM
Zucker2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by charged3800z24

hey, it is not our fault the Phenoms have a nice tweakable feature when OCing.

I didn't say there was something wrong with that, I was merely calling for a stock to stock comparison; when it comes to overclocking, it's a no brainer! :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

Yeah,even though you can tweak it to heaven and it will even let you :D,we shouldn't do it.Who needs all the unlocked goodies when you can even underclock it :D

Are we contradicting ourselves again... ? :D Talking about "feature" turbo mode, and HT (read hyperthreading comes to mind). I wonder if you can wrap your mind around that for me. But seriously, forget the features, it'll all come down to performance - stock, and overclocked. Each platform has ways to wring out the last ounce of performance and the best at doing it will win. Is that fair enough?
12-21-2008, 08:22 PM
charged3800z24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

I didn't say there was something wrong with that, I was merely calling for a stock to stock comparison; when it comes to overclocking, it's a no brainer! :rolleyes:

Well I thought I had a :p: at the end of my post.. but any who.... stock for stock...then it comes down to price point. I don't know if I remember what we are talking bout anymore lol
12-21-2008, 08:25 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

Are we contradicting ourselves again... ? :D Talking about "feature" turbo mode, and HT (read hyperthreading comes to mind). I wonder if you can wrap your mind around that for me. But seriously, forget the features, it'll all come down to performance - stock, and overclocked. Each platform has ways to wring out the last ounce of performance and the best at doing it will win. Is that fair enough?

Nope,HT and turbo are out of the box.Maybe for you this isn't the case,for me both are fine. AMD sells their chip as fully unlocked and only a "noob" wouldn't use all the abilities.
12-21-2008, 08:44 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

AMD sells their chip as fully unlocked and only a "noob" wouldn't use all the abilities.

:para:
12-21-2008, 08:45 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

:para:

I reckon this means you're going to OCit like hell? :D
12-21-2008, 09:02 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

I reckon this means you're going to OCit like hell? :D

wanna know what it means? it means i have had an fx58 and an fx60 before yet i can't recall if i ever went into the bios of either of those. also i have a phenom 9600 right now which i haven't overclocked at all for other reasons. but when i get phenom II hell yes im gonna overclock that thing. i just need to work out an issue right now.

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

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:01 PM.

XtremeSystems