Ok so to satisfy the majority, then they should also be benching on integrated graphics and with low-end dual core chips :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
Printable View
Ok so to satisfy the majority, then they should also be benching on integrated graphics and with low-end dual core chips :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
Cut it down man. Your remarks are pathetic.:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardyMan
id like to see it run with ddr2 since cheapest ddr3 is $200 :o
then again if u have the $1149 to dish out for a 9650 $200 must be chunk change.
You MUST be blind or something..... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by BeardyMan
I wroted to you above that I DON'T HAVE a DDR2 mobo right now to test..... :D
I'll borrow one maybe today or tomorrow...... ;)
@ Hipro5 & Macci, Nice showdown for us poor guys!!!
Honestly, its good to see AMD performing in the same range as Intel in 3DM05 atleast :P
Good, now go extreme to see the results ;)
^^ I think AMD chip is @ extreme [wid air] only... :rofl:
With good DDR2 sticks, you're close to the performance of average DDR3 AND DDR2 is supercheap ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dpa
If FSB gave him no perf increase, he wouldn't have increased it by that much but ran it stock, no? Does it hike power consumption and need higher volts for no reason? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNizze
As for K10h HT means nothing -> it makes a good difference if you're below 1800MHz anyway. All things constant (stock) Phenom 9500 2600XT 2k6:
HT 200MHz: 4438
HT 1000MHz: 4742
HT 1800MHz: 4783
Forgive the card. :lol:
KTE, why doesn't the cpu score go up?
It's good to see a max overclock Phenom going up against a stock clockspeed Yorkie in a bench cherrypicked to favor Phenom and still lose? :confused: Phenom will be "in the same range as Intel" when it has stock clocks over 3GHz and over, overclocks to 4.5GHz on air, performs across a range of benchmarks not a single cherrypicked one, and doesn't come with a performance destroying bugfix.Quote:
Originally Posted by harshal
Until then the only comparisons between Phenom and Yorkfield will be like this thread, a kind of carnival show where a pro fighter is taking on drunken challengers from the crowd with one hand tied behind his back.
^^ No my my point is clock to clock... and yes all of us know AMD should have aimed a lil higher then they did.
Also, I completly agree that with same percentage of overclock on Yorky will leave Phenom miles behind. :)
Keep up the good work guys this is awesome! :clap: :-|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTE
I think I´m missing something in youre post, because of the language barrier. Anyway, my point is that running HTT over stock on an AMD rigg does close to nothing for preformace, Right? I was actualy defending hipro by saying that high HTT does close to nothing for preformace with AMD cpu´s. No the other way around. I think that hipro´s score is 100% fair BTW. Towards me or anyone else that for that matter. I´m doing the best i can @ 2750mhz and so is hipro, if hi runs 200 or 333 or 500 fsb is fine by me! But i would be nice to see what a york pulls in 06 CPU tests... @ 2420mhz, 2750mhz and 3000mhz
ipc isn't close.Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoled
It's what 3DMark 05 does. It's the way it's coded. It really doesn't showcase the IPC of these processors. If you want that you'll have to run 3D Games or compare 3DMark 06 CPU scores.
Heck, using Cinebench or SuperPi would be better for IPC comparing. Mike over at Xtreme CPU has been doing so and the results are less then favorable for the Phenom CPU. It's a horrible processor right now. In time it might mature into something competitive, but as it stands it's junk.
http://www.erenumerique.fr/images/21...rk2005_cpu.gif
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...s/3dmark05.jpg
The 3DM05 cpu test is :banana::banana::banana::banana:. Rerun the test and your score will continuesly go up without changing the clocks.
higher ht is good for high res 3d benchs, no?
No idea but HT increases bandwidth between GPU>CPU so GPU gains if bottlenecked.Quote:
Originally Posted by massman
I understood you fine the first time. I don't think it's a true generalization TBH. I know 1800 from 1000 gets you good gains and people said the same thing when HT was at 1000. Have you tested 2600MHz HT vs 1800MHz HT across all apps? Try it. I would if I could but mine is hevaing like a dud. I don't see why AMD would increase HT from X2 to K10h to Shanghai if it did nothing on perf in any app. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNizze
because the HT Link has nothing to do with the CPU performance 'cause the Memoryinterface is in the CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by massman
The HT Link ist just tu communicate with the rest (ie graphics card and other I/O things), therefore the HT Link can have an impact on graphics performance especially if you use a HT3.0 chipset and a graphics card with small amount of memory (like the 8800GT/256MiB or the HD3850 with 256MiB).
superpi to compare cpus? imo its mostly a cache benchmark now, not really a cpu bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElMoIsEviL
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElMoIsEviL
Are you sure that aint the rebadged Intel Score Charts from Toms Hardware 1 1/2 ago:D Besides man what is so god awful about those scores? It just needs some time to mature just Like Intel did with the Prescots.