AMD 45nm Deneb Pictures, CPU-Z and Super Pi Results

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KeZzZu

well my celeron 440 ( conroe-L ) required 1.7vcore to get 4 ghz, so good result at least in my eyes.

---

Yeah and my E8400, which is a bad clocker, does 4GHz at 1.33v. Tell that to the folks with an E8600 E0 stepping, 4GHz at 1.21v. Nice comparison, new shinny high end 45nm AMD processor vs very low end, 65nm Intel processor :rolleyes:

This is only a good result if you compare it to Agena. If you start talking about Intel it's bad, very bad. And you know it, seriously I don't know why are you trying to compare apples to cars. Because almost every Intel user here can show you an apple being faster than the car :confused:

I think its true, on MB with SB750...Agenas are now with default voltage on 3GHz easily and with 1.4-1.5 about 3.5-3.6GHz. And this is ES Deneb, final products will about 3.5-3.8GHz max OC with air..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Actually AMD's SOI can take much more voltage than intel's sensitive high-k bulk process,at 45nm.I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD chips run at higher than 1.4V for OCing purposes.

---

Well, there's OCing and OCing, I'm thinking of 24/7 clocks. Anything else is completely uninteresting to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Helmore

@Rammsteiner: Is there any word on the clocks of the L3 cache on Deneb? Is there still a clock deficit between the L3 cache and the cores? I believe they could get a nice boost by clocking them at the same speeds, nothing ground braking probably and a downside might be a decrease (over)clocking potential. But these are all changes to the overall architecture of the chip, the cores them self could use a healthy boost and I don't think that adding some SSE instructions will do so right now.

---

Sorry, missed this part. Thus far it seems they clock the Northbridge still at 1.8Ghz, so excluding any eventual tweaks it would be just as fast. Deneb BE/FX might be clocked at 2Ghz again or higher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Yeah and my E8400, which is a bad clocker, does 4GHz at 1.33v. Tell that to the folks with an E8600 E0 stepping, 4GHz at 1.21v. Nice comparison, new shinny high end 45nm AMD processor vs very low end, 65nm Intel processor :rolleyes:

---

Funny to see how lots of people post their Yorkfield results in AMD threads to say Agena is crap, but if an Intel user does the opposite it's bad?

Anyway, it's bad anyway, just find it funny this is the first time someone critizes it not being an AMD user. However, you do the same with your C2D remark:

4Ghz at 1.33V for a Dual Core with High/k and metal gates that is which had quite some improvements/steppings already. This Voltage on an ES 45nm Quad without High/k and metal gates, I think it's very impressive.

It's not superb, but if you remember where we're coming from, B2 Phenoms, B3 Phenoms + SB600... Basicly all B3's (if not B2's as well) can clock well beyond 3Ghz now. I do hope they get rid of the few flaws in the NB though cause atm it's even slower clock for clock with Agena:rolleyes:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Yeah and my E8400, which is a bad clocker, does 4GHz at 1.33v. Tell that to the folks with an E8600 E0 stepping, 4GHz at 1.21v. Nice comparison, new shinny high end 45nm AMD processor vs very low end, 65nm Intel processor :rolleyes:

This is only a good result if you compare it to Agena. If you start talking about Intel it's bad, very bad. And you know it, seriously I don't know why are you trying to compare apples to cars. Because almost every Intel user here can show you an apple being faster than the car :confused:

---

Why don't you try a quadcore comparison?
Ironically hypocritical. :shakes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

Funny to see how lots of people post their Yorkfield results in AMD threads to say Agena is crap, but if an Intel (talking about a Conroe-L) user does the opposite it's bad?

---

Not bad at all, just funny to make a dual-quad-45nm-65nm-highend-lowend comparison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

Anyway, it's bad anyway, just find it funny this is the first time someone critizes it not being an AMD user. However, you do the same with your C2D remark:

4Ghz at 1.33V for a Dual Core with High/k and metal gates that is which had quite some improvements/steppings already. This Voltage on an ES 45nm Quad without High/k and metal gates, I think it's very impressive

---

I did the same on purpose, to show how illogical that comparison was, hence the :rolleyes: ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

It's not superb, but if you remember where we're coming from, B2 Phenoms, B3 Phenoms + SB600... Basicly all B3's (if not B2's as well) can clock well beyond 3Ghz now. I do hope they get rid of the few flaws in the NB though cause atm it's even slower clock for clock with Agena:rolleyes:.

---

Again, is nice compared to Agena, as I said in my first post. A 6GHz PIII or a 4GHz Athlon are nice too, but useless. I want AMD to be on par with Intel not only in overclocking, but in perfomance too, because that is what matters. I don't have my Intel at 4GHz just for the sake of it, I have it like that because I want/need that perfomance. You have your Phenom at 2,50GHz for the same reason right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macadamia

Why don't you try a quadcore comparison?
Ironically hypocritical. :shakes:

---

1. Because there are no E0 quadcores yet.
2. Because I don't have any experience with current Yorkfields, and usually I don't use info from others about something I have not tried myself first. But if you want quad comparisons go ask at what voltages the people in the P5Q Deluxe thread have their quads at 4GHz, crushing Agena/Deneb in perfomance, power consumption and perfomance/watt.

Ironically hypocritical is the fact that some AMD users first cry about Intel being present in AMD threads, and then the same users use Intel in those same threads trying to make AMD look better (and failing). I don't care as a happy Intel user, but way to go :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

I did the same on purpose, to show how illogical that comparison was, hence the :rolleyes: ;)

---

Ah, mkay. Although I have a bit of a problem to understand the context of the post then, it makes a bit clearer though;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Again, is nice compared to Agena, as I said in my first post. A 6GHz PIII or a 4GHz Athlon are nice too, but useless. I want AMD to be on par with Intel not only in overclocking, but in perfomance too, because that is what matters. I don't have my Intel at 4GHz just for the sake of it, I have it like that because I want/need that perfomance. You have your Phenom at 2,50GHz for the same reason right?

---

My Phenom runs at stock for a whole other reason;). My board+CPU combo is that crap I cant even OC it a 100Mhz before idle freezing. Simply waiting for SB750 then to give the OC process another try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Ironically hypocritical is the fact that some AMD users first cry about Intel being present in AMD threads, and then the same users use Intel in those same threads trying to make AMD look better (and failing). I don't care as a happy Intel user, but way to go :up:

---

Must have missed something:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

My Phenom runs at stock for a whole other reason;). My board+CPU combo is that crap I cant even OC it a 100Mhz before idle freezing. Simply waiting for SB750 then to give the OC process another try.

---

I mean you overclock with perfomance in mind, not just for fun right? I also overclock for fun, but that's not important compared to perfomance.

Another thing I find funny is how AMD was promoting compatibility with AM2 mobos, which is nice, and how AMD fanboys said here 'you don't need another mobo, Intel forces you to buy new boards blabla'. Now see how those users say 'hey buy another AM2+ mobo because current SB600's are crap. Buy SB750's blabla'. The contradiction is the mark of the AMD fanboy these days. This is not related to the thread but I want to say it to show how illogical it is too :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rammsteiner

Must have missed something:confused:

---

Go read all AMD threads in the news section man, is not that difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tony

you know I think AMD really do not care that they are slower than Intel at this time, they are building the "platform" which we all keep forgetting about. The GPU's look to be kicking ass now, chipset issues are getting ironed out and CPU clock speed and efficiency are climbing...which is what they had panned.

---

Wow what a thread.
I think Tony is onto something here , and i agree with him , I dont think they really care they have ahead of them what they want to do. And i feel they will be focusing on Fusion alot in the coming months/years.

But nether the less its good to see them going forward, which is they way they should be going. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

1. Because there are no E0 quadcores yet.
2. Because I don't have any experience with current Yorkfields, and usually I don't use info from others about something I have not tried myself first. But if you want quad comparisons go ask at what voltages the people in the P5Q Deluxe thread have their quads at 4GHz, crushing Agena/Deneb in perfomance, power consumption and perfomance/watt.

---

Quad Intel E0 already revealed ... I can get some too, just I'm not interested with Penryn anymore :p:
This is posted at some forum.
QX9650
http://www.coolaler.com.tw/coolalercbb/Q9650E0/520.gif

Q9550
http://www.coolaler.com.tw/coolalerc...0E0/L815/2.gif

why does there always have to be so much intel in every amd thread?

its sad to be honest. very

Not bad, but it could be better don't you think? I want Nehalem too, you are very lucky :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

I mean you overclock with perfomance in mind, not just for fun right? I also overclock for fun, but that's not important compared to perfomance.

---

And that's where you go wrong, I OC for fun. That's why I chose AMD in the first place, I dont see the fun in Intel. And Im not the only one who thinks that way.

Performance is important, of course it is. I miss at times my good old X2 6400 @ 3.5Ghz because any x core @ 2.5Ghz is quite a performance hit. Still it runs everything perfect, but not as smooth as before. However, performance is really not of any high priority as long as it runs everything perfect. And it does that.

Of course Im sometimes dreaming about an Asus Rampage Extreme, Q9450, OCZ Flex II (if they get 4Gb kit that is) and actually building some sort of showcase PC around that. That would be awesome, and fast of course. But why bother wasting that much if even this PC at stock does everything I want? And with the money I save on that I can upgrade a whole lot more here as well.

If I wanted performance I would have bought a 15" TFT screen;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Another thing I find funny is how AMD was promoting compatibility with AM2 mobos, which is nice, and how AMD fanboys said here 'you don't need another mobo, Intel forces you to buy new boards blabla'. Now see how those users say 'hey buy another AM2+ mobo because current SB600's are crap. Buy SB750's blabla'. The contradiction is the mark of the AMD fanboy these days. This is not related to the thread but I want to say it to show how illogical it is too :D

---

Wrong again.

In order to get a better chance for a respectfull OC it's recommendable to get a SB750 because there are issues with the SB600 boards. However, if you dont overclock there's no single need to get a SB750 board at all. Besides that, Im one of the fewer bad examples regarding overclocking. Others seem to get at least a 200Mhz out of it before :banana::banana::banana::banana: hits the fan. Others dont have a problem getting over 3Ghz.

You could run a Phenom on AM2 boards too, but you wont be able to OC the NB of the Phenom due to missing power plane for the NB. Still it runs at stock perfectly.

Besides that, as OC'er, you keep on upgrading every few months in the first place so it's not really a big issue. As well that the quality AM2+ boards are still quite a bit cheaper than most Intel quality boards, although that has all to do with marketing, the Intel user still pays the price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Go read all AMD threads in the news section man, is not that difficult.

---

I did, your comment fails to deliver context:rolleyes:. Also, since I cant even be bothered to look for it since Ive no clue, why do 'these' people post that stuff? Is it maybe to proof the Intel poster wrong?;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Ironically hypocritical is the fact that some AMD users first cry about Intel being present in AMD threads, and then the same users use Intel in those same threads trying to make AMD look better (and failing). I don't care as a happy Intel user, but way to go :up:

---

As a user of both companies' items, you sure seem to be banking on CPUs to boost your ego with this sort of lame trolling more than anything substantial. Performance... LMAO. You don't give a darn. I've seen enough people with the same, dead hard tone to know better.

p/s: At least SB750 users have a reason to change. X38 -> X48 -> P45, with the former 2 motherboards costing at least 1.5X-2X of AMD motherboards, you are only kidding yourself.

Yet another ruined thread.... thanks guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macadamia

p/s: At least SB750 users have a reason to change. X38 -> X48 -> P45, with the former 2 motherboards costing at least 1.5X-2X of AMD motherboards, you are only kidding yourself.

---

lol that point is mood, most 45nm core2s still run on the P965. :yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightSpeed

why does there always have to be so much intel in every amd thread?

its sad to be honest. very

---

For the same reason there is so much AMD in every Intel thread. They are direct competitors, compete in shared markets, and each company has its fans.

So there are legitimate reasons for performance comparisons, along with the back-and-forth cheerleading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrace215

For the same reason there is so much AMD in every Intel thread. They are direct competitors, compete in shared markets, and each company has its fans.

So there are legitimate reasons for performance comparisons, along with the back-and-forth cheerleading.

---

But how do u fit in JCornells post? Its just thread crapping...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

lol that point is mood, most 45nm core2s still run on the P965. :yepp:

---

I think it's more about how many P965 boards run 45nm's (although I dont know if this is abd or good, just saying your statement is incorrect).

On Intel's platform it's less of an issue, however imagine the amount of 680i's sold what was a complete :banana::banana::banana::banana: up from Intel:shakes:.

PS, Still I stand my point Rampage Extreme is a damn sexy board, shame Asus sucks so hard to do anything on AM2+ platform for that. And since the R&D cost Asus more than they'll have profit from it Im afraid we wont see such a board ever on AM2+, if even on any Intel platform. Then again, 300 Euro minimal for that board is quite shocking, although it's not 'needed'. Quality P45/X48 do cost a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eXa

But how do u fit in JCornells post? Its just thread crapping...

---

exactly

and i know they are direct competitors, but whenever theres some good news around the AMD camp the intel folks dont waste a breath and jump instantly saying xx stepping of my intel does xx ghz at this volt so this phenom sucks,

then they show screenshots of core2 cpu-z in this 45nm AMD thread

honestly, wtf? :confused:

edit: and yes, things will only get better with the 45nm deneb, early results do look promising :)

i think its coming to the point where i dont want to go outside with my amd t-shirt on for fears i might be the victim of a hate crime

The way I see it is that the AMD fanboys are just too sensitive, It is like they want an embargo on mentioning Intel, Why does it hurt so much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gallag

The way I see it is that the AMD fanboys are just too sensitive, It is like they want an embargo on mentioning Intel, Why does it hurt so much?

---

Yep, and it's really sad how they flame one of the few VIPs with access to pre-release hardware, just make him go away. :down: Sure he may show some bias, but he did not threadcrap, just explained STaRGaZeR's point.

I like both chips' results, looks like AMD really improved w/ 45nm, but both companies are fierce competitors - face it and enjoy ALL the results.

Bah I was going to answer, but is as useful as talking to a stone. A normal conversation can't be had when one of the parts ignore the facts and starts dreaming. To Rammsteiner, don't call others wrong when you're the one at fault. Macadamia, when you start the personal attacks you loose all credibility and your lack of arguments is evident. Well that was evident from the start, but still...

I don't mind seeing remarks about Intel this and AMD that, it's just that comparing volts and clocks between completely different architectures and manufacturing processes is pointless. It however can be useful to compare clocks and volts between the current Agena chips and future Deneb chips as these are pretty much the same architecture, this might tell you something about AMD's 45 nm. process and maybe clocking potential on Deneb chips.
When you do intend to compare between different architectures, then you should only look at performance, stability and power draw of both an overclocked and stock chip and all else is pretty much useless (except for pricing of the overall platform of course). But I guess most of you already know this, although some of you here apparently do not act like doing so.