http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=41970
if that is real... wow!
cumec
Printable View
http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=41970
if that is real... wow!
cumec
No reply's!?
Shamino in the 3dteam section got 27k with a 5.1ghz core 2, and two OC'd 2900xt's
So a 3.0ghz barcelona with two oc'd 2900xt's does 30k?
Something phishy, or AMD has a winner
it is over here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=156932
The crossfire (all 3dmark06 records are based on dual card setup) drivers are much better
(and maby they are a special version for 3dmark06), that helps but (a big but) one need to
remember, K10 is better, way better, so no surprize that in 3 ghz it kick intel patch work
(dual dual core, no integrated memoro controller) in the head - i expected nothing less.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=156932Quote:
Originally Posted by Unoid
That's the "official" topic on this subject.
And yes, it sounds very, very fishy...
It smell's like a garden of roses to me - hope its true and accurate.
That is the whole point.Quote:
Originally Posted by tsahi
It would smell like garden and roses if AMD had any real world benches to back this up.
30K in 3DMark is pretty much insane, as the world record right now is 27k, set with a C2Q running 5.1GHz and 2 super cooled and OCed HD2900XTs.....
well if there are benchmarks to back it up, it'll be the most aggressive performance jumps as far back as anyone can remember for x86Quote:
Originally Posted by The Coolest
You forget that the K10 supposed to be much better than core 2 "quad"Quote:
Originally Posted by The Coolest
and 3 ghz for k10 is quite a lot.
Overcloking can not match a better hardware design, it can only
raise the clock.
perhaps this is why they are only introducing 1.9Ghz versions as they know that's all they need to release till intel releases their new CPU's....
perhaps this K10 is a real winner and not just of C2D, but oh whats to follow....
exciting times!! :eek:
Well I hope the 1.9GHz version overclocks like a sonofab1tch then
Well it's supposed to be from the b1 revision (if you're to believe sites like the Inq etc), wich supposedly have problems reaching high clocks..Quote:
Originally Posted by gundersausage
Highly unlikely, considering AMD has a pretty bad track record in new CPU OC, especially when architecture changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by gundersausage
I think there are already two threads on this topic over in "Xtreme News"...
It's gettin' pretty ugly in there too.
I was under the impression that B2 was the latest and final release version?
AMD has been so low-key and mum throughout K10's entire development process that it's hard to assume we know anything about versions.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
30K is for TRIFIRE! Youtube is your friend! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7EZmYth6TM
I believe that rather then 3ghz phenom is equal to a 6ghz Kentsfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNizze
God, imagine the heat a tri-fire crossfire setup dumps out, and what kind of psu you'll need to supply those beasts.
Not only that, but it has also been proven that the benefits of a multi-GPU setup, a la SLI & Crossfire, do not justify the hundreds of dollars you'll spend for a second let alone THIRD GPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dome
who cares.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardrail
we are in the high end user group, we want more and more power.
3 cards would rock if the drivers would work for games.
mostly tho, crossfire isnt needed, but 30 inch screens are becoming common and 3 cards are there useful.
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAQuote:
Originally Posted by ownage
Quote:
You forget that the K10 supposed to be much better than core 2 "quad"
and 3 ghz for k10 is quite a lot
AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
you guys are just hilarious.
there is no.. and i repeat NO DATA to prove that ANY K10, i dont care if its 1ghz or 5 ghz can outrun a Core2Duo or Core2Quad
NONE
but you girls keep dreaming,
someday AMD will get off their a$$es and make a cpu that will create a gap like the AMD64 did to the Intel P4.
they already totally fooked up the 2900 series cards i HIGHLY doubt they are going to crank out a cpu that will totally crush the intel line like you boys are dreaming about.
AMD is being hush hush for 1 reason and 1 reason only.
they can not discuss the crappy benchmarks because the cpu can not beat the core2 duo or quad.
for them to divuldge information now would make the entire K10 launch an absolute flop.
just wait... you'll see,,,, once again, ive said it before and not been wrong,, so i'll say it again... mark my words....
in Which respects?Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
Both AMD and Intel processors are designed with a series of trade offs. (the same is said about all processors and anyone who says differently is lying)
In some environments current AMD processors outperform Intel Processors and vice versa. So you need to be more specific if you hope to qualify that statement.
that used to be true NNQuote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
but not anymore.
there is no trade off even comparing dual core amd to dual core intel
the intel just goes and goes and goes, while the AMD struggles.
the intel does everything better.
pound for pound 2.4ghz intel vs 2.4ghz AMD.... there is no comparison.. only 1 cpu pulls ahead all the way
i am no way shape or form complaining about AMD, i love the amd cpu's i had and still have.
but when it comes to getting the job done,, Intel wins everytime.
bogus figures i reckon.
but it makes me wonder how good k10 will really be.
and if the figures are true, it'd be a larf and a harf - and the pricetag would be also unbelievable, imo.
the more unsubstantiated crap i hear re k10 the more annoying it is :down:
i smell something...the smell is either:
1. bull sh1t, or
2. intel's cooked goose :hehe:
WRONG, it is still true. Yes I agree that Intel's Quads perform better than AMD's dual cores in many respects but not in all respects. For Example, Virtualization. AMD has hardware support for many(all) used virtualization instructions, Intel does not. Thus AMD can do in 6 clock cycles what takes Intel a hundred regular instructions with latencies ranging from 1 clock cycle to hundreds of clock cycles. So that even in a best case scenario, AMD's 6 clock cycles still owns Intel's 100 clock cycles. Thus even with Quadruple the numbers of Cores, double the clock speed it doesn't make up for the 16 fold superior performance that AMD has for the given task.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
I'm not suggesting it is a common situation, nor will it even matter in a desktop but it is an area that AMD's tradeoffs give them superior performance.
Just shut up , IIRC the link you use as proof has older , Netburst core Xeons , which are 10-30% slower in some tasks than comparable Opterons.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
The rest with clock cycles and latencies are only in your head ; go out in the world from time to time ; it might help.
Now now savantu. IIRC the link nn used to use was a AMD sponsored test. It could very well be true however.
I didn't say it wasn't true ; I merely questioned the level of his claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] riptide
Core improved VT and the new revision G0 brings other improvements ; Penryn will up the ante too.
Things aren't as black and white as nn says ; for example Intel has an extra level in VT vs. Pacifica which makes it less SW dependant.
The source of the news said specifically two cards:Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNizze
"The reference motherboard containing RD790 chip set packed two HD 2900XT cards,"
You are saying that he is a complete idiot (how hard is video card counting? case closed or open, it is very easy) or that he is flat out lying.
ths source:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=41970
On the other hand, he source also refers to "Corsair’s Dominator PC2-9136C5D" and they are part of the youtube video:
Corsair’s Dominator:
http://corsair.com/_images/products/...escription.jpg
I agree, it is very annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
This fall could either be very embarrassing or very glorifying for AMD.
seriously who gives a :banana::banana::banana::banana: about virtualisationQuote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
until they make it work properly with true indepenent workloads off one computer VT is a load of crap IMO
i want my ONE computer to simulataneously play games in one room, surf the net in another and be a full blown HTPC with HDTV feed and real time recording in the third, hell while i'm at it hook up my room 4 and 5 with some movie playback as well :rolleyes:
Umm you're quite clueless about the whole industry, I can tell. Here are some snippets from the real world so you might will consider things beyond your stinky basement...Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
1. Server market makes the mfrs fat, not your pathetic little home machine purchases.
2. Profit rate is much higher on server units and virtualization is one of the hottest - and I personally think the best - thing on the server market for years and on top of it helps to sell new CPUs.
3. I, for one (animation/post company), only use DC Opterons for our VMware machines: each DL145 (2x O285, 8GB RAM, SAS drives) machine runs at least 2 virtualized version of former physical servers - I save money on electricity, on management, on networking, everything and most importantly a lot of headaches/work (e.g. floating license servers: no need for server re-authentication for a dozen or so software after a hardware failure etc).
So the only load of crap here was your post, thanks to your ignorance on virtualization. :ROTF:
Besides this it really depends on application. According to our tests our dual FX-74 test WS is able to keep up the pace with our dual 5160 test nodes at least in half of the tests - that's pretty impressive if we consider how old is this current AMD architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
don't know if you realise this but you are in the wrong forumQuote:
Originally Posted by T2k
go to 2CPU.com if you are after info and server market users
this ain't the place :rolleyes:
as to my "industry knowledge" i've been around all channel structures up and down and even had my own company target specialised server and workstation markets but i am posting my reply specifically about products and to a forum which does not focus on that so next time you have a brain fart engage the gray matter a little more intensely
I wasn't 'after info', I simply replied to your moronic comment. Also since you're ignorant at least you should be nice instead of being ignorant AND arrogant, you know...Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
[qutoe]
this ain't the place :rolleyes:
[/quote]
Yes, it is the place, no matter how hard you're trying to save your face now - look the psot you replied to, johnny... :rolleyes:
Suuuuure... these 19-ys old-styled rants really show your knowledge about "specialised server and workstation markets"... :ROTF:Quote:
as to my "industry knowledge" i've been around all channel structures up and down and even had my own company target specialised server and workstation markets
BS. You replied to a post which specifically pointed out why AMD is still a better choice for a number of implementations.Quote:
but i am posting my reply specifically about products and to a forum which does not focus on that
:rolleyes: Stop embarrassing yourself - you posted a clueless idiotic thing and now this lame attempt to save face is really pathetic, I can tell you that.:down:Quote:
so next time you have a brain fart engage the gray matter a little more intensely
PS: I am no way an AMD fan, currently I am planning to buy Intel, just to make it clear it's not some kind of childish 'who is fan of which maker' kind of spat...
:eek2::eek2::eek2:Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Wazaaaa dude, tell us what'cha smokin' so we can treat you properly.
Well, I foggin' do.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Just consolidated my dataroom (not much, around 50 servers) to around 10 blades, each one having 2 well-clocked quaddies and loads of fb-ddr2, storage deployed on FC-SAN.
Of course, nowadays there is only one serious virtualisation product (no names :D) who doesn't give a fsck on virtualization capabilities, but have a chubby kernel with a twisted hypervisor. Nevertheless, looking at an open source alternative that really takes advantage of this, there are merely 7-800 relevant C code lines that make up a *good* hypervisor.
Of course, virtualisation is crap for home users, but that is not a reason why it shouldn't exist. Compare it with AMD64 instructions, the only clear benefit that *some* people are geting out of it *nowadays* (when RAM is affordable for the average Joe) is using 4+ gigs of RAM. No 64-bit games, no 64-bit apps (except for the ones really needing 4+ gigs such as SQL servers, mail servers etc).
Savantu, there is still an advantage of Pacifica over Vanderpool - the ability to virtualize realmode kernels. Thus AMD is very useful for virtualizing DOS/Win3.x servers :D
Doh.
Virtualization is a nice feature if you are a developer running a number of VM's or running a datacenter and trying to dynamically allocate CPU load to each application. Yes, that's all good.
But, here at XS, we are more into the 3D performance of a single machine. So, have to agree with Dinos22. And, if you had any background on him, you wouldn't be sending unfounded snide remarks his way. :D
This is also a waste of space!!
i bet you whatever amount you guys want that the first thing we all do is boot into bios and turn of VT :D useless :D
Puts on Mod hat reluctantly:
C'mon guys, stop with the personal attacks..
Calling people idiots or anything else just diminishes you and your argument not them..
Stop and think of all the different knowledge levels here and when you see something posted that is ludicrous and you KNOW for certain, not think, but KNOW that persons info is wrong, use your intellect and knowledge to inform them nicely as to what they missed.
Education is the answer, not insulting.
Just wait for the proper reviews of Phenom and then we can see how good is it. Those Inquirer's stories about Phenom scoring 30k in 3dmark have already been proven false (=meaning the cpu score would be something like 15 000. QX6850 clocked at 5.2GHz gets something like 8000).
Who ever gives a damn about INQ or FUDzilla? :DThey should be presenting what they have the most there: landmines and sniper rifles.