K10 Scores starting to surface

Again from coolaler's site

http://forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=161127

http://img.coolaler.com.tw/images/ma...hmwdiyjtze.jpg
http://img.coolaler.com.tw/images/uv...5d13ttimmz.jpg

The setup is Dual Opteron 2332 @ 2G with total 8 cores.

From what I can gather from dual clovertown scores

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1187979867

1X: Clovertown 22% advantage clock for clock
8X: K10 speedup 7X, Clovertown speedup 6X

So even K10 scales better, it still may lose at dual socket, at least for Cinebench 10.

Don't shoot me down, I'm just a messanger.

we still need to know how well it scales.

I want 3.3Ghz on water

ooooh baby cant wait

how about /2 still 4000 extra then 4.7G QX6700... hehe

For comparision:
http://www.3dfluff.com/mash/cinebench/top.php
Core 2 Duo 2GHz = 2016

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kl0012

For comparision:
http://www.3dfluff.com/mash/cinebench/top.php
Core 2 Duo 2GHz = 2016

---

You have to realize the 2016 score is run under windows XP 32bit
The score is higher under 64bit

has the core htt clock been released yet im curios on weather amd has upped it from 200mhz

I got to go look that up. I think I ran cine10 at 2000mhz for one of the guys..might have been 9.5..

Xbitlabs has a Fritz score for an 8-core X5365 system:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...tel-v8_13.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

Xbitlabs has a Fritz score for an 8-core X5365 system:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...tel-v8_13.html

---

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/2...nch3258fc8.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

Xbitlabs has a Fritz score for an 8-core X5365 system:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...tel-v8_13.html

---

Xeon faster by 60%. Clock difference is only 50%.

This is consistent with previous information; K10 is slower clock/clock than Core in rendering ( I expect similar results in Povray).No magic dust inside...

A 3.33Ghz Yorkfiled scores 13068 , almost the same as 8 2Ghz K10 cores.

Running it now at 2013mhz(closest I can get to 2000) on 32 bit win2K3.
Will take a bit..Machine isn't used to running under 3000mhz:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Running it now at 2013mhz(closest I can get to 2000) on 32 bit win2K3.
Will take a bit..Machine isn't used to running under 3000mhz:D

---

Can you please run it under 64bit windows?

Core 2 has 15% advantage in 64bit against 32bit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaarath

Can you please run it under 64bit windows?

Core 2 has 15% advantage in 64bit against 32bit

---

well if the score is higher or same in 32bit then just assume that it's 15% faster in 64bit.

Wouldn't wanna make AMD look THAT bad in cinebench

Better speed up in cinebench when compared to core 2, but that's no news is it .

Would help to know what kinda rams speeds were used for the tests, also i'd love to take a peak at pi calculations even though I have a feeling they will be real bad .

Awaiting your results MM :) I'm very curious .

So is that quad or 2X quad
http://img.coolaler.com.tw/images/mn...nmzfzgtjuh.jpg


same score of a 4GHZ quad Qx

wPrime score
Edit: Kemo6600 beat me to it.

Can someone post a dual clover wprime score?

2x quad ; fairly obvious when you see processor #8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaarath

Can you please run it under 64bit windows?

Core 2 has 15% advantage in 64bit against 32bit

---

I can, thats the other machine, that runs on win2K3 Ent 64 bit.
I've already run cine10 at 3000 and at 3240 on that machine and posted in the first cimebench10 thread here..9% slower than Intels posted benchmarks at the same cpu speed..
At my max of 3240 I was app 400 points behind the penryn setup at 3000

So simply you are saying that Intel dual socket is faster and indeed it looks faster in wprime

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

So simply you are saying that Intel dual socket is faster and indeed it looks faster in wprime

---

The multi core efficiency sees amd as the winner . That said, the performance seems still higher on Intel's side clock per clock .

we still don't know how k10 clocks/scales though...

2013mhz..win2K3 32 bit:
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/7969/cine10zs8.jpg

http://images.people.overclockers.ru/120410.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

2013mhz..win2K3 32 bit:
[IMG][/IMG]

---

now to make sure that the OS isn't effecting it, 64bit may be required.

Now you got me going..Going to crank down the other machine(64 bit) and see what happens..I got a feeling that there's going to be some surprised and maybe unhappy people here..back in a few..this takes a few minutes to do..server hardware..:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kl0012

http://images.people.overclockers.ru/120410.png

---

Core totally owns it in wPrime.

Let's wait for some Penryn scores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

now to make sure that the OS isn't effecting it, 64bit may be required.

---

If anything, the score is going to be higher on x64 os .

oh boy....... I can see why AMD kept silent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Now you got me going..Going to crank down the other machine(64 bit) and see what happens..I got a feeling that there's going to be some surprised and maybe unhappy people here..back in a few..this takes a few minutes to do..server hardware..:D

---

Yeah, I'm eager to see dual clover @2G cinebench R10 under 64bit windows

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Core totally owns it in wPrime.

Let's wait for some Penryn scores.

---

Not realy.
It is 2.66GHz 2xXeon.
From the russian site.
http://forums.overclockers.ru/viewto...er=asc&start=0

Assuming 100% clock scaling
dual K10 @ 2.66G will yield 8.00 sec and 246.17 sec in wprime.

unless every revision posts the SAME info on CPU-Z this has to be a B0

= EVT sample which are supposed to have bad performance....

i wait for final benches with final revisions :rolleyes:

From the other clover: Win2K3 ent 64 bit at 2000mhz:
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1...e102000eg0.jpg

SPI 1M
http://img.coolaler.com.tw/images/zm...mlwemyzmzk.jpg

PI1M @ 2G

Edit: Damn you, zaarath :P

Ouch!!!!

Bad News : So far it's down in Cinebench, wPrime and Superpi

Good News: All are synthetic and not real world benches

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generics_user

unless every revision posts the SAME info on CPU-Z this has to be a B0

= EVT sample which are supposed to have bad performance....

i wait for final benches with final revisions :rolleyes:

---

Well, it's certainly a valid concern, but aren't all EVT samples clocked @ 1.6G?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

From the other clover: Win2K3 ent 64 bit at 2000mhz:
[IMG][/IMG]

---

Thank you

If it's of any matter my best on that 64 bit machine on SP1M is 15.562s at 3330mhz..
That's an untouched OS and stock volt chips with DDR2-667FBDimms

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaarath

Well, it's certainly a valid concern, but aren't all EVT samples clocked @ 1.6G?

---

vr-zone got one @ 1.8ghz

but is this one really an ES, if it is supposed to be one then i smell BS because amd ES never show processor numbers...

EDIT: second scrrenshot shows full information, well we'll see :)

I sure hope those are the sucky ones. If this is retail, run for your Q6600's while they are still below 300$!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

Thank you

---

My friend, are you sure you want to say that to me after seeing this?
I fully expected to be on the losing end of this not the other way around.
Then add in that Penryn is 9% faster than my Clovers at the same clock.
Honestly, I am sorry to see this and I think you know me well enough to know I'm dead serious.

I don't think this is an ES.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

My friend, are you sure you want to say that to me after seeing this?
I fully expected to be on the losing end of this not the other way around.
Then add in that Penryn is 9% faster than my Clovers at the same clock.
Honestly, I am sorry to see this and I think you know me well enough to know I'm dead serious.

---

If that came from anyone else, I would have called you a Fanboy but its not the case, it's the truth. I truly am disappointed at the initial results.
I know these are preliminary results and synthetic, but in your experience movie man, how have these synthetic results transfered over to real work performance?

Second scrrenshot shows single socket F system with 1 cpu :confused:

EDIT: ok i pass out, this is just as much validated as Theos 30k in 06, no info on the system, the RAM or anything else, i'll pass :shakes: , much smooke around no info, intel ES benches had mor system specs and better screens to back it up :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generics_user

Second scrrenshot shows single socket F system with 1 cpu :confused:

---

It shows "Processor #8"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

My friend, are you sure you want to say that to me after seeing this?
I fully expected to be on the losing end of this not the other way around.
Then add in that Penryn is 9% faster than my Clovers at the same clock.
Honestly, I am sorry to see this and I think you know me well enough to know I'm dead serious.

---

I too expected amd to take back the crown, but it seems it's not the case . Perhaps we're too quick to come to conclusions, afterall we don't know how k10 speed scales as the clock increases .

I don't think anybody expected anything great in SPI tbh, afterall 512kb vs 4096kb L2 says it all... what I'm eager to see now is 3d06 cpu scores . Maybe we're in for a surprise ? :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n91htmare

If that came from anyone else, I would have called you a Fanboy but its not the case, it's the truth. I truly am disappointed at the initial results.
I know these are preliminary results and synthetic, but in your experience movie man, how have these synthetic results transfered over to real work performance?

---

I have been saying for the last 8 months that these clovers are the damnest things I've ever seen. I can load all 8 cores at 100% and it still doesn't slow down. nn_step can tell you, I run the 2 of these machines at 3157/8mb/1402 at 100% load 24/7 doing DC work..Thats nonstop 100% load except for a few benches and updates since last December..In March this machine had a 99.8% uptime, I remember that figure. I'd done 4 reboots for updates..Thats it..Yea, I could go to work selling these for Intel they are so good.

if that CPU exists, it's certainly not an ES, but does AMD give nonES's to
people? never heard of this.

smells fishy
and the performance gains are very low compared to what people having
this CPU in hands said.

WOW K10 has failed.

I thought that with all the Microarchitecture enhancements that it would have an advantage over 65nm Core2's and be at least even with the 45nm ones.

How wrong many of us were!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaarath

It shows "Processor #8"...

---

i was talking about the SPI screen which shows 4 cores and 4 threads but greyed out the processor so not the same system

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alayashu

if that CPU exists, it's certainly not an ES, but does AMD give nonES's to
people? never heard of this.

smells fishy
and the performance gains are very low compared to what people having
this CPU in hands said.

---

coolaler has MANY connections. Chances are it's a retail version.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n91htmare

coolaler has MANY connections. Chances are it's a retail version.

---

Corrrection: "People on Coolaler's site" have MANY connections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generics_user

i was talking about the SPI screen which shows 4 cores and 4 threads but greyed out the processor so not the same system

---

Different version of cpu-z .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slay0r

If anything, the score is going to be higher on x64 os .

---

maybe, maybe not. remember 64bit disables the inteligent caching from the core architecture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alayashu

if that CPU exists, it's certainly not an ES, but does AMD give nonES's to
people? never heard of this.

smells fishy
and the performance gains are very low compared to what people having
this CPU in hands said.

---

this is no longer an ES those were shipped with 1.6-1.8GHZ speed. It is a DVT or one of the "early birds" as some OEM like to call these

and for the performance... wprime/pi etc says nothing to real performance.
on INT it's not faster than micro on FPU it's a huge difference same with memory bandwith, power consumption is to early to tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alayashu

cpu-z, doesnt 1.40.5 show the voltage on K10 CPUs?

---

it look likes cpu-z is able to read vcore of the phenom, but it can't on barcelona

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

WOW K10 has failed.

I thought that with all the Microarchitecture enhancements that it would have an advantage over 65nm Core2's and be at least even with the 45nm ones.

How wrong many of us were!

---

funny how people think that 45nm penryn will be so much better.

I'll give some hint's:
yes it will have advantages because of the higher speed, don't expect miracles, they already had troubles fitting 3.16ghz wolfdale in the 120W tdp package
if the program has advantages due to additional cache yes it will benefit
if it supports sse4 yes it gives huge performance increase.
all the rest clock/clock it is the same performance

cpu-z, doesnt 1.40.5 show the voltage on K10 CPUs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MR_SmartAss

At higher frequencies it can only be slower(clock/clock) due to less memory bandwidth per MHz.

It is not up to the cache. Run a SPi test on a 2GHz Core2 with 512kB L2 and you'll get a very similar score to the one of the 4MB L2 Core2. Also the K10 has 2MB L3 dedicated to only one core when needed and two independent integrated memory controllers providing twice the memory bandwidth of Core2.

---

Actually 2MB C2D already has 10% deficit in Spi against 4MB, 512kb L2 Celeron 4xx is even worse. SPI is very cache sensitive.

Also, I don't think you can get 2X memory bandwidth against core2 in a single threaded application, more like 1.2X

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

WOW K10 has failed.

I thought that with all the Microarchitecture enhancements that it would have an advantage over 65nm Core2's and be at least even with the 45nm ones.

How wrong many of us were!

---

That should have been obvious from 5 reasons :

-constant delays
-far slower speed than expected
-changing tune from "Intel killer" to "perf/w over current Opteron" in AMD's PR
-AMD stressing Spec_rate benchmarks ; that was a clear indication that single threaded performance sucks
-early benchmark figures ( some from AMD itself )

The whole thing boils down to : K10 has nothing over Core to suggest it will have better IPC; it is simply a K8 upped to Core-like level.I say Core-like because IMO Intel still has a few advantages such as better prefetch and vastly better L2s.

Cinebench is a test where K8 kept up with Core , even exceeded it clock/clock.From these results , it is obvious that K10 is slower clock/clock than K8 at least for this benchmark.I attribute this to the cache hierarchy , the cpu simply needs to search in more places for data and this takes time.

I would guess it's an ES as AMD does give them out, just sparingly..
I'm not usually surprised, most things in this game are somewhat predictable.
I can't beleive that AMD would release a chip with lesser capibilities than the current Intel offering KNOWING that Intel has even faster waiting in the wings with Penryn. After almost 40 years in the business world that flyies in the face of logic.
SO if that is wrong, what are the alternatives?
AMD is sandbagging Intel to get Intel to relax and not release Penryn a weel before AMD releases these?
That is sound business logic and It wouldn't surprise me.
That is the only option that makes sense to me.
They control their chips much better than Intel does in terms of who gets ES and might they have intentionally sent out "slow" cpu's?
Sound loudricous? Yes, but when the obvious fails then you look at the not so obvious..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duploxxx

maybe, maybe not. remember 64bit disables the inteligent caching from the core architecture

...

---

Huh ?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MR_SmartAss

At higher frequencies it can only be slower(clock/clock) due to less memory bandwidth per MHz.

---

How do you work this out ? bandwidth is something Amd never lacked, on the other hand it's also something that had minimal influence on the overall performance . I understand the scaling is not going to be linear, but we can't know for sure that it's going to be slower c4c untill it gets tested.

Quote:

---

It is not up to the cache. Run a SPi test on a 2GHz Core2 with 512kB L2 and you'll get a very similar score to the one of the 4MB L2 Core2. Also the K10 has 2MB L3 which are being used and dedicated to only one core when needed and two independent integrated memory controllers providing twice the memory bandwidth of Core2.

---

It's not entirely up to the cache, on that I would agree . That said, the newer celerons already showed that fewer cache handicappes the performance on core2s (in superpi at least), the scores are not very similar at all .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I would guess it's an ES as AMD does give them out, just sparingly..
I'm not usually surprised, most things in this game are somewhat predictable.
I can't beleive that AMD would release a chip with lesser capibilities than the current Intel offering KNOWING that Intel has even faster waiting in the wings with Penryn. After almost 40 years in the business world that flyies in the face of logic.
SO if that is wrong, what are the alternatives?
AMD is sandbagging Intel to get Intel to relax and not release Penryn a weel before AMD releases these?
That is sound business logic and It wouldn't surprise me.
That is the only option that makes sense to me.
They control their chips much better than Intel does in terms of who gets ES and might they have intentionally sent out "slow" cpu's?
Sound loudricous? Yes, but when the obvious fails then you look at the not so obvious..

---

I think you are giving AMD too much credit ; aren't they allowed to fail after all ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I would guess it's an ES as AMD does give them out, just sparingly..
I'm not usually surprised, most things in this game are somewhat predictable.
I can't beleive that AMD would release a chip with lesser capibilities than the current Intel offering KNOWING that Intel has even faster waiting in the wings with Penryn. After almost 40 years in the business world that flyies in the face of logic.
SO if that is wrong, what are the alternatives?
AMD is sandbagging Intel to get Intel to relax and not release Penryn a weel before AMD releases these?
That is sound business logic and It wouldn't surprise me.
That is the only option that makes sense to me.
They control their chips much better than Intel does in terms of who gets ES and might they have intentionally sent out "slow" cpu's?
Sound loudricous? Yes, but when the obvious fails then you look at the not so obvious..

---

you crazy silly man.....get some sleep:D

hmm doesnt look that good for barcelone.

But ill wait till more benches pop up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I think you are giving AMD too much credit ; aren't they allowed to fail after all ?

---

If we lose AMD, then we will all be :banana::banana::banana::banana:ed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n91htmare

you crazy silly man.....get some sleep:D

---

I believe you mean reasonable man :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I think you are giving AMD too much credit ; aren't they allowed to fail after all ?

---

At this level of business you've got the company bet on it..
The answer is no, your not allowed to fail and if I had $$ I'd buy AMD stock tomorrow!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n91htmare

you crazy silly man.....get some sleep:D

---

We will see how nuts I am..:D

Good night Gentlemen..,Glad to help out! Sleep calls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I think you are giving AMD too much credit

---

But we have you who doesn't have single post on this forum for giving AMD and those benches at least little benefit of doubt!

And just like nice Intel fan boy Mikesta you go ahead giving us ultimate sentence for K10: failed

way to go Sav :up:

Gentlemen: I can see whats about to happen and I'll ask EVERYONE to think before they type.
No flaming please..No Gloating, tonight only raises questions, it provides no difinitive answers..
Please, remember, here at Xs, friends first please.
The last thing I want to do tonight is play Mod and ban people so please respect each other and each others views..
Thank you and goodnight..
(Yes, I get all these posts into my email);)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedjo

But we have you who doesn't have single post on this forum for giving AMD and those benches at least little benefit of doubt!

And just like nice Intel fan boy Mikesta you go ahead giving us ultimate sentence for K10: failed

way to go Sav :up:

---

I accept the reality of cold facts instead of replacing it with one of my own where K10 is the best thing since sliced bread...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I accept the reality of cold facts instead of replacing it with one of my own where K10 is the best thing since sliced bread...

---

Oh yes, because God knows a single post is 100% accurate in reflecting any possible future for a processor :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

If we lose AMD, then we will all be :banana::banana::banana::banana:ed

---

I doubt it ; Intel lost a lot of its power over the industry ; SW is becoming platform agnostic and the cellphone will ultimately replace the PC...

AMD will fail ; spending all their money on ATI instead of FABs was a turning point.

Secondly SOI is running out of steam ; AMD 65nm problems are part of ti and things will get far worse on 45nm.

Quote:

---

I believe you mean reasonable man :rolleyes:

---

He is reasonable when he tries to replace facts ( even deny his own tests ) with a conspiracy theory ? That's a new one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

Oh yes, because God knows a single post is 100% accurate in reflecting any possible future for a processor :rolleyes:

---

So independent Cinebech , wPrime , SuperPI , Fritz , Pov-ray scores together with AMD released Cinebench scores ( which support the independent ones ) all point to K10 being slower clock/clock than Core.

I smell spring 06 Conroe-denial-syndrome once again...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I doubt it ; Intel lost a lot of its power over the industry ; SW is becoming platform agnostic and the cellphone will ultimately replace the PC...

AMD will fail ; spending all their money on ATI instead of FABs was a turning point.

Secondly SOI is running out of steam ; AMD 65nm problems are part of ti and things will get far worse on 45nm.


He is reasonable when he tries to replace facts ( even deny his own tests ) with a conspiracy theory ? That's a new one.

---

well until I can play a DX11 game on my Cellphone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I doubt it ; Intel lost a lot of its power over the industry ; SW is becoming platform agnostic and the cellphone will ultimately replace the PC..[...]

---

lmao!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

I doubt it ; Intel lost a lot of its power over the industry ; SW is becoming platform agnostic and the cellphone will ultimately replace the PC...

AMD will fail ; spending all their money on ATI instead of FABs was a turning point.

Secondly SOI is running out of steam ; AMD 65nm problems are part of ti and things will get far worse on 45nm.




He is reasonable when he tries to replace facts ( even deny his own tests ) with a conspiracy theory ? That's a new one.

---

You on the other hand were graced with foresight on birth ?

How about we tone it down a tad and wait for more results to come in ? you know, cinebench/superprime/superpi produce really fashionable numbers, ay . But what do they mean in "real world" (if it even has a meaning of its own) performance ? not a great deal .

If amd has failed, then so be it . "Better luck next time" .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

At this level of business you've got the company bet on it..
The answer is no, your not allowed to fail and if I had $$ I'd buy AMD stock tomorrow!

...

---

That's blind faith territory ; Intel failed with Prescott altough it was supposed to be a killer.

You can have a superb product ( Alpha ) and still go down under , far larger companies crumbled in this space ; why whould AMD be exempt ?

K10 will offer sizeable benefits over K8 in the server arena , altough this will be obvious only when it ramps up the clock.But that's about it ; it won't obliterate Core , not to mention Penryn.

i hope later today we see some gaming benches, im curious about the performance of K10 in games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

well until I can play a DX11 game on my Cellphone

---

well you need to buy a cellphone first my friend :rofl: :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slay0r

You on the other hand were graced with foresight on birth ?

How about we tone it down a tad and wait for more results to come in ? you know, cinebench/superprime/superpi produce really fashionable numbers, ay . But what do they mean in "real world" (if it even has a meaning of its own) performance ? not a great deal .

If amd has failed, then so be it . "Better luck next time" .

---

Cinebench is portrayed as representative of commercial 3D rendering SW ; that is pretty real world.

After all , what's real world ? 3Dmark ? Games ?

If anything , tests like the above show which core has more oomph , even if the results are semi-worthless for real world.

Just because AMD can't release anything that beats a conroe/kentsfield does not mean they will just "suddenly die"...
I guess if worst comes to worst they can go back to the days of the K6, where they were vastly inferior to intel in terms of performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

well you need to buy a cellphone first my friend :rofl: :rofl:

---

already taken care of that one (I use it as a modem when I travel)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Cinebench is portrayed as representative of commercial 3D rendering SW ; that is pretty real world.

After all , what's real world ? 3Dmark ? Games ?

If anything , tests like the above show which core has more oomph , even if the results are semi-worthless for real world.

---

If the results are correct, then AMD looks like it will be without a paddle in the home market. If this is the case, they better had hope that when put in typical servers, it performs exceptionally well.

I'm just hoping these chips are "broken" revisions and the 3Dmark Phenom is the actual speed. I wont be holding my breath though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Cinebench is portrayed as representative of commercial 3D rendering SW ; that is pretty real world.

After all , what's real world ? 3Dmark ? Games ?

If anything , tests like the above show which core has more oomph , even if the results are semi-worthless for real world.

---

ye, but you have to consider that:
- only cinebench and wprime were used to measure the performance. this is just a very small amount of benchmarks at all
- this is just ONE source that shows us its benchmark-scores. if more and different sources report the same performance numbers than we can say that the results are representative (almost).

we won't know for sure until barcelona is officially launched and credible review-sites put it to the acid test. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

lmao!

---

What's to laugh about ?

Have you heard of Fusion , Silverthorne ?

The purpose of such devices is to move the PC as we know it on the cellphone. Current cellphones are slowly going uphill into PC territory ; this will advance at a very rapid pace once system-on-a-chip devices appear next year.The whole point is to move x86 down , into cellphone territory and this is the purpose of Silverthorne early next year. ( Iphone 2 will use it according to rumours )

This is real and is happening now ; both Intel and AMD are preparing for the 2010-2012 generation , by that time , cell phones will be more powerfull than current PCs.Add 3D glasses to them and all my multimedia needs are satisfied.

/End off topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

What's to laugh about ?

Have you heard of Fusion , Silverthorne ?

The purpose of such devices is to move the PC as we know it on the cellphone. Current cellphones are slowly going uphill into PC territory ; this will advance at a very rapid pace once system-on-a-chip devices appear next year.The whole point is to move x86 down , into cellphone territory and this is the purpose of Silverthorne early next year. ( Iphone 2 will use it according to rumours )

This is real and is happening now ; both Intel and AMD are preparing for the 2010-2012 generation , by that time , cell phones will be more powerfull than current PCs.Add 3D glasses to them and all my multimedia needs are satisfied.

/End off topic.

---

yep, our current gfx-cards consume 200w+ and need a bigass cooling solution and you're talking about cellphones that are faster than our current pcs by 2010-2012?

even if this would be true, who could afford these cell phones? talking about premium deluxe highend ultra extreme prices :rolleyes:

c'mon, i can't believe you're serious about this...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Cinebench is portrayed as representative of commercial 3D rendering SW ; that is pretty real world.

After all , what's real world ? 3Dmark ? Games ?

If anything , tests like the above show which core has more oomph , even if the results are semi-worthless for real world.

---

imho real world is different from user to user . I'm essentially a gamer, even though my job wants me sat at a pc all day for obvious different reasons . Bearing in mind that I am a fanboy of performance, I'd pass a SPI 1M 15sec pc for one that takes twice or three times as much to complete the loop, if the latter, afterall, ran cpu intensive games at a higher frame rate when compared to the former .

Given that the above has little chances to reflect reality, that's the way I see it .

more on topic:

can anyone provide benches for Friz Chess Bench, CPU Mark 99 with xeons @ 2ghz ?

woooooow hold on.....am I right in saying you guys are arguing over an early K10 benchmark submitted by an INTEL fanboi?

You can't pay attention to a bench from people who jumped ship to intel and have licked their a$$e$ ever since.

I could bench a Q6700 and show you 28second Pi 1M times......big deal.

:welcome: to common sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64

woooooow hold on.....am I right in saying you guys are arguing over an early K10 benchmark submitted by an INTEL fanboi?

You can't pay attention to a bench from people who jumped ship to intel and have licked their a$$e$ ever since.

I could bench a Q6700 and show you 28second Pi 1M times......big deal.

:welcome: to common sense

---

i didnt know you know that 84036980 dude, who posted the benchmarks... so everyone who posts something "negative" about amd is a intel fanboy... :rofl:

btw. nice ninja edit on the 18 secs to 28 secs. :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

i didnt know you know that 84036980 dude, who posted the benchmarks... so everyone who posts something "negative" about amd is a intel fanboy... :rofl:

btw. nice ninja edit on the 18 secs to 28 secs. :p:

---

lol...no no not everyone.....just the INTEL fanatics who submit K10 scores :)

yeah, I'm ninja-like alright ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64

woooooow hold on.....am I right in saying you guys are arguing over an early K10 benchmark submitted by an INTEL fanboi?

You can't pay attention to a bench from people who jumped ship to intel and have licked their a$$e$ ever since.

I could bench a Q6700 and show you 28second Pi 1M times......big deal.

:welcome: to common sense

---

my common sense fails to understand how one could be "fan boy" of either company, never mind "jumping ship", unless there were lucrative reasons in the background .

it's like me turning down a ford mustang for a fiat panda (given that money wasn't an issue) because fiat is an italian brand . what the :banana::banana::banana::banana: . :shrug:

AMD ppl appears! Have been a long time without them in this thread. Only informal remains in silent :rofl:

Now we have some real numbers, more to come in the upcoming days. As spected, K10 seems to be a disappointment. And that really sucks. No competition to Intel = Intel wont innovate as fast as they do with the C2D.

AMD BAD!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slay0r

my common sense fails to understand how one could be "fan boy" of either company, never mind "jumping ship", unless there were lucrative reasons in the background .

it's like me turning down a ford mustang for a fiat panda (given that money wasn't an issue) because fiat is an italian brand . what the :banana::banana::banana::banana: . :shrug:

---

Put it this way, when I see an AMD user post K10 benches I'll believe them, or atleast someone with some credibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64

Put it this way, when I see an AMD user post K10 benches I'll believe them, or atleast someone with some credibility.

---

And if the benchies are true, then AMD could well be in very big trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slay0r

my common sense fails to understand how one could be "fan boy" of either company, never mind "jumping ship", unless there were lucrative reasons in the background .

it's like me turning down a ford mustang for a fiat panda (given that money wasn't an issue) because fiat is an italian brand . what the :banana::banana::banana::banana: . :shrug:

---

Italian is Italian , how can you turn down a fiat :shakes: ,,,




some people will favor a product over another one due to a good past experience ,, the other type of fan boys those who pays more to get less either stupid people or retarded ,,, you should only buy whatever will give you the best for your budget and always hope for better competition and better performance with every advancement

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64

Put it this way, when I see an AMD user post K10 benches I'll believe them, or atleast someone with some credibility.

---

fair enough, i still fail to see how one can only either be amd or intel. I have both in my house, does that make me an untrustable bad e-person ? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

Italian is Italian , how can you turn down a fiat :shakes:

---

well, if i was to choose between italian brands, i'd be more prone to buy off alfa romeo or ferrari(i wish). :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kemo6600

you should only buy whatever will give you the best for your budget and always hope for better competition and better performance with every advancement

---

:up: :up: :up:

Already got my Alfa :)

Soo anyway... now you've all stopped being b1tches at each other (yeah right!)

..here are some some:

1Mb K8 (Windsor) Super pi @ 2ghz , with DDR2 667, to serve as some sort of comparison, since the opty's must be running reg'd 667.

http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/3645/pi2gmy8.jpg


And a 32bit cinebench 10 single CPU score..

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/504/cine2gpi2.jpg

So this should give a rough idea of the single core performance delta if these benchmarks are a true representation:

5% faster at super pi

somewhere between 0 ann 7% faster @ cinebench, depending on how much K8 scales in 64bit version.. (anyone?)

If someone with a socket F opty system lurks out there on 64bit would like to do the same.. would be good.