AMD Phenom 9100e First Pics & Review

It seems like AMD is gonna release the Quad core for "the poor" :D
MSRP about $100-$130

Family : Phenom
Codename : Agena
Cores : X4
Frequency : 1.8GHz
Stepping : B2
Cache L1 : 512KB
L2 : 2MB
L3: 2MB

http://www.hwbox.gr/images/imagehost...c6c342cc51.jpg

http://www.hwbox.gr/images/imagehost...c6c3445eb6.jpg

http://www.hwbox.gr/images/imagehost...c6c345b2c6.jpg

http://www.hwbox.gr/images/imagehost...c7278efa72.gif

Link
Review
The topic is not in English, but i am gonna translate the key points when the review-comparison will be out :) [soon enough]

Quad Flr 100-130 go go this with an 780 board for my htpc!

i suppose thats a good price range however I think they should have included just a tad more cache on L2, if not then L3 for sure

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hecktic

i suppose thats a good price range however I think they should have included just a tad more cache on L2, if not then L3 for sure

---

that is k10 design, you'll have to wait for 45nm revision for bigger l3 cache and also speed bump on cpu clock and most important on NB

nice price/core ratio :)

Sweet price. Only 9150e without errata would be tad better.

Reporter: Mister Ruiz, how much does AMD profit from selling one Phenom 9100?
Ruiz: ...
Reporter: Uh, sir?
*crickets chirping*

So the release version is going to be B3 but what you have is an ES sample and a B2?

Ruiz: ...
Reporter: AMD does profit, right?
Ruiz: Uhm... maybe?

lol, here in NL a 9200 is available for 124euro's. :D

Looks PHENOMenal har har har

A quad for $130 is actually in my price range. Wow...poor kid gets a quad :)

Well considering how Phenom seems to max out at 2.6GHz, I wonder if this chip can hit 2.4-2.5Ghz overclocked? If so, killer budget chip although it'll probably still be trounced by the Q6600 G0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler

Well considering how Phenom seems to max out at 2.6GHz, I wonder if this chip can hit 2.4-2.5Ghz overclocked? If so, killer budget chip although it'll probably still be trounced by the Q6600 G0.

---

I think there would be some binning involved. If these chips can overclock to ~2.5GHz, it means that they could be sold off as higher margin Phenom 9500s and 9600s instead. With the poor clocks on current Phenoms, I don't think AMD is in a position to 'artificially' downclock their chips for the low end market. It'll probably be chips that failed to reach the 2.2GHz Phenom 9500 at stock volts, and rather than just throw it away, why not sell it as a budget quad core.

This is just personal speculation of course, I'd be happy to be proven wrong and have these suckers overclock just as far as a 9600 BE. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shift

Looks PHENOMenal har har har

---

:rofl:

get one of these and a 9600gt, and ur set.
never has it been better for ppl who dont wanna spend too much money on hardware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grimREEFER

get one of these and a 9600gt, and ur set.
never has it been better for ppl who dont wanna spend too much money on hardware.

---

Actually, a 1.8GHz Phenom would be a poor choice for a gaming machine. You'll be much better off with a higher clocked dual core CPU.

if they release a quad for $100+....count me in. new mobo and all :clap:

this plus a 780G chipped board. talk about a cheap build:D but decent on board video and a 4 core cpu. not to bad:D you could make a pretty good budget WCG only machine. $120 4 core cpu $70 780G chipset mobo $45 2Gb of DDR2 and a $30 Sparkle FSP 400watt psu and you good to go. all for under $300 not bad:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epsilon84

Actually, a 1.8GHz Phenom would be a poor choice for a gaming machine. You'll be much better off with a higher clocked dual core CPU.

---

Well, this depends on alot of things. If you want to play todays games, then dual yes, but what if you want to enjoy games for few next years and ain't that interested in all those fancy gfx effects etc? Games which can utilize 4 cores will be faster with QC machine, if not overclocking etc. At least when comparing to DC CPUs @ $100-130 price, I think.

...completely another story when starting to overclock that rig.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Well, this depends on alot of things. If you want to play todays games, then dual yes, but what if you want to enjoy games for few next years and ain't that interested in all those fancy gfx effects etc? Games which can utilize 4 cores will be faster with QC machine, if not overclocking etc. At least when comparing to DC CPUs @ $100-130 price, I think.

...completely another story when starting to overclock that rig.

---

The vast majority of games don't benefit at all from dual -> quad cores. An exception would be Supreme Commander, but even then, a higher clocked dual core can easily make up the difference:

http://images.tomshardware.com/2008/...rs/supreme.png

Supreme Commander is very CPU limited and performance scales almost linearly with clockspeed. Extrapolating from the Phenom 9600 results, a Phenom 9100 would score about ~36fps, putting it below an X2 6000+, even in a heavily multithreaded game.

At the projected $100 - $130 pricerange, you're looking at C2D E4600 or X2 6000+ as alternatives. I would say both these chips will outperform a Phenom 9100 in gaming performance.

Let's not kid ourselves - by the time most games actually start taking advantage of quad cores, a Phenom 9100 would be obsolete. Even upon release, it'll be BY FAR the slowest QC CPU available today, let alone in 2 years time when we'll be running 4GHz+ octocore Nehalems and Bulldozers. It'll be a bit like running DX10 games on a 8600GT - yeah, it'll run with all the fancy features on, but at 10fps. :rolleyes:

Good way to get rid of all the B2's :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epsilon84

The vast majority of games don't benefit at all from dual -> quad cores. An exception would be Supreme Commander, but even then, a higher clocked dual core can easily make up the difference:

http://images.tomshardware.com/2008/...rs/supreme.png

Supreme Commander is very CPU limited and performance scales almost linearly with clockspeed. Extrapolating from the Phenom 9600 results, a Phenom 9100 would score about ~36fps, putting it below an X2 6000+, even in a heavily multithreaded game.

At the projected $100 - $130 pricerange, you're looking at C2D E4600 or X2 6000+ as alternatives. I would say both these chips will outperform a Phenom 9100 in gaming performance.

Let's not kid ourselves - by the time most games actually start taking advantage of quad cores, a Phenom 9100 would be obsolete. Even upon release, it'll be BY FAR the slowest QC CPU available today, let alone in 2 years time when we'll be running 4GHz+ octocore Nehalems and Bulldozers. It'll be a bit like running DX10 games on a 8600GT - yeah, it'll run with all the fancy features on, but at 10fps. :rolleyes:

---

true but I wonder how wells these will O/C is a decent board. Some people just like to tinker and play with new hardware. When its cheap its a bonus:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vengance_01

true but I wonder how wells these will O/C is a decent board. Some people just like to tinker and play with new hardware. When its cheap its a bonus:up:

---

Of course it's always fun to overclock the crap out of a cheap CPU. :up:

If these can overclock to 2.5GHz then they will be incredible value for someone who's into media encoding, 3D rendering and the such, but not so much for gamers. You can get an E4500 to around 3.5GHz and it would blow it away in games. Heck, even an E2140 @ 3GHz would beat it in 99% of games. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler

Well considering how Phenom seems to max out at 2.6GHz, I wonder if this chip can hit 2.4-2.5Ghz overclocked? If so, killer budget chip although it'll probably still be trounced by the Q6600 G0.

---

But it is 1/2 the price...

Nice one, AMD has to play the cheap card, and that cant be bad for us all. Can you say cheap Q9*** quads... (heres me hoping)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kain665

But it is 1/2 the price...

---

But it offers less than half the performance? :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan

Good way to get rid of all the B2's :up:

---

+1 lol :ROTF:

im gonna buy one for my girlfriend... she stills has a Duron :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epsilon84

Actually, a 1.8GHz Phenom would be a poor choice for a gaming machine. You'll be much better off with a higher clocked dual core CPU.

---

games are basically all about the gpu, and the quad core cpu would help out in basically everything else a person does on their pc.

Yay! GG again, AMD. 2 good news in one day! :)


Good news as in... mobilize the giant's big lazy butt to make some price reductions. I want octo nehalem for 150$ !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gallardo

I want octo nehalem for 150$ !

---

Keep on dreaming man...Try 400+$ for lowest clocked 8 Core Nehalem(whenever it comes out).

Waiting for the B3 revision for this, even if the B3 doesn't offer more oc headroom, it's still nice to have the errata fixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler

But it offers less than half the performance? :shrug:

---

How do you factor that?

Core 2 is around 10% faster clock-for-clock, that means Q6600 is equal to around a 2.6GHz Phenom. How do you get 1.8GHz being "less than half" of 2.6GHz?

Even overclocking, if we assume this chip can hit 2.4GHz and an average Q6600 will hit 3.6GHz (around 3.9GHz Phenom) it's still far from less than half.

if the northbridge is clocked at 1600mhz, and is stable up to about 2000mhz, does that mean we can expect about 2000/1600 * 1.8ghz = 2.25ghz from it?
more or less?
or am i talking crap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hollo

if the northbridge is clocked at 1600mhz, and is stable up to about 2000mhz, does that mean we can expect about 2000/1600 * 1.8ghz = 2.25ghz from it?
more or less?
or am i talking crap

---

One thing is certain - this CPU will be perfect tool for testing the HTT ceiling of AM2+ mobos!

It's reasonable to expect it can reach 2.4 GHz a speed that is minimum for ALL that have tried Phenom 9500!

For it to reach 2.4 GHz, you'll need to raise reference clock from 200 to 266 MHz.

Regarding the NB, 266x8 would result in 2133MHz, and so far reaching 2.2 GHz for NB didn't prove to be a problem… so yeah this could be really one sweet cheap QC processor!

Wow thats awesome if the price actually does happen. I have a q6600 and its great but for 125 bucks which is 1/2 the price i would totally have gotten this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler

But it offers less than half the performance? :shrug:

---

Yes but this will sell like hotcakes, oems will eat this up as it will make for excellent marke3ting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grimREEFER

games are basically all about the gpu, and the quad core cpu would help out in basically everything else a person does on their pc.

---

OK, I have to ask, do you even play games? If you actually played games you will realise that a 1.8GHz Phenom will bottleneck any modern GPU... in terms of gaming performance it'll be about equal to a stock E2160 or X2 4000+... in other words, it sucks for gaming. A higher clocked dual core for the same price would be much better.

yeah, here are some gaming benchmarks of a phenom quad with cores disabled
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/02/...nom/page5.html

over 2 cores there's virtually no improvement except for supreme commander

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hollo

yeah, here are some gaming benchmarks of a phenom quad with cores disabled
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/02/...nom/page5.html

over 2 cores there's virtually no improvement except for supreme commander

---

That benchmark is ridiculous. They used a TLB-fix enabled BIOS to test multicore performance :down: .

that'd have a very trivial impact on the core-scaling in games, the overall picture is pretty clear

We made a review

9100e Vs C2D4700

It seems like the Entry Quad Core AMD is just marketing around the word "Quad"

The review is in Greek, but if you see the graphs...you will understand everything i guess...

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219

ouch, loosing against a e4700 sure hurts (which is known to oc like crazy and produces far less heat)...
Amd should just hire the apple marketing guys, then they could sell a 500 mhz quadcore with tlb errata for 1000$:p:

The performance results from the Greek review are brutal.

and isnt there gonna be special pricing per 1,000 chips or something like that??

e7400 GMV for my next CPU...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grimREEFER

games are basically all about the gpu, and the quad core cpu would help out in basically everything else a person does on their pc.

---

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=8 (credit to GoriLLakoS for the review).

As I said earlier, higher clocked dual core >>> lower clocked quad when it comes to gaming.

If you bothered to take a look at Winrar results for 9100e you would see it had TLB fix turned on...Testing this CPU with the patch on brings the results further down(apart from low clock speed and singlethreaded nature of a lot of tests done).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

If you bothered to take a look at Winrar results for 9100e you would see it had TLB fix turned on...Testing this CPU with the patch on brings the results further down(apart from low clock speed and singlethreaded nature of a lot of tests done).

---

We don't want TLB bug ;)

I can't believe it took 20+ posts for somebody to mention overclocking one.

I heard that the 9100e was already available in an HP (i think), and that if you can find one for sale, itll cost you about as much as a 9500 would.

I'm a bit baffled by those results. There seems to be something wrong with your setup. It looks like you most likely have the TLB patch enabled. Also i didnt see any mention whether you ran the tests with memory in ganged or unganged mode. Iirc there is a new version of both Sandra and Everest that added proper support for Phenom. Did you use those? Additionally you used mostly single threaded apps where obviously(granted not so obviously for ppl that dont know much about computer technology) the faster clocked processor is going to be faster. Power consumption results are also not directly comparable since you werent able to use CnQ.
p.s. I'm trying to be polite here.

BrowncoatGR,i raised the same question(basically) in my previous post,too.

Trying to be polite? I did not catch what you want to say :)

We are just discusing..not fighting...everyone got to be always and everywhere polite...or else we may be characterized as animals :)

We discuss to learn more and be better..right?

Quote:

---

there is a new version of both Sandra and Everest that added proper support for Phenom

---

What do you want to say with proper? Those programs identified the cpu perfect ! This review is being generated close to 1 month, so, some programs are the latest versions from then...

Quote:

---

Also i didnt see any mention whether you ran the tests with memory in ganged or unganged mode

---

If you look the second pic on the second page on the amd system , the cpu-z says "ganged"

The other "wrong" results on some progs seems to be bugs from the motherboard ...
Pls check here :
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messagev...threadid=91249

GoriLLakoS,what about the mentioned very low results from the Winrar that indicate the TLB fix was actually turned on(and killed the performance of 9100e even more than the singlethreaded nature of the very test did)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

Trying to be polite? I did not catch what you want to say :)

We are just discusing..not fighting...everyone got to be always and everywhere polite...or else we may be characterized as animals :)

We discuss to learn more and be better..right?

---

Was just trying to point out that i was very carefull with the wording i used.

Quote:

---

What do you want to say with proper? Those programs identified the cpu perfect ! This review is being generated close to 1 month, so, some programs are the latest versions from then...

---

The problem was with the memory bandwidth not beeing reported correctly.

Quote:

---

If you look the second pic on the second page on the amd system , the cpu-z says "ganged"

---

You are right i missed that. sorry

Quote:

---

The other "wrong" results on some progs seems to be bugs from the motherboard ...
Pls check here :
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messagev...threadid=91249

---

Dont you think that using both the TLB patch and a bios that does not work properly, makes your results unrepresentative of what a user should expect from a similar setup?

From my point of view, the reviewer always writes what he saw on the specific time of the review.


1. The mobo did not recognize the cpu , and we changed the bios.

2. The TLB i think it may be visible on higher speeds and not on those speeds.
Check those results here :
http://techreport.com/r.x/phenom-tlb.../sandra-bw.gif
We got more around 7180.


3. Also take on mind that the cpu is sample and it is B2 Stepping.


Last, we run the tests as a customer would run them if he was going to purchase those setups without optimizing something.
The results are pure as we get them...if the hardware have problems, bad for them... :)

I totally agree with you that something on the AMD setup is not working properly, but if someone purchase it right now, he will face the same things.

Did you understand my point?
I am not a fanboy of intel or amd...and i am not trying to push intel.
But the results are a small sample of what is going on right now on this platforms :)


EDIT : Off course, with the time passing, most of the bugs will be fixed, but this is the image we have in our mind for the time being.
Do you agree with this?

9100e looks nice and with TLB errata fix disabled will make good entry level workstation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

From my point of view, the reviewer always writes what he saw on the specific time of the review.
1. The mobo did not recognize the cpu , and we changed the bios.

---

I assumed that this was the case. My point is that this makes your results totally unrepresentative in regard to every other motherboard a user could use. In essence you compred a properly functioning system with a system that was performing below its capabilities.

Quote:

---

2. The TLB i think it may be visible on higher speeds and not on those speeds.
Check those results here :
http://techreport.com/r.x/phenom-tlb.../sandra-bw.gif
We got more around 7180.

---

I meant the bios fix not the bug itself, but i does look like it might not enabled and its just the mobo acting up. I think though techreport was using the version that wasnt reporting mem bandwidth correctly.

Quote:

---

3. Also take on mind that the cpu is sample and it is B2 Stepping.

---

Yes and it seems all new chips hve appeared as b3 versions only at least here in Greece(even all the tricores are B3). Which is why i think the results you posted are not representative of the capability of the cpu and what most users will experience using the cpu. That obviously doesnt mean that the e4700 isnt a better cpu for all single threaded and lightly threaded apps.

Quote:

---

Last, we run the tests as a customer would run them if he was going to purchase those setups without optimizing something.
The results are pure as we get them...if the hardware have problems, bad for them... :)

I totally agree with you that something on the AMD setup is not working properly, but if someone purchase it right now, he will face the same things.

Did you understand my point?
I am not a fanboy of intel or amd...and i am not trying to push intel.
But the results are a small sample of what is going on right now on this platforms :)


EDIT : Off course, with the time passing, most of the bugs will be fixed, but this is the image we have in our mind for the time being.
Do you agree with this?

---

Yes i understand your point but it seems to be a problem isolated to the motherboard being used. Additionally it is a bios issue that is going to be worked out in a few weeks. As such any reader not aware of ths will make wrongfull conclusions. At the very least you should mention that the processor was not working at its full potential because of problems with the motherboard. It is also quiteclear tht AMDs platform still has teething problems and that should also be mentioned in the cons.

Thanks for the review.

Do you still have the 9100e?
If so, could you run some tests (preferably games and some winrar etc) with the tlb patch disabled?

We almost agree on most of the performance feedback...i will try to re-run every benchmark when the final B3 will come out , i will re-check to see what the heck is going on :)

Regarding TLB, there was TLB on all the progs, but there is no a bios setting to disable it..only a (semi)hide button on AMD overdrive to click on it and disable it in win...

Voudas(the guy that made the review) will re-run all the progs with no TLB and add the results(but it may take some time :) )

So, we are looking forward for the B3s and new results...:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triple_A

Thanks for the review.

Do you still have the 9100e?
If so, could you run some tests (preferably games and some winrar etc) with the tlb patch disabled?

---

You are welcome :)

He is running averyhting without TLB and will add them soon enough.

PS .All the test results are 1.5 month old, so please do not bite us :p :)

Great! :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

You are welcome :)

He is running averyhting without TLB and will add them soon enough.

PS .All the test results are 1.5 month old, so please do not bite us :p :)

---

Nice work! Looking forward to the next round of results!:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by largon

Reporter: Mister Ruiz, how much does AMD profit from selling one Phenom 9100?
Ruiz: ...
Reporter: Uh, sir?
*crickets chirping*

---

Most processors cost ~$5 - $40 to manufacture.

can you Oc the phenom to 2.6ghz and rerun de 3dmark benchs?

The Phenom is actually a very nice CPU guys you should try it you may even agree:) Mine is at 2800mhz @1.23vcore Stable!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N00B

can you Oc the phenom to 2.6ghz and rerun de 3dmark benchs?

---

More than likely, NO! Common thinking is that if they had Headroom, AMD would have sold them as higher end models. This is similar to the *most 3500 and 3800 Dual Cores. Now, extreme and voltage might let it overclock some but I'd be surprised to see more than 1.9 to 2.1GHz over volted and etc....

Yet, it'd still make a great Home Server processor or etc.... I can see these sell in that quickly growing Home Server market.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2370...-server-market

http://www.physorg.com/news98621889.html

http://www.windowsfordevices.com/news/NS6378793892.html

Be that home server Linux or MS, I've seen more of them as I visit folks. Even folks with multiple laptops showed off that old Destop now setup as a File/Home Server. Here, this 1.8GHz QC would make a great fit:) Or is that bashing AMD?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brother Esau

Mine is at 2800mhz @1.23vcore Stable!

---

OMFG :yepp:

:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brother Esau

The Phenom is actually a very nice CPU guys you should try it you may even agree:) Mine is at 2800mhz @1.23vcore Stable!

---

Well then you're very lucky, since most phenoms cannot reach that speed at all, let alone on a low vcore like that. That's exactly why most people think phenom isn't all that nice :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triple_A

Well then you're very lucky, since most phenoms cannot reach that speed at all, let alone on a low vcore like that. That's exactly why most people think phenom isn't all that nice :)

---

Actually if you take a look at the AMD section most B3 9850s can do at least somewhere between 2.8-3.0Ghz at stock or near stock volts. Its the TDP that is limiting AMD in this case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Well, this depends on alot of things. If you want to play todays games, then dual yes, but what if you want to enjoy games for few next years and ain't that interested in all those fancy gfx effects etc? Games which can utilize 4 cores will be faster with QC machine, if not overclocking etc. At least when comparing to DC CPUs @ $100-130 price, I think.

...completely another story when starting to overclock that rig.

---

if it's not good enough for today it won'
t be good enough for tomorrow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

We almost agree on most of the performance feedback...i will try to re-run every benchmark when the final B3 will come out , i will re-check to see what the heck is going on :)

Regarding TLB, there was TLB on all the progs, but there is no a bios setting to disable it..only a (semi)hide button on AMD overdrive to click on it and disable it in win...

Voudas(the guy that made the review) will re-run all the progs with no TLB and add the results(but it may take some time :) )

So, we are looking forward for the B3s and new results...:)

---

Thank Voudas for taking the time to redo the tests. :up: I know he probably spent a lot of time working on this already, so thats to be commended.

I think it could just OC quiet nice, since its a 65w model, but i guess i have to buy one and test it.:up:

I just saw 9500's are available for 110euro's.. wonder what these babys are gonna cost :shocked:

@GoriLLakoS
Thank you for the very good review. :toast:
It would be nice if you can find and add an E7200 and a Phenom 8400 to the charts. Both are in the same price range as the Phenom 9100. Also you should have tried OC-ing. Most of us here are interested about the CPU OC-ed. And of course if you can translate in English the entire review it would be very appreciated and helpful for many people around the world.

Anyway if I can find it around for 100 euros I'll buy one for experimenting. I hope it'll be stable OC-ed to 2.4GHz cores/2GHz NB&L3 and as such I guess it'll be an upgrade of my 2.8GHz OC-ed Brisbane.

Graphs with TLB off is up and running

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=4
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=5
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=6
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=7
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=8
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=9
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=10
http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=1219&garpg=11


Seems like no big difference...

Being B2 its more than likely going to have the 2.6 limit that most B2 have.

If it does end up being B3 I would guess 2.6 will be easy. Seeing as 9850 are hitting 3.0-3.5ghz right now.

Thanks for the results, GoriLLakoS.
Seems like the patch makes a significant difference, but that baby phenom still get's it's ass kicked by the e4700.. although by a smaller margin.:D

Will there be a B4? or are they just going to settle with B3 untill C1? (C1=45nm right?)

that was a great review, even if i couldnt read anything, the pictures were nice

i think people keep forgetting how big a difference a few hundred mhz is on a phenom. i was expected it to be about the same as the intel duel core cause the phenoms need to be at 2.4-2.6 to really use multi core properly.

what we really need to see from this is the OC potential of both chips and then do a compare. and anyone willing to do that is a saint

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triple_A

Thanks for the results, GoriLLakoS.
Seems like the patch makes a significant difference, but that baby phenom still get's it's ass kicked by the e4700.. although by a smaller margin.:D

Will there be a B4? or are they just going to settle with B3 untill C1? (C1=45nm right?)

---

settle with 45nm i guess...

maybe i'll sell this IX38+e2140 to a friend and get an 9850+sapphire/DFI mobo for fun (originally i planned for a second rig but this would require a second monitos :rolleyes: )

hmmm *checking prices*

they should sell all their B3s without fixed multi, B3 is so tempting (at 100€), but 180 for the 9850 is too much (if you count in overclocking)

Thanks for the update with the TLB bug disabled - whilst I understand your point about testing the system 'as is' how a normal customer would run it had though bought such a PC, this is XS and most people know about the TLB bug and most would prefer to turn off the fix and get the extra performance instead.

To informal/browngoatGTR, which tests are single threaded? Apart from SuperPi of course. Most of them are at least dual threaded, and a few (like the video encoding tests) are fully multithreaded as well. Either way, it goes to show that a higher clocked dual core can still beat a lower clocked quad core in many typical day to day applications, and it probably will remain that way for a long time yet.

Btw, heres a Google translated version of the review, its not the best but it does the job. ;)
http://www.google.com/translate?u=ht...&hl=en&ie=UTF8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

Graphs with TLB off is up and running

Seems like no big difference...

---

Thanks for the time you guys put into this. So, it still gets spanked but just not as hard and long:rolleyes: Please add a few overclocked results to this thread.

You are welcome guys,

For the time being we have no real free time to add other low end cpus on the charts...but we will try to add some more in some days :(

Regarding the oc comparison it is not fair as all the B2's have an fsb wall at around 233 :( and the intel can oc far more.

I think the B3s 9100 will be named 9150 :)

So the best OC we can expect is 2.1GHz...I think I'll wait for the B3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gOJDO

So the best OC we can expect is 2.1GHz...I think I'll wait for the B3.

---

That doesn't make it a bad chip, it just means AMD is binning them vigorously!
I honestly don't blame them under the circumstances.

Well, at 2.1GHz it will downgrade the performance for almost everything, compared to my Brisbane @2.85GHz. I'll wait until there is a Phenom X4 for around 100 euros(around $100 in US) that can do 2.4GHz stable.

I don't even know why you would consider one at 2.4. Then there's also power usage. The thing is already using 40 watts more at idle as it is, let alone overclocking to 2.4.

Since I have 3 OC-ed PCs (q6600 @3.6GHz, e6420 @3.6GHz, X2 4200 @2.85GHz), with lots of hardware attached to them, running in my working room, I doubt that the extra 40W will make any difference in the bills.

No worries, if you were to overclock it 2.4, it will be using more than 40.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gOJDO

Well, at 2.1GHz it will downgrade the performance for almost everything, compared to my Brisbane @2.85GHz. I'll wait until there is a Phenom X4 for around 100 euros(around $100 in US) that can do 2.4GHz stable.

---

I like running both company's stuff as well. I hope AMD is around long enough for K10.5 or K11. To me and me only, Buying the current model is like buying Prescott when it was Intel's best:rolleyes: