Shanghai can now be purchased!

Printable View

11-11-2008, 06:29 AM
VVJ

Shanghai can now be purchased!

Here is what I've found at neutroncanada.com:

907963 OPTERON X4 8380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8380WAL4DGI)
907250 OPTERON X4 2376 SOCKET F 1207 2.3GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2376WAL4DGI)
907532 OPTERON X4 2380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2380WAL4DGIWOF)
907181 OPTERON X4 8382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8382WAL4DGI)
907182 OPTERON X4 2378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2378WAL4DGI)
907076 OPTERON X4 2382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2382WAL4DGIWOF)
907077 OPTERON X4 2382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2382WAL4DGI)
907078 OPTERON X4 2380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2380WAL4DGI)
907079 OPTERON X4 8378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8378WAL4DGIWOF)
907638 OPTERON X4 2378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2378WAL4DGIWOF)
907990 OPTERON X4 2376 SOCKET F 1207 2.3GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2376WAL4DGIWOF)
907877 OPTERON X4 8384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8384WAL4DGI)
907993 OPTERON X4 8378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8378WAL4DGI)
907878 OPTERON X4 8382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8382WAL4DGIWOF)
907430 OPTERON X4 2384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2384WAL4DGIWOF)
907640 OPTERON X4 8384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8384WAL4DGIWOF)
907641 OPTERON X4 8380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8380WAL4DGIWOF)
907962 OPTERON X4 2384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2384WAL4DGI)
11-11-2008, 06:55 AM
nanohead

Thats cool... Lots O' part numbers though :shocked:
11-11-2008, 07:01 AM
Blaber

Now any one pls pick one up and do some benchmarking and gaming and not the least overclocking .. ;)
11-11-2008, 07:04 AM
Blaber

Shanghai 45nm K10.5 launches on the 13th

Quote:

Finally

It is finally fixed, after long wait we can confirm that Shanghai 45nm Quad core, 45nm part comes out on the 13th.

AMD is ready to announce these chips with up to 2.7GHz frequency with its partners while the faster parts are expected in early 2009. Shanghai should focus on virtualisation, something that is very important for servers and it should be a decent match to Core 2 Quad based Xeons, Harpertown at least at similar clock but we still strongly believe that Nehalem based Xeons at same clock will end up faster.

AMD will play lets sell them cheaper strategy and it will hope to win but its been more than a year since AMD had a competitive product in server market. AMD Shanghai Opteron should consume less power than Nehalem and this will also be one of the sale points.

First reviews are expected on Thursday.

Source: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...10391&Itemid=1 :up: :D
11-11-2008, 07:45 AM
Particle

Pick one up? At that price, no thanks. The lowest-end 2-way part costs 50% more than low-med 65nm parts.
11-11-2008, 07:47 AM
informal

It's the price jacking that always happens with new products.In a week or two it should get down to recommended prices.
11-11-2008, 07:58 AM
Mechromancer

My response in one sentence or less, LOL:

I hope that rumor about AMD releasing Deneb at the end of the month is true because it would be great for AMD to be 2+ months ahead of schedule to shake off that dark cloud of delays that has been looming over their head these last few months (run on sentences FTW!).
11-11-2008, 07:59 AM
gallag

2.7ghz? What happened to 3ghz?
11-11-2008, 08:06 AM
donitsi

That's for Deneb
11-11-2008, 08:08 AM
N19h7m4r3

Deneb is 3Ghz not Shanghai if I recall.

Edit: Beaten by Donitsi
11-11-2008, 08:32 AM
informal

gallag,Shanghai is server part.Deneb is desktop part.
11-11-2008, 08:43 AM
Rammsteiner

Quote:

Originally Posted by gallag

2.7ghz? What happened to 3ghz?

Will come later I presume. After Deneb at least.
11-11-2008, 09:33 AM
VVJ

I have just checked prices on the ISA Hardware web site. Here is more info on prices:

OS2376WAL4DGIWOF CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 2376 (6MB,75W,Socket F) box 429.00
OS2378WAL4DGIWOF CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 2378 (6MB,75W,Socket F) box $595.00
OS2380WAL4DGIWOF CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 2380 (6MB,75W,Socket F) box $795.00
OS2382WAL4DGIWOF CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 2382 (6MB,75W,Socket F) box $994.00
OS2384WAL4DGIWOF CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 2384 (6MB,75W,Socket F) box $1,126.00
OS8384WAL4DGIWOF CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 8384 (6MB,75W,Socket F) box $2,445.00
OS8384WAL4DGI CPU Server Opteron Quad Core Model 8384 (6MB,75W,Socket F) tray $2,446.00
11-11-2008, 11:55 AM
Glow9

Quote:

Originally Posted by VVJ

Here is what I've found at neutroncanada.com:

907963 OPTERON X4 8380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8380WAL4DGI)
907250 OPTERON X4 2376 SOCKET F 1207 2.3GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2376WAL4DGI)
907532 OPTERON X4 2380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2380WAL4DGIWOF)
907181 OPTERON X4 8382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8382WAL4DGI)
907182 OPTERON X4 2378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2378WAL4DGI)
907076 OPTERON X4 2382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2382WAL4DGIWOF)
907077 OPTERON X4 2382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2382WAL4DGI)
907078 OPTERON X4 2380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2380WAL4DGI)
907079 OPTERON X4 8378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8378WAL4DGIWOF)
907638 OPTERON X4 2378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2378WAL4DGIWOF)
907990 OPTERON X4 2376 SOCKET F 1207 2.3GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2376WAL4DGIWOF)
907877 OPTERON X4 8384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8384WAL4DGI)
907993 OPTERON X4 8378 SOCKET F 1207 2.4GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS8378WAL4DGI)
907878 OPTERON X4 8382 SOCKET F 1207 2.6GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8382WAL4DGIWOF)
907430 OPTERON X4 2384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS2384WAL4DGIWOF)
907640 OPTERON X4 8384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8384WAL4DGIWOF)
907641 OPTERON X4 8380 SOCKET F 1207 2.5GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ WOF (OS8380WAL4DGIWOF)
907962 OPTERON X4 2384 SOCKET F 1207 2.7GHZ 6MB 75W 2000MHZ TRAY (OS2384WAL4DGI)

LOL that sites a pile of :banana::banana::banana::banana:. $364 for a X4 9950 140w
11-11-2008, 12:21 PM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

It's the price jacking that always happens with new products.In a week or two it should get down to recommended prices.

Besides, server parts are more expensive than desktop parts, despite the identical CPU.
11-11-2008, 12:26 PM
Trunks

it seems they are a little slower then the harpertowns (clock for clock) but they consume less energy :)
11-11-2008, 12:37 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trunks

it seems they are a little slower then the harpertowns (clock for clock) but they consume less energy :)

Where is the benchmark you are referring to? :confused:
11-11-2008, 01:00 PM
bldegle2

even with the launch, AMD is in a pile of poopy.....it still leaves them at about 2 intinerations behind Intel...

i was reading this review when it hit me hard square in the face:

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//i...1&limitstart=0

Micheal would never fudge figures, Intel's only competition is with several of their OWN intinerations of different CPU's.....I am AMD through and through have been for 17 or so years, dabbled with Intel a bit in the past, but one does not have to hit me very hard on da head to realize the gap is HUGE....

What is my next rig gonna be, LOL< I think it is obvious>

Laterzzzzz......................
11-11-2008, 01:40 PM
Trunks

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

Where is the benchmark you are referring to? :confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bellisimo

OK, here are the results, thank you anonymous website :yepp: ;)

Bench: Caselab Euler 3D
AMD Opteron 2384: 63.1s
Intel Xeon L540: 66.9s
AMD Opteron 2356: 84s

Bench: Cinebenc 10
AMD Opteron 2384: 19357
Intel Xeon L540: 19997
AMD Opteron 2356: 15372

Bench: FlamMap FSPRO
AMD Opteron 2384: 427
Intel Xeon L540: 376s
AMD Opteron 2356: 512

Bench: HL2 Build Map Bench
AMD Opteron 2384: 91s
Intel Xeon L540: 87s
AMD Opteron 2356: 109s

Bench: PovRay 3.7b21 Chess2 1280*1024
AMD Opteron 2384: 58.4s
Intel Xeon L540: 59.1s
AMD Opteron 2356: 69.4s

Bench: SunGard AA
AMD Opteron 2384: 249.6s
Intel Xeon L540: 230.2s
AMD Opteron 2356: 300.2s

Power Consumption Idle
AMD Opteron 2384: 100W
Intel Xeon L540: 169W
AMD Opteron 2356: 109W

Power Consumption Load
AMD Opteron 2384: 197W
Intel Xeon L540: 227W
AMD Opteron 2356: 226W

there you go
11-11-2008, 01:51 PM
Particle

It looks very competitive in the selected applications while consuming much less power. I'd say this is a win.

I won't have my dual 1207 server ready for another six weeks anyway, so I'll see if prices look good on SANE websites like Newegg. That Canadian store is overcharging quite a lot even for current products, so things may actually be promising for good prices like we all have expected.
11-11-2008, 02:01 PM
Titan7171

Hmm my current cinebench score at about 3.3+ghz is about 10,000

this Opteron is hitting

Bench: Cinebenc 10
AMD Opteron 2384: 19357 2.7ghz
Intel Xeon L540: 19997
AMD Opteron 2356: 15372

at 2.7ghz are these scores comparable? because if they are that is a huge increase in performance:eek: at 600mhz less

you could then say if performance between deneb and shanghai are similar that Deneb at 1350mhz would give about 10,000 points? which in turn is equal to agena at 3.3+ghz?

somebody correct me if Im wrong?:shrug:
11-11-2008, 02:04 PM
accord99

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

Hmm my current cinebench score at about 3.3+ghz is about 10,000

this Opteron is hitting

Bench: Cinebenc 10
AMD Opteron 2384: 19357 2.7ghz
Intel Xeon L540: 19997
AMD Opteron 2356: 15372

Dual socket scores.
11-11-2008, 02:05 PM
Trunks

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

Hmm my current cinebench score at about 3.3+ghz is about 10,000

this Opteron is hitting

Bench: Cinebenc 10
AMD Opteron 2384: 19357 2.7ghz
Intel Xeon L540: 19997
AMD Opteron 2356: 15372

at 2.7ghz are these scores comparable? because if they are that is a huge increase in performance:eek: at 600mhz less

you could then say if performance between deneb and shanghai are similar that Deneb at 1350mhz would give about 10,000 points? which in turn is equal to agena at 3.3+ghz?

somebody correct me if Im wrong?:shrug:

those results are from a dual socket systems
11-11-2008, 02:07 PM
Titan7171

Quote:

Originally Posted by accord99

Dual socket scores.

ok so single shanghai at 2.7ghz is about equal to 3.3ghz agena? + 50w idle, 98.5w load?
11-11-2008, 02:11 PM
possessed

don't know for sure, but that score may be for two opterons, even so, if you split it by two there's still the 600MHz difference for about the same result, that's still a really nice bump.

just speculating due to the result values (that's what makes sence to me).

edit
damn so many responded.
11-11-2008, 02:14 PM
informal

CIne10 and PovRay are toy benchmarks and have zero importance(name me one accepted and widely used app based on povray and cine10 engine).
The rest is OK and a healthy bump in both perf. and lower power draw.

thanks for posting this :)
11-11-2008, 02:22 PM
accord99

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

ok so single shanghai at 2.7ghz is about equal to 3.3ghz agena? + 50w idle, 98.5w load?

It's 7.3% faster clock for clock versus the 2.3GHz Opteron 2356 and Cinebench scales almost perfectly with clockspeed. Is your Agena score with 64-bit Cinebench?
11-11-2008, 02:23 PM
gallag

AMD Opteron 2384 2.7ghz 45nm
AMD Opteron 2356 2.3ghz 65nm

Is this correct? Also what speed does the Xeon L540 run at?
11-11-2008, 02:24 PM
Trunks

Quote:

Originally Posted by gallag

AMD Opteron 2384 2.7ghz 45nm
AMD Opteron 2356 2.3ghz 65nm

Is this correct? Also what speed does the Xeon L540 run at?

2.66ghz 45nm
11-11-2008, 02:28 PM
Titan7171

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

CIne10 and PovRay are toy benchmarks and have zero importance(name me one accepted and widely used app based on povray and cine10 engine).
The rest is OK and a healthy bump in both perf. and lower power draw.

thanks for posting this :)

you can still compare your own systems performance. I dont have alot of those benchmarks so this is the one Im using for my own reference, thats why Im comparing my score.
11-11-2008, 02:28 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

ok so single shanghai at 2.7ghz is about equal to 3.3ghz agena? + 50w idle, 98.5w load?

shanghai and barcelona are server. agena and deneb are desktop.
11-11-2008, 02:30 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by accord99

It's 7.3% faster clock for clock versus the 2.3GHz Opteron 2356 and Cinebench scales almost perfectly with clockspeed. Is your Agena score with 64-bit Cinebench?

That's with an app that showed nearly no improvement going from K8 to K10(single core scores).It uses scalar SSE to benchmark the CPU and is intel "tuned"(they even use it to show off 45nm Penryn and Nehalem gen if chips)
11-11-2008, 02:31 PM
Titan7171

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

shanghai and barcelona are server. agena and deneb are desktop.

I know this but are the clocks/test results comparable between desktop and server?
11-11-2008, 02:33 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

I know this but are the clocks/test results comparable between desktop and server?

im not sure but i wouldn't say so because of different ram and because the opteron chips are better than phenoms. but really i have no idea.
11-11-2008, 02:35 PM
Titan7171

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

im not sure but i wouldn't say so because of different ram and because the opteron chips are better than phenoms. but really i have no idea.

ok cool I guess someone who knows will chime in.......off to play some left4dead:p:
11-11-2008, 02:37 PM
Particle

Opteron systems use slower memory. They top out with DDR2-667 ECC Registered.
11-11-2008, 02:57 PM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle

Opteron systems use slower memory. They top out with DDR2-667 ECC Registered.

The Shanghai core Opterons will support the DDR2-800 ECC Registered standard.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...C%20registered
11-11-2008, 06:51 PM
demonkevy666

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliverda

The Shanghai core Opterons will support the DDR2-800 ECC Registered standard.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...C%20registered

ECC registered is slow compared to desktop. at 800mhz the timings are like 5-5-5-18 and 6-6-6-24.

error correcting check < thats what ECC (I think)
11-11-2008, 07:02 PM
roofsniper

Quote:

Originally Posted by demonkevy666

ECC registered is slow compared to desktop. at 800mhz the timings are like 5-5-5-18 and 6-6-6-24.

error correcting check < thats what ECC (I think)

yea ecc registered ram is built for stability.
11-11-2008, 08:11 PM
Macadamia

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

CIne10 and PovRay are toy benchmarks and have zero importance(name me one accepted and widely used app based on povray and cine10 engine).
The rest is OK and a healthy bump in both perf. and lower power draw.

thanks for posting this :)

I am using Cinema 4D as of now. :rofl: But I'm using the vRay renderer so it doesn't count :)
11-11-2008, 10:58 PM
Oese

opteron will be clocked slower as well, or deneb will be clocked higher then shanghai the other way round. remember the thermal stress in server racks and the much higher need for reliability in the server section..
11-12-2008, 07:33 AM
Aussie FX

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

Nehalem gen if chips)

:ROTF:
That's the best one I've seen yet. :up:
11-12-2008, 08:06 AM
Titan7171

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle

Opteron systems use slower memory. They top out with DDR2-667 ECC Registered.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliverda

The Shanghai core Opterons will support the DDR2-800 ECC Registered standard.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...C%20registered

Quote:

Originally Posted by demonkevy666

ECC registered is slow compared to desktop. at 800mhz the timings are like 5-5-5-18 and 6-6-6-24.

error correcting check < thats what ECC (I think)

Quote:

Originally Posted by roofsniper

yea ecc registered ram is built for stability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oese

opteron will be clocked slower as well, or deneb will be clocked higher then shanghai the other way round. remember the thermal stress in server racks and the much higher need for reliability in the server section..

so because of all these reasons you could say that Opterons are kinda krippled just to be server stable.

well between the memory increase going from 667/800 to 1066 for Deneb, the clock for clock increase, the increase in total clocks (2.7 vs 3.0ghz) + overclocking we should see very nice increases overall:yepp:
11-12-2008, 08:15 AM
demonkevy666

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan7171

so because of all these reasons you could say that Opterons are kinda krippled just to be server stable.

well between the memory increase going from 667/800 to 1066 for Deneb, the clock for clock increase, the increase in total clocks (2.7 vs 3.0ghz) + overclocking we should see very nice increases overall:yepp:

there where benchmarks done with Barcelona and 8800 GTX on a sever with 677mhz ECC.

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3092

it us to have a 3dmark numbers too. :/

I think it scored around 9,00 points and a phenom scored around 9,800 10,250.
11-12-2008, 09:04 AM
knopflerbruce

The TDP is only 75w;) I wonder what stock vcore is for these CPUs:p:

Wonder what kind of speeds they would get out of a 140w Deneb:)
11-12-2008, 09:11 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by demonkevy666

ECC registered is slow compared to desktop. at 800mhz the timings are like 5-5-5-18 and 6-6-6-24.

error correcting check < thats what ECC (I think)

Just to let people know that memory isn't that crucial with bigger CPU caches. And with wider memory controller the timings become more important rather than the frequency. Also, 800 MHz CAS 4 is slower(only due to the lower bandwidth available, actual CAS latency stays the same) than 1200MHz with CAS 6 or 1600 MHz with CAS 8.

Quote:

Originally Posted by knopflerbruce

The TDP is only 75w;) I wonder what stock vcore is for these CPUs:p:

Wonder what kind of speeds they would get out of a 140w Deneb:)

Yet this is their first launched 45nm batch, thus I assume they have room to improve, quite a bit.
11-12-2008, 09:39 AM
Particle

Of course, a dual-socket system also has the benefit of running two memory controllers. One bank for each CPU generally.
11-12-2008, 10:34 AM
EvilBlitz

informal, I agree povray is a bit of a toy benchmark, but CineBench?
I thought Cinebench was from one of the most popular rendering programmes?
If so I wouldn't call it minor. Optimising for SSE isnt just optimising for intel either, the Opterons do run certains subsets of of SSE faster than their intel equivalents(or they definitely did vs P4 even though intel came up with them, not sure about Conroe etc)AFAIK.
11-12-2008, 01:01 PM
qurious63ss

Quote:

Originally Posted by knopflerbruce

The TDP is only 75w;) I wonder what stock vcore is for these CPUs:p:

Wonder what kind of speeds they would get out of a 140w Deneb:)

I believe that the 75W number is actually for ACP so true TDP is something like 110W or something like that.
11-12-2008, 01:04 PM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by qurious63ss

I believe that the 75W number is actually for ACP so true TDP is something like 110W or something like that.

105W ACP = 125W TDP
75W ACP = 95W TDP
55W ACP = 68W TDP
11-12-2008, 01:12 PM
qurious63ss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliverda

105W ACP = 125W TDP
75W ACP = 95W TDP
55W ACP = 68W TDP

I found this from AMD and they have it broken down like this.

ACP TDP(max power)
105W = 137W
75W = 115W
55W = 79W

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...61C_ACP_WP.pdf
11-12-2008, 04:54 PM
Macadamia

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilBlitz

informal, I agree povray is a bit of a toy benchmark, but CineBench?
I thought Cinebench was from one of the most popular rendering programmes?
If so I wouldn't call it minor. Optimising for SSE isnt just optimising for intel either, the Opterons do run certains subsets of of SSE faster than their intel equivalents(or they definitely did vs P4 even though intel came up with them, not sure about Conroe etc)AFAIK.

It isn't. The Cinema 4D renderer is CRAP.

Cinebench is only popular for those people who DON'T use Cinema 4D. The former is obsessed with statistics and e-peen, the latter is obsessed with creating something in 3D space.

And now that Autodesk has 3DS Max, Maya and XSI all under one roof, I think C4D's relevance is gonna fall even more.
11-12-2008, 08:40 PM
EvilBlitz

Thanks for explaining that macadamia. What happened to all the maya benchmarks? Im sure I used to see that used alot more often, even at Anandtech and now all I see is this CineBench.
11-12-2008, 08:52 PM
MJR

I think Cray is already using these in some boxes and maybe some of the BIG machines. I can't find the article, atm...
11-12-2008, 09:09 PM
Chad Boga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macadamia

It isn't. The Cinema 4D renderer is CRAP.

Cinebench is only popular for those people who DON'T use Cinema 4D. The former is obsessed with statistics and e-peen, the latter is obsessed with creating something in 3D space.

And now that Autodesk has 3DS Max, Maya and XSI all under one roof, I think C4D's relevance is gonna fall even more.

The Tech Report has some 3DS Max benches here.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/15818/11
11-13-2008, 02:39 AM
Winterwind

First tests
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3456
http://www.tecchannel.de/server/proz...ance_shanghai/

http://images.tecchannel.de/images/t...3_1000x700.jpg
atleast the power consumption is pretty good.
11-13-2008, 03:32 AM
knopflerbruce

Quote:

Originally Posted by qurious63ss

I believe that the 75W number is actually for ACP so true TDP is something like 110W or something like that.

My bad, I just read the numbers:p:
11-13-2008, 04:45 AM
Aussie FX

Quote:

Originally Posted by qurious63ss

I believe that the 75W number is actually for ACP so true TDP is something like 110W or something like that.

Unless something has changed recently AMD always rate their processors by TDP. ACP is just there to give a comparison with intel as that's how intel rate their processors.

I am almost certain that you have this backwards.

Barcelona are certainly rated by TDP so if Shanghai are rated with ACP then that makes them worse than Barcelona and that definitely isn't the case.
EDIT:
Actually the more I think about it the more certain I am that you have this wrong. My 9950 is a 140w TDP model yet it is around 100w in reality, so if that 140w was ACP then the TDP would be what, around 200w. Sorry but there isn't a motherboard PWM that can handle that.

KTE looked right into this not long ago and came out with some astonishing findings.

EDIT I'm now confused myself as to what is going on with TDP vs ACP so I have asked AMD to clear this up for me, so I will update as soon as I have my answer..(see post #62)
11-13-2008, 05:03 AM
gallag

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie FX

that's how intel rate their processors.

Is this actually true today or are you talking about the pentium 4 still?
11-13-2008, 05:18 AM
Aussie FX

Quote:

Originally Posted by gallag

Is this actually true today or are you talking about the pentium 4 still?

As I understand it they are using average figures not absolute worse case scenario.

However I wouldn't bet my life on it and I'm happy to be proven wrong. :)

Also don't forget that intel rate their processors in "families" so it's now getting very confusing...On both sides.
11-13-2008, 06:30 AM
Particle

Intel is kind of funny that way. My 45nm dual core is rated for 65W while in reality it pulls like 20-30W under load. :) Weirdness.

But on to the big news: Today is launch day! This is going to be exciting.
11-13-2008, 06:49 AM
Aussie FX

OK this is confusing, I have been told that Opterons are using ACP but Phenoms are still using TDP.

So a 75w Shanghai is actually 105w rated by TDP although the actual power draw is ~75w.

What is interesting is how this relates to intel as it's quite obvious that Shanghai are more efficient than Harpertown.

This is becoming a mess and probably needs some kind of standard applied because as it stands you can't compare processors between companies going by the numbers quoted on the specification sheet. Both sets just don't correlate.
11-13-2008, 01:47 PM
karbonkid

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

CIne10 and PovRay are toy benchmarks and have zero importance(name me one accepted and widely used app based on povray and cine10 engine).

Erm.. Cinema 4D and POV-Ray, respectively, followed by BodyPaint 3D, and I suppose you could argue, all the modellers designed for the POV-Ray renderer.

I jest, but only lightly - this does illustrate a point... I am sick and tired of people thinking that <benchmark name>: <high number> is the be-all and end-all of performance - personally, I don't give a flying :banana: about (generic) benchmarks - use whichever chips suit your particular application better...
11-14-2008, 08:51 AM
Oliverda

What is the stepping of these retail Shanghai core Opterons? C0, C1 or C2? :rolleyes:
11-14-2008, 09:01 AM
uOpt

Quote:

Originally Posted by demonkevy666

ECC registered is slow compared to desktop. at 800mhz the timings are like 5-5-5-18 and 6-6-6-24.

error correcting check < thats what ECC (I think)

There's no reason why you can't just set the timings yourself. Even if the BIOS doesn't support it it's no problem with use a memory timings setter since the registers to do this are just plain visible on the PCI bus. sourceforge/icspll has "a64timings" which uses pcitweak and will be easy to adapt to newer AMD CPUs.

The error checking itself has negligible slowdown these days (see my benchmarks in my signature).

Of course clocking a given registered ECC module is more limited than an unreg non-ECC. You have 9 instead of 8 chips that all have to play along and the register chip can be overdriven, too. But in general, it's the memory chips that count. You won't be running much slower putting the same chips into a reg ECC module than running them plain.
11-14-2008, 09:02 AM
Particle

The ACP vs TDP thing makes sense. They do ACP in the server arena and so does Intel. I'd guess that the reason is somewhat reactive (do it because Intel does it) and somewhat marketing (yay power efficiency). Desktop chips have always been TDP and I doubt that'll change.

Has anyone spotted the new Opterons available at any decent online stores in the US?
11-14-2008, 10:36 AM
merkk1

Thought you all mite want to see this http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...10482&Itemid=1
11-14-2008, 10:47 AM
crazydiamond

Quote:

Originally Posted by merkk1

Thought you all mite want to see this http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...10482&Itemid=1

:up:
11-14-2008, 11:26 AM
charged3800z24

I must say, I am impressed. Our HP rep for our company had a lot of good things to say. We might actually sell some multi socket AMD based servers in 2009. That is a shocker, since our company has refused to use AMD for 8 years now. We looked at the specs and were impressed. We have a "green" innitiative and these show promise.
11-14-2008, 11:27 AM
SkullCracka

:D :banana::banana::banana::banana: :yepp:
11-14-2008, 12:38 PM
GenTarkin

this is awesome news, now Im just hoping some of this translates over into deneb results =) I want it to be a competitive chip also!
Hopin the best for AMD here...I love AMD =) Still holding onto my opty 165 waitin to upgrade to AM3
11-18-2008, 07:43 AM
Particle

Five days after the launch, Newegg, ZZF, Directron and ChiefValue still don't have 45nm Opterons. The only places that do are stores I've never heard of, and they cost about $400. I guess I'll go 65nm this time around.
11-18-2008, 08:46 AM
demonkevy666

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle

Five days after the launch, Newegg, ZZF, Directron and ChiefValue still don't have 45nm Opterons. The only places that do are stores I've never heard of, and they cost about $400. I guess I'll go 65nm this time around.

lots of 2.7ghz Shanghai's available but nothing else.

I'd give newegg another week.
11-19-2008, 06:42 PM
Particle

Hi-ho SHAAAAANGHAIIIIIII!

:up:
11-19-2008, 07:09 PM
Sparky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle

Hi-ho SHAAAAANGHAIIIIIII!

:up:

And it is consistently cheaper than the Barcelona parts :up:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...nd&Order=PRICE

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...e=&srchInDesc=

No 8 series Shanhais yet but they are probably not far behind.

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:07 PM.

XtremeSystems