Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 90

Thread: AMD Phenom 9100e First Pics & Review

  1. #26
    Diablo 3! Who's Excited?
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    9,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Kain665 View Post
    But it is 1/2 the price...
    But it offers less than half the performance?

  2. #27
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan View Post
    Good way to get rid of all the B2's
    +1 lol

    im gonna buy one for my girlfriend... she stills has a Duron
    C2Q QX6800@ 3.75GHz (375x10 - 1.450v) - L725A - G0
    4GB PC2-5300 Kingston Micron D9@ 3-4-4-10 750MHz 1:1
    Asus P5E-Deluxe - no mods
    eVGA 9600gso G92 + XFX 8500 GT (physics)
    H4ck3d-Slackware 11.0
    kernel-2.6.22.1@MCORE2 Arch Optimized

  3. #28
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Epsilon84 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by grimREEFER; 03-04-2008 at 09:27 AM.
    DFI P965-S/core 2 quad q6600@3.2ghz/4gb gskill ddr2 @ 800mhz cas 4/xfx gtx 260/ silverstone op650/thermaltake xaser 3 case/razer lachesis

  4. #29
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Bucharest, Romania
    Posts
    376
    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$ !


    Generalizations are, in general, wrong.

  5. #30
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,215
    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).

  6. #31
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    881
    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.

  7. #32
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler View Post
    But it offers less than half the performance?
    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.

  8. #33
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    617
    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

  9. #34
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,550
    Quote Originally Posted by hollo View Post
    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!
    Adobe is working on Flash Player support for 64-bit platforms as part of our ongoing commitment to the cross-platform compatibility of Flash Player. We expect to provide native support for 64-bit platforms in an upcoming release of Flash Player following the release of Flash Player 10.1.

  10. #35
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Edmonton Alberta
    Posts
    955
    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.

  11. #36
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Edmonton Alberta
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler View Post
    But it offers less than half the performance?
    Yes but this will sell like hotcakes, oems will eat this up as it will make for excellent marke3ting

  12. #37
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    658
    Quote Originally Posted by grimREEFER View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Epsilon84; 03-05-2008 at 10:06 AM.

  13. #38
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    617
    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

  14. #39
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Thessaloniki, Greece
    Posts
    1,307
    Quote Originally Posted by hollo View Post
    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 .
    Seems we made our greatest error when we named it at the start
    for though we called it "Human Nature" - it was cancer of the heart
    CPU: AMD X3 720BE@ 3,4Ghz
    Cooler: Xigmatek S1283(Terrible mounting system for AM2/3)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte 790FXT-UD5P(F4) RAM: 2x 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600Mhz Gold 8-8-8-24
    GPU:HD5850 1GB
    PSU: Seasonic M12D 750W Case: Coolermaster HAF932(aka Dusty )

  15. #40
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    617
    that'd have a very trivial impact on the core-scaling in games, the overall picture is pretty clear

  16. #41
    X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Hellas-->Athens
    Posts
    1,298
    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
    When Mercedes brought their C111 to Talledega years ago and blew away the closed course record did it count? Yes..
    That was a "factory" car and a "one of" that no one could buy and was never sold.
    Records are records and that is a fact so get over it.

  17. #42
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    川崎市
    Posts
    2,076
    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$

  18. #43
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    758
    The performance results from the Greek review are brutal.

  19. #44
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,588
    and isnt there gonna be special pricing per 1,000 chips or something like that??

  20. #45
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    HD0
    Posts
    2,646
    e7400 GMV for my next CPU...

  21. #46
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    658
    Quote Originally Posted by grimREEFER View Post
    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.

  22. #47
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,215
    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).

  23. #48
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Spain, EU
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    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
    Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)


    Quote Originally Posted by PerryR, on John Fruehe (JF-AMD) View Post
    Pretty much. Plus, he's here voluntarily.

  24. #49
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    781
    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.
    Computer:
    Case: Corsair 750D Airflow Edition
    Mobo: Gigabyte Aorus X570 Ultra
    RAM: Team TForce Xtreem ARGB 3600C14 2x16gb XMP
    CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900x
    Graphics: EVGA (rip) RTX 3080 FTW3
    PSU: Seasonic Focus GX 850w
    Cooling: Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360mm
    NVMe: SKHynix P41 Platinum, Samsung 980 Pro 2tb
    SSD: Micron 1100 2TB, Samsung 860 Evo 1tb
    HDD: WD SE 2TB, WD Black 1tb 3 platter with over 10 years of power-on time

  25. #50
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Thessaloniki, Greece
    Posts
    1,307
    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.
    Last edited by BrowncoatGR; 04-15-2008 at 03:57 AM.
    Seems we made our greatest error when we named it at the start
    for though we called it "Human Nature" - it was cancer of the heart
    CPU: AMD X3 720BE@ 3,4Ghz
    Cooler: Xigmatek S1283(Terrible mounting system for AM2/3)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte 790FXT-UD5P(F4) RAM: 2x 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600Mhz Gold 8-8-8-24
    GPU:HD5850 1GB
    PSU: Seasonic M12D 750W Case: Coolermaster HAF932(aka Dusty )

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •