MMM
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 115

Thread: Penryn 40% faster on games, video...

  1. #26
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  2. #27
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by Vapor View Post
    Good news is they have 3.33GHz 1333FSB chips up and running already

    Let's face it...most of us would be happy with identical clock-for-clock performance with only higher clocks...but we're getting both, even if it is only a small gain in some applications.
    3.6ghz @1600mhz fsb
    Media PC:[AMD x2 4800][MSI K9N-SLI][2x1gig Corsair DDR2 800][ATI 3650 AIW][Asus Xonar D2X][500gig Samsung SATA][Crap Antec Case and PSU]


  3. #28
    xtreme energy
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Europe, Latvia
    Posts
    4,145
    First Xtreme edition penryn will be 3.63Ghz 11x333 according to unofficial source Later they will move to 1600fsb
    ...

  4. #29
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    12,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Movieman View Post
    I could put them in a vise and give it a 20nm squeeze!
    Or a girdle!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    Hmmm, that DiVX is really, really impressive....hopefully h.264 encoders can utilize SSE4, DiVX is ugly Rest of the scores aren't too shabby either....would like a bit more clock-for-clock improvement in my main application of Photoshop, but I guess that would be asking too much

  5. #30
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,730
    If you take out the 13% speed difference and the extra cache/FSB you end up with little IPC improvement if any.I guess you need SSE4 enabled SW to show Penryn's potential.

    Anyway , Intel lifted the bar even higher for AMD.If the K10 top bin will be 40% faster on average* than QX6700 it will barely match the 45nm Intel generation.

  6. #31
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    132
    Well it seems that the same processor overloaded with L2 cache is faster then the old cores.

    Surprise! L2 cache can only help so much. AMD's way of doing things is much more elegant.

  7. #32
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Herbert's House in Family Guy
    Posts
    2,381
    it will be close i think ... this is not like K8 vs presler where difference is still huge .
    E6600 @ 3.6
    IN9 32x MAX
    EVGA 8800Ultra
    750W

  8. #33
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by selectodude View Post
    Well it seems that the same processor overloaded with L2 cache is faster then the old cores.

    Surprise! L2 cache can only help so much. AMD's way of doing things is much more elegant.
    That's why they are planning chips with up to 8MB of cache next year ?

  9. #34
    YouTube Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Klaatu barada nikto
    Posts
    17,574
    Quote Originally Posted by savantu View Post
    That's why they are planning chips with up to 8MB of cache next year ?
    why don't we just take the leap and have 1GB of L2 and call it a day
    Fast computers breed slow, lazy programmers
    The price of reliability is the pursuit of the utmost simplicity. It is a price which the very rich find most hard to pay.
    http://www.lighterra.com/papers/modernmicroprocessors/
    Modern Ram, makes an old overclocker miss BH-5 and the fun it was

  10. #35
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    U.S of freakin' A
    Posts
    1,931
    The DivX scores are impressive to say the least.

    I'm sure that includes SSE4 optimizations.

    However, the new Super Shuffle enhancement in the Penryn core should provide a boost on SSE optimized apps, even if it's not SSE4 optimized.

    AMD won't get SSE4 until next year when they move to 45nm..

  11. #36
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,402
    3.33-2.9 and higher bus.

    15% for higher frequency.

    about 5-10% for bus.

    And you need use SSE4 for get the fake 40% ...
    intel is really good for fake bench

    And peryn don't have one L2 for the four cores ... that's always a MCM way.

    caraf, AMD run SSE4A in K10 65nm too
    Last edited by madcho; 04-16-2007 at 11:57 PM.

  12. #37
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    167
    ill just wait for real benches instead of slides
    Now i am become death , the destroyer of worlds.

  13. #38
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    U.S of freakin' A
    Posts
    1,931
    Quote Originally Posted by madcho View Post
    3.33-2.9 and higher bus.

    15% for higher frequency.

    about 5-10% for bus.

    And you need use SSE4 for get the fake 40% ...
    intel is really good for fake bench

    And peryn don't have one L2 for the four cores ... that's always a MCM way.

    caraf, AMD run SSE4A in K10 65nm too
    SSE4A is NOT the same thing as SSE4.

    Also, the reason for the inflated DivX scores is definitely due to the Alpha SSE4 optimized DivX..

    The other programs have not been SSE4 optimized, hence the performance advantage is much lower.

  14. #39
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by madcho View Post
    3.33-2.9 and higher bus.

    15% for higher frequency.

    about 5-10% for bus.

    And you need use SSE4 for get the fake 40% ...
    intel is really good for fake bench

    And peryn don't have one L2 for the four cores ... that's always a MCM way.

    caraf, AMD run SSE4A in K10 65nm too
    Just like AMD needs specFP_rate. Its just as fake
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  15. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    1,716
    Quote Originally Posted by madcho View Post
    3.33-2.9 and higher bus.

    15% for higher frequency.
    13.63%


    about 5-10% for bus.
    FSB frequency does not translates into CPU performance. It can help only a little(1%-3%) in certain cases, when the BUS is getting saturated and needs more than 8.5GB/s bandwidth, and such cases are very rare thanks to the aggressive prefetchers and large L2.

    And you need use SSE4 for get the fake 40% ...
    intel is really good for fake bench
    WTF are you FUDing about?
    SSE4 is the most significant update to the SSE instruction set and has more improvements over SSSE3, than SSE2 had over SSE1. Also Penryn's SSE engine has architectural improvements and Penryn will perform faster than same clocked Conroe in SSE3/SSE2(non SSE4) applications.
    Do you have an idea what is SSE, how it works and what kind of software has benefit of it?

    And peryn don't have one L2 for the four cores ... that's always a MCM way.
    So what?


    caraf, AMD run SSE4A in K10 65nm too
    AMD's SSE4A has only 6 new instructions.
    Intel's SSSE3 and SSE4(has the SSE4A instructions) have 82 new instructions.
    Last edited by gOJDO; 04-17-2007 at 01:01 AM.

  16. #41
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    2,542
    This sounds great!
    I guess Intel slides will be the guideline for AMD marketing on how to adjust their own slides not to look bad
    Quote Originally Posted by LexDiamonds View Post
    Anti-Virus software is for n00bs.

  17. #42
    XS News
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,010
    Slides is ok for intel users but if amd does it then its far from ok.
    Its a funny world =)
    Everything extra is bad!

  18. #43
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    OZtralia
    Posts
    2,051
    Looks all good for the consumer, I dont give a toss if its AMD or Intel as long as the performance is ramped
    lots and lots of cores and lots and lots of tuners,HTPC's boards,cases,HDD's,vga's,DDR1&2&3 etc etc all powered by Corsair PSU's

  19. #44
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    519
    I want to see an AMD slide with Cinebench!

    Or with HL2, for that matter..

  20. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by R101 View Post
    I want to see an AMD slide with Cinebench!

    Or with HL2, for that matter..
    I'll add to that; I want to see an AMD slide with clockspeed listed...

    Slides suck, but this one slide is more useful than all of amd's slides so far.

  21. #46
    Xtreme Monster
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,182
    That is a great old news coming from the surface to the depths of Intel wafer's. I see a wishful thinking over and over about Penryn and I really think will be a great step for Intel as had been CD2. The truth is that Penryn will be faster and an improvement of 20% over the top current quad core QX6800 shows us how fast that will be. I wonder what AMD is going to do to fight it back. Penryn will be coming in the Q1 08 or earlier Q4 07.

  22. #47
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by Ubermann View Post
    Slides is ok for intel users but if amd does it then its far from ok.
    Its a funny world =)
    There is a difference in real world applications. And then a specFP_rate benchmark. Also AMD compared Clovertown with a dualcore K8 and K10 quad. They left out dual dualcores on purpose.

    K8 already beated Clovertown in that bench. Atleast here we have something REAL and something thats comparable to the previous.

    Show me the AMD slide with a 2S dualcore K8 system vs a single socket K10. And you see K10 will lose or just equal the same specFP_rate bench.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  23. #48
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by alpha0ne View Post
    Looks all good for the consumer, I dont give a toss if its AMD or Intel as long as the performance is ramped
    agree

    conclusions on speculations are not the best indicators of performance, I cannot help but be silent.

  24. #49
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    But we believe AMDs numbers out of the box. You are funny nn_step.
    Word.

    How bizarre that Penryn will ship AFTER Barcelona and yet we get Penryn benches now but no Barcelona benches. AMD seems afraid to expose their upcoming offering to scrutiny

    PS: Even if K10 and Penryn are more or less the same speed, Intel will have the massive advantage of 45 nm vs AMDs 65 nm. Intel will be able to keep prices low forcing AMD to do the same. If AMD doesnt have a significant speed advantage they must compete on price ... which is an unhealthy position to be in vis a vis Intel.
    Last edited by WillyWonka; 04-17-2007 at 03:43 AM.

  25. #50
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by LOE View Post
    since when amd slides suck and intel slides rule ?
    Since Intel gave a proper description of the chip being benched including the clockspeed.

    AMD didnt bother giving a clockspeed. Their performance figures weren't a benchmark.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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
  •