Here's a little teaser....

[KTE]

I'm trying to roughly compare things here, on average.

K8 90nm-> K8 is 65nm - K10 is 65nm (shouldn't be much clock speed bin differences, short maturing time)
P4 65nm-> Core 2 is 65nm - Penryn is 45nm (should be much clock speed bin differences but long maturing time)

We know that staying on the same fab level does make clock speed raising easier as the process matures, but while that'll hold roughly true for AMD dual cores like it did for Intel dual cores, I doubt it too much when passing over to a fully different and new quad core.

K10 server: I've looked at Anandtech review long and hard and extrapolated backwards the dual Opteron 2224SE 3.2GHz scores for perfect clock scaling (which is obviously rare), down to 2x 2GHz and compared to 1x Opteron 2350 2GHz. A few times I used the 3GHz instead (where scores were available - twice I think). Flaws will arise since clock scaling won't be linear, but not by hugely.

Overall Opteron 2350 @ 2GHz (4 core) comes to be 52.2% (or 152.2%-100% for some) better than 2x Opteron 2224SE @ 2GHz (4 core).

Now that certainly is inline with what AMD has been saying.

Take one high Intel optimized benchmark score out of the equation, LINPACK and you get an average mean performance increase, clock per clock of:

39.28% for K10 server chip in server benches. That's not far from a Core 2 over P4...

August '07 HKEPC desktop Wolfdale 2330MHz was overall ~9.8% better than a E6550 2330MHz. Anandtech's was around 5%. We'll take the first one.

That's including the one high Divx score with Intel SSE4 specific optimization.

Take away that score and the mean average performance increase clock per clock basis is:

7.45% for a desktop chip with desktop benches.

Boards used were? Two separate ones IIRC, a GA-P35-DQ6 with DDR3 1066 for the Wolfdale and a GA-G33-DS3R DDR2 1066(?) for the E6550. Which ones runs 1066MHz on RAM default or did they overclock for RAM to the same speed? I'm not sure.

14.156sec SPI 1M at stock for that Wolfdale IIRC.

Tigerton/Clovertown: is beat clock per clock basis by K10 Opteron overall. With 2.13GHz and many times even with 2.33GHz parts compared to 2GHz.

Desktop: no idea.

Problem: Intel is competing with higher clocks and good performance per clock. AMD with better power efficiency and lower prices but lower clocks. Will outperform at the equal price market with its low clocks yet, but it has nothing for mid-high end.
AMD loses out when comparing top offerings due to low clock speeds against an already very matured chip and fab process. Price is very good. They just need higher clock speeds to compete more on a level basis. It'll be tight but I reckon AMD takes this clock per clock basis, and maybe by even price. They just need a 3GHz Agena X4 part by sometime Q1 when desktop Yorkfield will be releasing 3.16GHz.

Do I give a damn which chip kills what? No, because it kills inside weak minds only. Competition is always healthy, even Intel knows that. If the highest Barcelona quad beats or levels the highest Penryn with highest clock possible by Q2 08, then the same excitement and effort turns out for Nehalem, and so on.

[PhilDoc]

I'm trying to roughly compare things here, on average.

K8 90nm-> K8 is 65nm - K10 is 65nm (shouldn't be much clock speed bin differences, short maturing time)
P4 65nm-> Core 2 is 65nm - Penryn is 45nm (should be much clock speed bin differences but long maturing time)

We know that staying on the same fab level does make clock speed raising easier as the process matures, but while that'll hold roughly true for AMD dual cores like it did for Intel dual cores, I doubt it too much when passing over to a fully different and new quad core.

K10 server: I've looked at Anandtech review long and hard and extrapolated backwards the dual Opteron 2224SE 3.2GHz scores for perfect clock scaling (which is obviously rare), down to 2x 2GHz and compared to 1x Opteron 2350 2GHz. A few times I used the 3GHz instead (where scores were available - twice I think). Flaws will arise since clock scaling won't be linear, but not by hugely.

Overall Opteron 2350 @ 2GHz (4 core) comes to be 52.2% (or 152.2%-100% for some) better than 2x Opteron 2224SE @ 2GHz (4 core).

Now that certainly is inline with what AMD has been saying.

Take one high Intel optimized benchmark score out of the equation, LINPACK and you get an average mean performance increase, clock per clock of:

39.28% for K10 server chip in server benches. That's not far from a Core 2 over P4...

August '07 HKEPC desktop Wolfdale 2330MHz was overall ~9.8% better than a E6550 2330MHz. Anandtech's was around 5%. We'll take the first one.

That's including the one high Divx score with Intel SSE4 specific optimization.

Take away that score and the mean average performance increase clock per clock basis is:

7.45% for a desktop chip with desktop benches.

Boards used were? Two separate ones IIRC, a GA-P35-DQ6 with DDR3 1066 for the Wolfdale and a GA-G33-DS3R DDR2 1066(?) for the E6550. Which ones runs 1066MHz on RAM default or did they overclock for RAM to the same speed? I'm not sure.

14.156sec SPI 1M at stock for that Wolfdale IIRC.

Tigerton/Clovertown: is beat clock per clock basis by K10 Opteron overall. With 2.13GHz and many times even with 2.33GHz parts compared to 2GHz.

Desktop: no idea.

Problem: Intel is competing with higher clocks and good performance per clock. AMD with better power efficiency and lower prices but lower clocks. Will outperform at the equal price market with its low clocks yet, but it has nothing for mid-high end.
AMD loses out when comparing top offerings due to low clock speeds against an already very matured chip and fab process. Price is very good. They just need higher clock speeds to compete more on a level basis. It'll be tight but I reckon AMD takes this clock per clock basis, and maybe by even price. They just need a 3GHz Agena X4 part by sometime Q1 when desktop Yorkfield will be releasing 3.16GHz.

Do I give a damn which chip kills what? No, because it kills inside weak minds only. Competition is always healthy, even Intel knows that. If the highest Barcelona quad beats or levels the highest Penryn with highest clock possible by Q2 08, then the same excitement and effort turns out for Nehalem, and so on.

Did pretty much the same thing, but came with some different numbers using the articles last page. If you thow in the B1 stepping that was used, then maybe a little higher, don't really know.

Came to the same conclusion that AMD needs to get to 3G. If they do we may have a nice little price war, which is great for us. Plus Intel may have some tricks of their own, which would mean even faster cpus. All in all, I think we as consumers are going to win bigtime.

[zakelwe]

Well , waiting for results still. Considering that this processor has been released and is in final production form it is a very poor showing up to now when it comes to actual results.

As a reference

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ghlight=conroe

That's a Conroe 4 months before release, not too many bugs or excuses there. Just goes to show how shoddy this release has been. How many more months can it be strung out that AMD will rule ... if you wait just a little bit longer. I am sure I have been hearing this from just before 65nm K8 and that ended in nothing but a massive let down with its poor overclocking and slow cache. Slow cache, hmm, that rings a bell with the K10 ...

As an avid overclocker since the Celeron 300A all I can say is

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Or can you not put up AMD merchants? Show us the scores.

Don't bother quoting me and arguing the other side, just put up some earth shaking benchmarks in the desktop space. If Conroe can get good scores 4 months before release then Phenom should be able to provide similar 2 months before if it is that good, or are AMD just dicking around still in the quicksand ?

This is another HD2900XT all over again.

Regards

Andy

[dave_graham]

Well , waiting for results still. Considering that this processor has been released and is in final production form it is a very poor showing up to now when it comes to actual results.

As a reference

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ghlight=conroe

That's a Conroe 4 months before release, not too many bugs or excuses there. Just goes to show how shoddy this release has been. How many more months can it be strung out that AMD will rule ... if you wait just a little bit longer. I am sure I have been hearing this from just before 65nm K8 and that ended in nothing but a massive let down with its poor overclocking and slow cache. Slow cache, hmm, that rings a bell with the K10 ...

As an avid overclocker since the Celeron 300A all I can say is

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Or can you not put up AMD merchants? Show us the scores.

Don't bother quoting me and arguing the other side, just put up some earth shaking benchmarks in the desktop space. If Conroe can get good scores 4 months before release then Phenom should be able to provide similar 2 months before if it is that good, or are AMD just dicking around still in the quicksand ?

This is another HD2900XT all over again.

Regards

Andy

and your point is?

why don't you let the folks who actually know something about the platform get a chance to get test the processors out besides hacking through a list of "Well, Intel did this..." stuff? we get it, you're not impressed....don't really care.

i have been upfront in claiming that B1 cores with their BIOS workaround DO cause performance deficits. BA will eliminate that, so, why don't you shut up and let me (and S7) get back to getting the platforms in line. you don't see me crapping in your threads, so....please, stop trying to attack people.

dave

[zakelwe]

and your point is?

why don't you let the folks who actually know something about the platform get a chance to get test the processors out besides hacking through a list of "Well, Intel did this..." stuff? we get it, you're not impressed....don't really care.

i have been upfront in claiming that B1 cores with their BIOS workaround DO cause performance deficits. BA will eliminate that, so, why don't you shut up and let me (and S7) get back to getting the platforms in line. you don't see me crapping in your threads, so....please, stop trying to attack people.

dave

Dear Dave,


My point is that Intel Conroe was putting in great scores months before release even with new BIOS and motherboards. K10 doesn't do the same after release, what does that show?

You say I attack people, however I have only ever attacked the initial K10 results and said that "excuses" for it were not logical. If you want an example of somone attacking the person let me quote you on another forum:-

""i'm a liar at Xtremesys by a few uninformed imbeciles but, whatever....""

Nobody called you a liar, we were trying to work out the steppings by asking questions to try and get to the bottom of it. Nice to know what you actually think of us when you are not here though.....

And as for you claim about :-


"i have been upfront in claiming that B1 cores with their BIOS workaround DO cause performance deficits"

I can inform you now that Anandtech were using BA and B1 according to a source at Anandtech and did not notice a difference between the two but they are still testing and will give a full report later.

On the subject of testing, you said why don't I shut up and wait for you to get testing these things in anger. Good idea. I waited and you both are producing very little so I thought I'd just mention

SHOW US THE BEEF

XS is all about results on the desktop, not excuses and what ifs and could have beens and just wait a bit longer and the platforms currently is not right. A fantasic processor would still cut through all of this like Woodcrest/Conroe did.

You have to walk the walk, not talk the talk and after 17 pages how much walking has actually been done in this thread? And this is a cpu that is being shipped for revenue, not something to be released in Q108

Regards

Andy

[dave_graham]

Dear Dave,
My point is that Intel Conroe was putting in great scores months before release even with new BIOS and motherboards. K10 doesn't do the same after release, what does that show?

i understand taking a few days to respond but seriously, this has been thrashed through enough by myself and others. read the pages AFTER your initial email.

You say I attack people, however I have only ever attacked the initial K10 results and said that "excuses" for it were not logical. If you want an example of somone attacking the person let me quote you on another forum:-

""i'm a liar at Xtremesys by a few uninformed imbeciles but, whatever....""

Nobody called you a liar, we were trying to work out the steppings by asking questions to try and get to the bottom of it. Nice to know what you actually think of us when you are not here though.....

that was from here: http://forums.2cpu.com/showpost.php?...1&postcount=48 (for reference)...always quote your source, zakelwe.

hey, you missed one here: http://forums.2cpu.com/showpost.php?...9&postcount=73

In that thread i say:

it's the ridiculous amounts of intel/AMD fan-s over at XS that are wearing me out. figure it this way, I'm probably my nicest at 10am....my most grouchy at 5pm.

on AMDZone, i said this: http://amdzone.com/index.php?name=PN...wtopic&t=11206

fighting ignorant trolls over at XS....it's tiring.

let's see...where else have I posted? gah...it escapes me...


actually, it's been implied, im'd, and others directly to me. i neither have the time, patience, or energy to go through and grab all the snarks that have been tossed my way. Have I lost my patience? you betcha. you can quote me anywhere you want, the message is still the same. iirc, that might have been from 2cpu where GENERALLY speaking, the level of intelligent conversation around this particular topic has been lightyears beyond here. With KTE's, PhilDoc's, et al. entrance into this thread, we actually have a bit of work to do.

see, at other places, there are less trolls simply entering into threads bashing a concept or a company. at XS, it's taken to the extreme. Not only do i have to defend myself, my statements, my ideals, i have to protect EVERYTHING i say since, as you've so delicately pointed out, i might infer something that I never actually said. happens too often here which is why i took about a 4 month hiatus before coming back. it's tiring and, when you actually have another job, it's not worth it.

And as for you claim about :-


"i have been upfront in claiming that B1 cores with their BIOS workaround DO cause performance deficits"

I can inform you now that Anandtech were using BA and B1 according to a source at Anandtech and did not notice a difference between the two but they are still testing and will give a full report later.

well, given that i've talked to Anand about it, they've disclosed that they used B1 and B2 steppings in their reviews, i don't see how your statement brings anything new to the table. *shrug*

On the subject of testing, you said why don't I shut up and wait for you to get testing these things in anger. Good idea. I waited and you both are producing very little so I thought I'd just mention

SHOW US THE BEEF

i'm testing at the right i'm able to. trying balancing a day job, a pregnant wife, a 2.5 year old child, and any number of other things that I do. matter of fact, don't because that would, in addition, complicate your ability to shoot arrows at the undefended down below. I buy all my own hardware, with the exception of processors and the OCCASIONAL memory relief, and have to fit it into the budget. I've already explained that I'm receiving BA steppings within a week or so, so, you can keep asking for it, but i'm going to keep saying, it's coming. then again, that gives you another platform to cast dispersion on myself and others for at least attempting to intelligently answer "critics," "trolls," and "fanboys" (on both accounts) with the platform performance. I can't help it if your expectations and timelines are unrealistic.

XS is all about results on the desktop, not excuses and what ifs and could have beens and just wait a bit longer and the platforms currently is not right. A fantasic processor would still cut through all of this like Woodcrest did.

and your point is? woodcrest and clovertown weren't without their share of problems though intel has a better track record of first run releases. who cares? the "results on the desktop" statement is...well, interesting. the issue is that XS exists in a vacuum; it in no way, shape, or form represents what revenuing partners, manufacturers, etc. care about when it comes to processor design. See, i guarantee that AMD didn't stop by XS and go, "wow, these XS guys are so cutting edge that we need to release a product that will appease them." that's what's so unbelievably unrealistic about your worldview.

You have to walk the walk, not talk the talk and after 17 pages how much walking has actually been done in this thread? And this is a cpu that is being shipped for revenue, not something to be released in Q108

Regards

Andy

and I am. simple as that. I've engaged the resources that I've had the time to all while balancing work and family. i'd like to see you do the same.

it's easy to cast stones...much harder to actually quarry them.

dave

[zakelwe]

and I am. simple as that. I've engaged the resources that I've had the time to all while balancing work and family. i'd like to see you do the same.

it's easy to cast stones...much harder to actually quarry them.

dave

More talk Dave and no action.

So, you'd like to see me doing the same with a wife and family ?

Well check out the 3dmark 2001 scores for nvidia cards from GF3 ti200 onwards and see how many first pages have my name on them. I'm still pretty proud of my MX440 with FX-55, took them 2 years to take that score down. I've often stayed up till early in the morning in sub zero temperatures in my shed and then set off for work whilst my wife and kid were in bed so don't go giving me lectures about not doing the same :-

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&highlight=5am

I was up to 3am and had to get up at 5am to go to work

So no excuses, where are the results?

Andy

[Movieman]

Well , waiting for results still. Considering that this processor has been released and is in final production form it is a very poor showing up to now when it comes to actual results.

As a reference

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ghlight=conroe

That's a Conroe 4 months before release, not too many bugs or excuses there. Just goes to show how shoddy this release has been. How many more months can it be strung out that AMD will rule ... if you wait just a little bit longer. I am sure I have been hearing this from just before 65nm K8 and that ended in nothing but a massive let down with its poor overclocking and slow cache. Slow cache, hmm, that rings a bell with the K10 ...

As an avid overclocker since the Celeron 300A all I can say is

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Or can you not put up AMD merchants? Show us the scores.

Don't bother quoting me and arguing the other side, just put up some earth shaking benchmarks in the desktop space. If Conroe can get good scores 4 months before release then Phenom should be able to provide similar 2 months before if it is that good, or are AMD just dicking around still in the quicksand ?

This is another HD2900XT all over again.

Regards

Andy

Ohh Andy, your on a roll today!
I think what happenned is that AMD backed themself into a corner.
They had moved the release date I think twice and knew they couldn't do it again BUT, they still had some issues with the chips so they kept it all quiet as long as possible( great job doing that) with the hope that they would solve the issues before release. It seems they didn't but JUST seems that way.
I think that given 60-90 days they will correct most of the issues and then is when we should make our judgements not today..
Just my 2 cents pal..

[zakelwe]

I think what happenned is that AMD backed themself into a corner.
They had moved the release date I think twice and knew they couldn't do it again BUT, they still had some issues with the chips so they kept it all quiet as long as possible( great job doing that) with the hope that they would solve the issues before release. It seems they didn't but JUST seems that way.
I think that given 60-90 days they will correct most of the issues and then is when we should make our judgements not today..
Just my 2 cents pal..

First part is a very good summation Dave, the "it will get better" part I don't agree with. They can make it better but they would need to pull off a Thoroughbred B trick again and I do not think they can find the magic again this time round.

I tell you what, if they do manage it I will dedicate my 2 machines to the DC project of your choice for a year and you know what I now think of DC after being addicted for years

If AMD are 10% better overall than Penryn on desktop benches on the last day of 2007 my machines are at your DC command

Regards

Andy