Official Phenom Reviews Thread

[Zytek_Fan]

AMD stock is still doing really bad. If it hits $5 per share, AMD is going to be taken over...

[JumpingJack]

No, No, I mean a regular 94 or 9500 being overclocked, not their retail stock temp being that high. No matter what speed, you're right they'd never do that. That's one of the things that killed Tejas, remember? All I'm saying is that AMD will bin these suckers for every once of speed to get better returns, sort of like my 3500+ has about 90MHz of Headroom LOL! Why would I want something that will generate a 150W of heat (after being overclocked) to still end up being slower, be more power hungry and more expensive? Doesn't matter who made it, that's a bad deal IMHO! Please note, I skipped Prescott for that same reason.

Ahhh, I see.. thanks for clarifying.

[JumpingJack]

You are aware of 6400+?You are aware of it's TDP?And you are aware of OCs achieved with it?
Right.Sinked in badly.

Well, not actually, I have not seen 6400+ overclocking data... and a quick google did not yield much information. All I could find were consumer quotes about it being pretty poor overclocker.

For example:
http://components.computers.merchant...FSB-Socket-AM2

For power consumption, very few sites published power numbers (or even reviews for this processor), so the data is scant at the moment.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...reme_qx9650/16

It is clear that this platform the 6400+ consumes as much as the 65 nm Intel quad. With the exception of the FX-74 (dual socket of course), this may be the highest power CPU on the market today. Oddly, at 3.2 GHz it is consuming a great deal of power... it would be interesting to compare this to a Prescott 3.2 GHz just for a power/clock comparision.

Back to overclocking, perhaps you can provide some information, please ensure it is on air cooling. I doubt it is much above 3.4 Ghz as this is about the Fmax of AMD's 90 nm process using the good air cooling. Consquently, this is roughly the same for the 65 nm processors, about 3.4 Ghz or so without more exotic cooling, of course milage varies as there is a distribution of process parameters that affect overall performance.

Edit: Here is one --

http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/60128...irst_look.html

Unfortunately, we couldn’t squeeze much more speed out of it after overclocking either, as the 90nm chip was close to its limit anyway at 3.2GHz. We managed to clock it up to 3.36GHz by taking the front side bus up to 210MHz, but it refused to go any higher than this using our Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro.

So with this, a 125 W TDP processor squeezing out a meager 160 MHZ more speed. I stand by my original statement.

[Donnie27]

Well, not actually, I have not seen 6400+ overclocking data... and a quick google did not yield much information. All I could find were consumer quotes about it being pretty poor overclocker.

For example:
http://components.computers.merchant...FSB-Socket-AM2

For power consumption, very few sites published power numbers (or even reviews for this processor), so the data is scant at the moment.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...reme_qx9650/16

It is clear that this platform the 6400+ consumes as much as the 65 nm Intel quad. With the exception of the FX-74, this may be the highest power CPU on the market today. Oddly, at 3.2 GHz it is consuming a great deal of power... it would be interesting to compare this to a Prescott 3.2 GHz just for a power/clock comparision.

Back to overclocking, perhaps you can provide some information, please ensure it is on air cooling. I doubt it is much above 3.4 Ghz as this is about the Fmax of AMD's 90 nm process using the good air cooling.

Edit: Here is one --

http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/60128...irst_look.html

So with this, a 125 W TDP processor squeezing out a meager 160 MHZ more speed. I stand by my original statement.

No biggie on that other reply, my country Dyslexic @$$ should have stated it better.

Probably to make fairer if you could compare it to a Smithfield? You think? I don't remember where or what forum but there was a thread about that.

This is AMD's problem-->So the new 45nm process gives you a quad-core CPU for the power cost of a dual core 65nm Intel CPU. AMD's high-end Athlon 64 X2s still use the 90nm SOI manufacturing process and have reached the end of their limits, just like it was back with Pentium 4 Preshot. Thus, it's no surprise that they don't square up at all well here.

The disconnect here is wayyyyyyy beyond being blind or loyal, it seems more like a plot to try and fool folks. When some folks here say we, I don't know if they mean fellow Enthusiast or AMD Employees

[Donnie27]

If you don't like it here, why bother coming here in the first place?


As for the others :
Stop the thread crapping and name calling and stick to the facts.
We don't want another AMD vs Intel war going on here again.
You guys know how topics like those end, so keep it clean.
Thx.

To: Jupiler

I don't want to get in trouble either but I think you missed it

#1

You expected anything better around here in trolltown?

#2

XS was never better descirbed.

Like in American Football the second offender usually gets flagged.

If you don't like it here, why bother coming here in the first place?

Maybe? Just Maybe your comments should have been aimed at post #1 instead of #2? I've seen MR_SmartAss posts before and I'm sure he as was being sarcastic to mAJORD. In that he was "throwing mAJORD's Trolltown" comment back at him. Or saying that it's an AMD Trolltown LOL! If my post seems out of line or anything, please delete it?

I hope Xtreme Systems.org never gets to the point where folks aren't allowed to address incorrect info, lies, FUD and general BS. Phenom didn't do so well and pointing that out isn't trolling LOL!

[KTE]

I hope Xtreme Systems.org never gets to the point where folks aren't allowed to address incorrect info, lies, FUD and general BS.

Neither do I and so moderator input is very appreciated.

[JumpingJack]

No biggie on that other reply, my country Dyslexic @$$ should have stated it better.

Probably to make fairer if you could compare it to a Smithfield? You think? I don't remember where or what forum but there was a thread about that.

This is AMD's problem-->So the new 45nm process gives you a quad-core CPU for the power cost of a dual core 65nm Intel CPU. AMD's high-end Athlon 64 X2s still use the 90nm SOI manufacturing process and have reached the end of their limits, just like it was back with Pentium 4 Preshot. Thus, it's no surprise that they don't square up at all well here.

The disconnect here is wayyyyyyy beyond being blind or loyal, it seems more like a plot to try and fool folks. When some folks here say we, I don't know if they mean fellow Enthusiast or AMD Employees

Yeah, but I cannot find a side by side data set with a 6400+ and a Smithfield or any late Netburst processor, the 6400+ came out long enough after all interest in the Prescott lineage expired. So I mention -- it would be interesting to see what the thermals would be like, but cannot find a consistent side by side to make a fair compare... so the answer will remain, more or less unknown.

Jack

[DoubleZero]

Well, not actually, I have not seen 6400+ overclocking data... and a quick google did not yield much information. All I could find were consumer quotes about it being pretty poor overclocker.

Well since you're in the xtreme systems forum, maybe you should look it up in here... just a thought

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=151746

The review of the Phenom confirmed what a lot of folks already guesstimated. Yet, instead of patting savantu, shintai, coldpower27, red, jumpingjack and others on the back for being right, folks get flamed. If no one else said it, I'll say to you guys, THANK YOU! Please keep up the good work! I thought Phenom would make a better showing than it did. You guys should be acknowledged for getting it right, not flamed and called Trolls LOL!

I don't know if i should laugh or if i should cry. I lost count of the times a had to post just to debunk the nazi anti-AMD propraganda by some of those guys you speak of... yeah, yeah people are upset because they said k10 wouldn't cut it, and that's all they did.

I guess then, for example, that you stand by savantu prediction of K10=K8 performance-wise.

The disconnect here is wayyyyyyy beyond being blind or loyal, it seems more like a plot to try and fool folks. When some folks here say we, I don't know if they mean fellow Enthusiast or AMD Employees

There isn't an AMD thread where the usual Intel trolls lead in posting by a factor of 10:1, i lost count of the AMD threads that were closed because of the usual intel trolls, even the AMD section is infested with Intel trolls, i lost count of the times people that rarelly post come out and said "hey i don't usual post, but stfu already", that's how anoying you are, and you have the nerve of talking about AMD employees in this forum...

Holy crap... I entered the thread to read up on the reviews and user experiences but instead I got caught in an adult kindergarten thread..

Avoid AMD threads and you will be fine.

[Donnie27]

Yeah, but I cannot find a side by side data set with a 6400+ and a Smithfield or any late Netburst processor, the 6400+ came out long enough after all interest in the Prescott lineage expired. So I mention -- it would be interesting to see what the thermals would be like, but cannot find a consistent side by side to make a fair compare... so the answer will remain, more or less unknown.

Jack

The other thread was about temps, not performance or price. I do remember folks here talking about 120W was unacceptable when it was Intel's problem.
How quickly we forget the "Prescott Survival Kit".

[Donnie27]

Well since you're in the xtreme systems forum, maybe you should look it up in here... just a thought

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=151746

I don't know if i should laugh or if i should cry. I lost count of the times a had to post just to debunk the nazi anti-AMD propraganda by some of those guys you speak of... yeah, yeah people are upset because they said k10 wouldn't cut it, and that's all they did.

I guess then, for example, that you stand by savantu prediction of K10=K8 performance-wise.

There isn't an AMD thread where the usual Intel trolls lead in posting by a factor of 10:1, i lost count of the AMD threads that were closed because of the usual intel trolls, even the AMD section is infested with Intel trolls, i lost count of the times people that rarelly post come out and said "hey i don't usual post, but stfu already", that's how anoying you are, and you have the nerve of talking about AMD employees in this forum...

Avoid AMD threads and you will be fine.

First of all, I said others and you're one of them, sometimes Unlike one person here, I don't have a list. Also Periander6, cupholer and again, many others. Phenom didn't do so well and NOTHING like AMD said it would. Pointing that out doesn't make the pointee a Troll. Most folks, even some AMD leaning people accepted it, other just pretended it didn't happen.

Posts: 324 I'll believe it when I see it. Phenom was super late out the door and is by all indication a bust. I don't believe AMD anymore after all the hype that was put into their 65nm chips. The way things are going AMD won't have 45nm out the door until 2009 and by then Intel could have even denser chips.

First link : http://www.news.com/AMD-Go-to-Barcel...3-6152645.html
"We expect across a wide variety of workloads for Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent," Allen said.
To blame AMD because this sentence has been transformed to "We expect across [a wide variety of workloads for] Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent," Allen said, it's a little lame.

Where's the "wide variety of workloads"? Seen those workloads yet?

X2 6400+ CCB8F 0722 TPMW 4222 1,55 H2O/pelt mAJORD ----3503 @1,5 Validation

Please, look for my last posts in the AMD section, please? I don't believe in trying to argue with folks from that Alternate Reality Zone.

So that'd make it what, fast as a C2D at 3.2GHz LOL!j/k

Honestly here we have the same example of what happened as guys showed off Prescott at 4.5GHz being bested by Athlon64 at 3GHz or an overclocked 805 still slower than a stock 3800. AMD was better=P See the disconnect here? A not so extremely overclocked on air C2D would easily spank the absolute best world record overclocked X2. Never mind a water cooled C2D. This frustration leads frustrated folks lash out and make Trolltown comments and call others names and etc... Frustrated folks are the ones who should be warned here.

[DoubleZero]

Phenom didn't do so well and NOTHING like AMD said it would. Pointing that out doesn't make the pointee a Troll. Most folks, even some AMD leaning people accepted it, other just pretended it didn't happen.

and Intel said penryn would be a whooping 40% faster and it's barely 5 %
http://www.reuters.com/article/techn...36329920070417

Now compare Amd threads with Intel threads and try to learn something from that comparison. And stop acting like some of the guys you named only pointed out the truth, it's no true.

Where's the "wide variety of workloads"? Seen those workloads yet?

Here:
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3162&p=12
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3091&p=13

Look hard and you will see a K10 2.5ghz beating a Clovertown 3.0ghz and even a Harpertown 3.0ghz in some "workloads".
Or continue to pretend it didn't happen, and continue trolling and spread fud, and then when someone points the finger, to you and your friends, play the victim and say that AMD fans are too sensitive and can't handle the truth lol

X2 6400+ CCB8F 0722 TPMW 4222 1,55 H2O/pelt mAJORD ----3503 @1,5 Validation

Please, look for my last posts in the AMD section, please? I don't believe in trying to argue with folks from that Alternate Reality Zone.

So that'd make it what, fast as a C2D at 3.2GHz LOL!j/k

Honestly here we have the same example of what happened as guys showed off Prescott at 4.5GHz being bested by Athlon64 at 3GHz or an overclocked 805 still slower than a stock 3800. AMD was better=P See the disconnect here? A not so extremely overclocked on air C2D would easily spank the absolute best world record overclocked X2. Never mind a water cooled C2D.

Someone was having trouble finding x2 6400+ results, i just gave a link, that shows results not that far from the review he found, stable settings that is, but yet you managed to make another pointless pro-intel rant.

This frustration leads frustrated folks lash out and make Trolltown comments and call others names and etc... Frustrated folks are the ones who should be warned here.

Since the intel guys are cleary the ones acting like they are frustraded, i agree 100% with you.

[Donnie27]

and Intel said penryn would be a whooping 40% faster and it's barely 5 %
http://www.reuters.com/article/techn...36329920070417

In high-performance computing and bandwidth intensive applications ... there will be up to a whopping 45 percent performance increase," said Patrick Gelsinger, the general manager for Intel's digital enterprise group.

Look up SSE4 and learn something? Then you of all people wonder why I stay out of the Alternate Reality Zone? Compare what you said to what they said? Plus Phenom stinks so far!

Now compare Amd threads with Intel threads and try to learn something from that comparison. And stop acting like some of the guys you named only pointed out the truth, it's no true.

Here:
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3162&p=12
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3091&p=13

Look hard and you will see a K10 2.5ghz beating a Clovertown 3.0ghz and even a Harpertown 3.0ghz in some "workloads".
Or continue to pretend it didn't happen, and continue trolling and spread fud, and then when someone points the finger, to you and your friends, play the victim and say that AMD fans are too sensitive and can't handle the truth lol

The only thing I've learned is that you're blind as the rest. Phenom still stinks.

Then "some" doesn't equal ""wide variety of workloads". Just so you don't miss it again, BOTH Intel and AMD has lied their @$$es off. The only real difference between the two are Size, Money and right now Intel has the better Products IMHO! Again, try that one on someone else? If that makes me an Intel guy, dewd I'm gladly there There is no Intel vs. AMD fight, Intel has already kicked the crap out of AMD and went home, get over it?

Someone was having trouble finding x2 6400+ results, i just gave a link, that shows results not that far from the review he found, stable settings that is, but yet you managed to make another pointless pro-intel rant.

Bringing up Athlon64 Dual core in any manner is very pointless on your part but who's complaining? Again, no matter where its clocked it still get's Female Dog slapped. Ironic isn't it? Of course if I were glowing about about a useless pointless AthlonX2, you'd think that was cool uh? I'd already said try to run two of those in the same die? SOS here!

Since the intel guys are cleary the ones acting like they are frustraded, i agree 100% with you.

You've got to be kidding, right? Most Intel guys have been Happy as hell since Conroe Launched. They're not constantly waiting like you and the rest of the AMD guys for AMD to do something besides lie.

This thread is about Phenom, folks aren't supposed to come here and lie about it. If it stinks up the place, merely pointing that out isn't thread crapping. You can twist and turn, spin and whatever else, nothings changed. So far Phenom has been a miss and not a hit. Intel guys hope AMD stops stumbling because they know Intel will NOT keep prices low if AMD keeps stinking up the place. This even as you and a few others think all is OK!

[Cooper]

thread locked