AMD 45nm Deneb Pictures, CPU-Z and Super Pi Results

[perkam]

It is like someone saying they think car a is better than car b because it is slightly harder to service and breaks down a bit more.

You don't need these crazy excuses to justify your cpu preference. AMD still makes sense in a lot of ways and have some excellent products for the money.How does it even work? Do you like it when an oc fails and you get to reset cmos? are you disappointed if you spend 10 mins setting it up and it just works fine? I don't get it. surely it is about playing in the bios for 10mins then actually running the computer to see the benefit of your 10mins hard work. Hell its not even like a AMD system is that much more different, In about 20 steps in the bios you should have your desired results.

Gallag. One point of interest which is actually a fact: the average AMD users can tweak both AMD and Intel systems due to the knowledge required to oc an AMD pc (HTT, individual core overclocks etc) while the average Intel user would have difficulty handling an AMD system. It is a trade off to the ease with which an Intel system can be overclocked.

Perkam

[Donnie27]

I'd lile to see the quotes from the 'sources' that say Deneb will be faster than Penryn per clock.

As for Nehalem, the 2.66GHz part will cost $284. If a 3GHz Deneb cannot outperform it (which I think is highly likely) then the most AMD can expect to charge for it is around ~$250, or if they keep their current pricing system, $235 like the 9950BE.

I'm starting to think that Intel deliberately priced Nehalem so low to hurt AMD's ASPs. They want to keep AMD on life support, strong enough to survive so they don't become a monopoly, but not really strong enough financially to really challenge them from a R&D standpoint.

I vote for this as one of the most common sense posts of the thread.

[Donnie27]

Umm...Gallag. One point of interest which is actually a fact: the average AMD users can tweak both AMD and Intel systems due to the knowledge required to oc an AMD pc (HTT, individual core overclocks etc) while the average Intel user would have difficulty handling an AMD system.

Perkam

That's a double edge sword though. Intel's stable, reliable, compatible, easy to overclock and industry standard systems just worked better without tweaking. The negative affect is that they make users lazy as a side affect.

It's like a Ron Popel infomercial, "Just set it and forget it!". Many Intel users never suffered through Crappy VIA, Early Irongate, nForce 1 and etc...........
Hell, I got Doctor Tom to try the correct mixture VIA 4 in 1's for KX-133 In other words many AMD users are better tweakers through necessity. The old saying goes, "Practice makes perfect". I'm too busy using my computer to be constantly tweaking it! Not only AMD but Intel Processor on nVidia motherboards as well.

[perkam]

That's a double edge sword though. Intel's stable, reliable, compatible, easy to overclock and industry standard systems just worked better without tweaking. The negative affect is that they make users lazy as a side affect.

It's like a Ron Popel infomercial, "Just set it and forget it!". Many Intel users never suffered through Crappy VIA, Early Irongate, nForce 1 and etc...........
Hell, I got Doctor Tom to try the correct mixture VIA 4 in 1's for KX-133 In other words many AMD users are better tweakers through necessity. The old saying goes, "Practice makes perfect". I'm too busy using my computer to be constantly tweaking it! Not only AMD but Intel Processor on nVidia motherboards as well.

Careful, if you say that Intel users would rather use their PC than tweak them, you're saying AMD users are more worthy overclockers because we spend our time tweaking our systems

Perkam

[LightSpeed]

I dont understand, i think its absolutely fine if someone to want to tweak an AMD system :S

I switched to intel a year and a half back and i love it, but i do i miss my s939

for some people HTT, nb, individual core overclocking can be more fun im sure

and as always, its never wrong to have both intel and AMD

[cegras]

It is like someone saying they think car a is better than car b because it is slightly harder to service and breaks down a bit more.

You don't need these crazy excuses to justify your cpu preference. AMD still makes sense in a lot of ways and have some excellent products for the money.How does it even work? Do you like it when an oc fails and you get to reset cmos? are you disappointed if you spend 10 mins setting it up and it just works fine? I don't get it. surely it is about playing in the bios for 10mins then actually running the computer to see the benefit of your 10mins hard work. Hell its not even like a AMD system is that much more different, In about 20 steps in the bios you should have your desired results.

Wow. Never, ever try to use an analogy ever again.

[gallag]

Gallag. One point of interest which is actually a fact: the average AMD users can tweak both AMD and Intel systems due to the knowledge required to oc an AMD pc (HTT, individual core overclocks etc) while the average Intel user would have difficulty handling an AMD system. It is a trade off to the ease with which an Intel system can be overclocked.

Perkam

Guess you have a point perk, Different strokes for different folks To illustrate what I mean though, Say deneb rocks, I will buy on, Go to the AMD section and see what settings i need in the bios and set them to it . That would be it. Its not like I would enjoy that part, I would just enjoy the end results.

[Rammsteiner]

You don't need these crazy excuses to justify your cpu preference. AMD still makes sense in a lot of ways and have some excellent products for the money.How does it even work? Do you like it when an oc fails and you get to reset cmos? are you disappointed if you spend 10 mins setting it up and it just works fine? I don't get it. surely it is about playing in the bios for 10mins then actually running the computer to see the benefit of your 10mins hard work. Hell its not even like a AMD system is that much more different, In about 20 steps in the bios you should have your desired results.

Although Perkam covered your post mostly already, I'd like to comment on it as well:

It's not a crazy excuse. Nor am I saing Intel is easy, but a CPU becomes a bit harder tweaking wise when you're coming near the wall. Now we all know that most Intel CPU's can go well beyond the usual limits of air cooling. When we go sub zero the tweaking on Intel gets better.

However, I love tweaking but Im not looking for unsustainable OC's done by LN2/dice. Im not going all that far for tweaking, I want a sustainable OC without sitting 24/7 50cm form a full Delta fan. I want to enjoy my tweaking after.

Anyhow, to get back at your question. Im rarely disappointed when OC'ing. Of course Im not disappointed if I spend x time in BIOS and it actually works out, but that's my motivation to continue untill it actually fails. When it fails I try to find out why, tweak all different Voltages to discover what is actually holding me down (both under as over Volting). If I got that covered, I go on with my RAM which takes ages (Micron D9's). If done the most hard parts I usual spend some time evaluating the system by gaming etc, say a little break from tweaking. After I look for other things, for example my GPU's.

When am I disappointed? As said, rarely. When the Phenom+SB600 symptoms weren't fully known yet, after a month of useless tweaking I got slightly disappointed when it turned out it was all for nothing and whatever I would do, be it over/under volting or other hardware, it wouldnt ever fix it.

Another example, the old skt 939 days. I bought an Opteron 146 as I saw lots of people hitting 3Ghz. I tweaked and tweaked and couldnt reach 3Ghz although it was my goal. I could have bought another one until I got it, however I wasnt disappointed. Why? Because I had a hell of a good time tweaking it, I got a damn cheap CPU which was faster than any other CPU you could buy and it was 100% ready to run any program.

To get back to one of my earlier statements, I mainly use air cooling (although im thinking to get WC). In that case OC'ing on Intel is hardly any difficulty. It's almost a standard program, up FSB, add this little Vnb and Vcore and you're done. RAM tweaking is a bit harder, but on Phenom this is even harder than on Intel due to full control over Drive Strengths (I still dont have them worked out). Besides that, although many Intel users call native QC BS, it's not. When you think you ran into a wall you try to find out which core(s) is/are holding you back and work further from there.

That's a double edge sword though. Intel's stable, reliable, compatible, easy to overclock and industry standard systems just worked better without tweaking. The negative affect is that they make users lazy as a side affect.

Although I dont see how AMD isnt stable, reliable and compatible, Intel OC'ing is as you say it for the lazy (unless you really look for the 'fight' and go play around with sub zero).

That's not worth it for me. There will be for a while a delta between AMD and Intel, but who cares if Intel gets 1500fps in a game and AMD 750fps? They will both run it perfectly in the end.

Guess you have a point perk, Different strokes for different folks To illustrate what I mean though, Say deneb rocks, I will buy on, Go to the AMD section and see what settings i need in the bios and set them to it . That would be it. Its not like I would enjoy that part, I would just enjoy the end results.

That's why fora are there in the first place, but you still need the people to post these results if you're not looking for the tweaking fun. The end results is always awesome, but by for not as awesome as the road to the end result.

Stupid comparison, when I was young I played a lot with LEGO. Now building these things was the best untill you finished it... You played a little bit with it, but quickly I deconstructed it to build something else; the building was a lot cooler (for me) than the end result, although you're always happy with the end result.

[gallag]

Although Perkam covered your post mostly already, I'd like to comment on it as well:

It's not a crazy excuse. Nor am I saing Intel is easy, but a CPU becomes a bit harder tweaking wise when you're coming near the wall. Now we all know that most Intel CPU's can go well beyond the usual limits of air cooling. When we go sub zero the tweaking on Intel gets better.

However, I love tweaking but Im not looking for unsustainable OC's done by LN2/dice. Im not going all that far for tweaking, I want a sustainable OC without sitting 24/7 50cm form a full Delta fan. I want to enjoy my tweaking after.

Anyhow, to get back at your question. Im rarely disappointed when OC'ing. Of course Im not disappointed if I spend x time in BIOS and it actually works out, but that's my motivation to continue untill it actually fails. When it fails I try to find out why, tweak all different Voltages to discover what is actually holding me down (both under as over Volting). If I got that covered, I go on with my RAM which takes ages (Micron D9's). If done the most hard parts I usual spend some time evaluating the system by gaming etc, say a little break from tweaking. After I look for other things, for example my GPU's.

When am I disappointed? As said, rarely. When the Phenom+SB600 symptoms weren't fully known yet, after a month of useless tweaking I got slightly disappointed when it turned out it was all for nothing and whatever I would do, be it over/under volting or other hardware, it wouldnt ever fix it.

Another example, the old skt 939 days. I bought an Opteron 146 as I saw lots of people hitting 3Ghz. I tweaked and tweaked and couldnt reach 3Ghz although it was my goal. I could have bought another one until I got it, however I wasnt disappointed. Why? Because I had a hell of a good time tweaking it, I got a damn cheap CPU which was faster than any other CPU you could buy and it was 100% ready to run any program.

To get back to one of my earlier statements, I mainly use air cooling (although im thinking to get WC). In that case OC'ing on Intel is hardly any difficulty. It's almost a standard program, up FSB, add this little Vnb and Vcore and you're done. RAM tweaking is a bit harder, but on Phenom this is even harder than on Intel due to full control over Drive Strengths (I still dont have them worked out). Besides that, although many Intel users call native QC BS, it's not. When you think you ran into a wall you try to find out which core(s) is/are holding you back and work further from there.


Although I dont see how AMD isnt stable, reliable and compatible, Intel OC'ing is as you say it for the lazy (unless you really look for the 'fight' and go play around with sub zero).

That's not worth it for me. There will be for a while a delta between AMD and Intel, but who cares if Intel gets 1500fps in a game and AMD 750fps? They will both run it perfectly in the end.


That's why fora are there in the first place, but you still need the people to post these results if you're not looking for the tweaking fun. The end results is always awesome, but by for not as awesome as the road to the end result.

Stupid comparison, when I was young I played a lot with LEGO. Now building these things was the best untill you finished it... You played a little bit with it, but quickly I deconstructed it to build something else; the building was a lot cooler (for me) than the end result, although you're always happy with the end result.

Fair play then my friend

[Calmatory]

Not all so-called AMD fanboys think that AMD is any way better, or that it should be prefered. For example one could call me an AMD fanboy because I'd love to see AMD being better than Intel due to the current financial situation of both companies. Same as AMD > Nvidia, right now. If things change, like Nvidia becoming more and more underdog in financial situation, I'd prefer to see them on top. However, I don' think myself as a fanboy really, as I don't base my opinions over the current financial situation of companies. All I wish is competition, for the reasons everyone knows.

[Donnie27]

Careful, if you say that Intel users would rather use their PC than tweak them, you're saying AMD users are more worthy overclockers because we spend our time tweaking our systems

Perkam

No, that's not what I said but let me put it this way. You put an Intel system together and tweak an already very stable system to make it faster. You first have to tweak an AMD system to stability, then tweak to get a meager overclock. Then your best overclock still leaves your rig slower. Sure exclusive users of AMD based rigs have to have skillz, they're troubleshooting while Intel users are through tweaking and using their rigs. I use both and use AMD rigs to sharpen my skills. No, I don't think it is fun to do stuff I should be getting payed for instead of paying nVidia to Beta test

[Donnie27]

Not all so-called AMD fanboys think that AMD is any way better, or that it should be prefered. For example one could call me an AMD fanboy because I'd love to see AMD being better than Intel due to the current financial situation of both companies. Same as AMD > Nvidia, right now. If things change, like Nvidia becoming more and more underdog in financial situation, I'd prefer to see them on top. However, I don' think myself as a fanboy really, as I don't base my opinions over the current financial situation of companies. All I wish is competition, for the reasons everyone knows.

But I know Die Hard Intel want that very same thing. Hell, everyone knows Intel isn't going to keep sweet prices while their competition falters. Show me some Intel folks saying crap like was said about AMD? "AMD cares about us Enthusiasts while Intel doesn't!" AMD and Intel doesn't give a $#it about us or anyone else. They are about the bottom dollars just as any large company should. Loving these companies is like professing you love for a Prostitute Nothing wrong with having a preference for a favorite one but only as a service!

[Rammsteiner]

No, that's not what I said but let me put it this way. You put an Intel system together and tweak an already very stable system to make it faster. You first have to tweak an AMD system to stability, then tweak to get a meager overclock. Then your best overclock still leaves your rig slower. Sure exclusive users of AMD based rigs have to have skillz, they're troubleshooting while Intel users are through tweaking and using their rigs. I use both and use AMD rigs to sharpen my skills. No, I don't think it is fun to do stuff I should be getting payed for instead of paying nVidia to Beta test

But... did you had a rotten apple as AMD system? I never had any problem that I had to tweak my system right from scratch. And the best OC being slower than an Intel rig, yes, but look at my example above; I had lots of fun tweaking and why should I care about 750fps vs 1500fps? It will run everything just as good as any OC'd Intel system anyway.

Of course motherboard manufacturers are sometimes a bit crappy with new BIOS releases and new CPU steppings, but it doesnt happen all that often and besides that, one shouldnt think a Jan '07 motherboard is right away compatible with a Dec '08 CPU, always look for BIOS updates.

[gallag]

I had lots of fun tweaking and why should I care about 750fps vs 1500fps? It will run everything just as good as any OC'd Intel system anyway.

See, this is another thing, since c2d launched and AMD fell to the no2 spot some people now say that performance does not matter anymore. You give an example of 750fps vs 1500fps but I could be equally silly and say what about 15fps vs 30fps and no, you are completly wrong, It will not run every thing as good as any oced Intel system, The Intel system will be faster, cooler and use less power.

I think that what a lot of the problems come from the excuses people come up with to down play Intels performance advantage. Even benchmarks that were used to show the lead AMD had over Intel are now worthless and all review sites are now also paid by Intel.

[Hornet331]

See, this is another thing, since c2d launched and AMD fell to the no2 spot some people now say that performance does not matter anymore. You give an example of 750fps vs 1500fps but I could be equally silly and say what about 15fps vs 30fps and no, you are completly wrong, It will not run every thing as good as any oced Intel system, The Intel system will be faster, cooler and use less power.

I think that what a lot of the problems come from the excuses people come up with to down play Intels performance advantage. Even benchmarks that were used to show the lead AMD had over Intel are now worthless and all review sites are now also paid by Intel.

Indeed, the first reason for me to oc is to get out more preformance. If system a allowes me to get better performance with less effort then system b, hell yeah.

As donnie said, if it takes "massive amount of time" (compared to system a) for system b to be stable to just reach a meagre oc its not funny... if we go on the "xtreme" side, more options and more complexity is always good, to squeeze out the last mhz and it can be fun and rewarding.

I would feel silly if i spend countless hours to get some decent ocs out of system and then to be beaten by a "noob" who just typs 450 in the fsb box and owns my rig by miles.

Also that why this sort of argument (system b is not as ocable, has lower perfromance, but it soooooooooooo much more fun to oc) makes me grin. It nothing personal, i just can't get the logic behind this. I would understand it if it where something like retrorigs, but thats not the case, its one state of the art rig vs another.

Anyway, thats my perception of this and if somone felt insulted by this, feel free to flame away.

[Cooper]

this thread has served it's purpose