45nm Phenom Overclocked, Super Pied

[demonkevy666]

I really wish I could say so... but the difference between Q9450 at 3.6GHz and the same processor at 3.8GHz is not a tolerable one. Of course from 3.6GHz to 4.0GHz, it's an even higher gap. There IS a gap, though in stuffs that are already maxed out in terms of performance (simply because C2Q is just too fast), you won't feel a thing.

Plus Agena is up to 25% slower in some media encoding benchmarks. I think Anandtech has one that shows that.

Not to bash AMD... but... rubbing yourself to make it feel better by reducing numbers slowly and slowly is just a bit... weird.

So... what I am trying to say here is... there is no more excuses for Agena. It's a different story about Deneb, though, and I wouldn't even dare guess anything at this stage.



You can't say those are crap just because they show one processor over another. So what would be a better "benchmark?" Some game that never gets to use more than one core or never uses that much CPU power? If it's so, we might all well get dual-core processors.

Again... no excuses for Agena. It was just plagued with silly mistakes from AMD. Judging from earlier results from Deneb, I am led to believe that the late launch is due to more silly bugs... which I'm leaning towards the software team to blame. Maybe a BIOS issue. Maybe... something else they overlooked while beta-testing. Either way, I believe Deneb will be a hit IF AMD doesn't resort to some crappy software fixes... again.



I wouldn't pit Deneb against Nehalem. Maybe against Yorkfield, but not against Nehalem. That said, it's not that Nehalem is overpowered against Deneb, but rather... it's not even worthy of being put against Yorkfield, much less Deneb.

I gotta admit... Nehalem is a stupid move from Intel. Kind of like the GTX 200 series from nVidia.

Anandtech also showed the Phenom winning in HDTV play back, like 1920x1080.

I wish they stop comparing Nehalem to this 45nm phenom... it's 8 threads vs 4 is it not ?

totally pointless.

[gallag]

I wish they stop comparing Nehalem to this 45nm phenom... it's 8 threads vs 4 is it not ?

totally pointless.

4 cores vs 4cores Anyway, Comparisons should always be done on price, I mean , It should not matter if it is 16cores 32 threads vs 1core as long as they are the same price then it is a good comparison. Its like x3 k10 being compared to 45nmcore2, One has an extra core but if they cost the same then it is fair game.

[Rammsteiner]

4 cores vs 4cores Anyway, Comparisons should always be done on price, I mean , It should not matter if it is 16cores 32 threads vs 1core as long as they are the same price then it is a good comparison. Its like x3 k10 being compared to 45nmcore2, One has an extra core but if they cost the same then it is fair game.

Yes and no, although you're mostly right.

I think however that people who base comments/purchases on said reviews should look from a neutral point of it. In the end Nehalem is a well designed architecture with proven features from the Core 2 line where as this is AMD's first 45nm.

Where it often goes wrong is that people right away think 'Intel OC's further'. If said comparison shows AMD being equal or a little bit slower, they lose regardless when OC'ing is applied. As said, you're right although people seeing CPU x coming better out of a test than CPU y fastly call CPU y to suck.

But yes you're right, in the end we compare a R700 with the GT200 too although the R700 has two GPU's. But does GT200 suck? No, but it's getting its butt kicked though.

[OFFTOPIC]Although it's funny as nVidia came with a too big ego on the market with its GT200 without knowing what AMD was up to.[/OFFTOPIC]

[JCornell]

Anandtech also showed the Phenom winning in HDTV play back, like 1920x1080.

I wish they stop comparing Nehalem to this 45nm phenom... it's 8 threads vs 4 is it not ?

totally pointless.

Another "Numbers" folk

[informal]

Another "Numbers" folk

Um,what is that and how is it related to 45nm Phenom in any way?

[insurgent]

Yes and no, although you're mostly right

I think comparison by price is totally fair since we're all consumers. I buy based on the best deal, what can I say, my wallet dictates my choice.
I want deneb to be comparable to yorkfield atleast in price and performance since I want to build an AMD rig, but ultimately the better deal gets my wallet's nod.

[Devil's Prophet]

I think comparison by price is totally fair since we're all consumers. I buy based on the best deal, what can I say, my wallet dictates my choice.
I want deneb to be comparable to yorkfield atleast in price and performance since I want to build an AMD rig, but ultimately the better deal gets my wallet's nod.

True, but I'd like to add the argument of who has the best total platform. That, of course, depends on in what environment the computer would be used. But since it's perfectly possible to build an AMD cpu, AMD chipset and AMD gpu platform, AMD tends to win in my view. Not that Intel doesn't have IGP's, but they rather suck compared to the AMD solution, both in performance/features as in power usage.

[insurgent]

That, of course, depends on in what environment the computer would be used.

Yeah, I play games but that's not the primary purpose of my system so I'd be looking at the cpu performance first and go from there. I hope matching yorkfield's price/performance is not too big a hurdle for amd.

[Devil's Prophet]

I hope matching yorkfield's price/performance is not too big a hurdle for amd.

If not in the CPU segment, then in the total platform segment. Just like they do now, but hopefully better.

[Rammsteiner]

AMD's RS780D, check these out:

RS780D 3DMark06 run
RS780D OC'd
RS780D OC'd results

This makes it quite a good platform

[demonkevy666]

AMD's RS780D, check these out:

RS780D 3DMark06 run
RS780D OC'd
RS780D OC'd results

This makes it quite a good platform

I've got a jet way board with sb700 & 3300 IGP.

AOD could push that 1,200 mhz. bois limts it to 1,023mhz

it's also got the 9550 in it.

[Winterwind]

AMD 45nm Phenom test
http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont...58&pageid=3149

Power consumption

[informal]

^^ That's full load on four cores,1.8x less power draw than 9650 Phenom(65nm),same clocks,same board.Early C0 stepping.

[MrMojoZ]

^^ That's full load on four cores,1.8x less power draw than 9650 Phenom(65nm),same clocks,same board.Early C0 stepping.

One please.

[Devil's Prophet]

Don't forget the X4 9350e 65nm, only 65W for 2GHz. Not very far from the results seen in that graph, but whatever, still a nice improvement.

[charged3800z24]

I demand more leaked info....

[Rammsteiner]

I demand more leaked info....

I demand surprise butt-sexness and AMD to release a bug gree fully optimized Deneb tomorrow.

Meh, Ill really skip the 9950BE now. Ill settle down with my 9850BE. It will at least hit 3Ghz with my new motherboard and that's already a lot closer to the X2 6400+ I had before. Deneb will go in after.

9950BE might do it better than my 9850BE, but is that little Mhz (OC'd) jump worth it to pay another 180 Euro's and have a very small chance to sell this 9850BE, and if it sells, get a way too low price? No, IMO it's not, at least not this close for Deneb.

[Winterwind]

Don't forget the X4 9350e 65nm, only 65W for 2GHz. Not very far from the results seen in that graph, but whatever, still a nice improvement.

yes but dont forget that 9350e has vcore under 1v

[Devil's Prophet]

yes but dont forget that 9350e has vcore under 1v

THAT I had forgotten.

Yeah, only 58W at 1,25V is very nice. Maybe if they up the clock a bit to see what impact that has on the total used power.

[ryboto]

yes but dont forget that 9350e has vcore under 1v

I don't think it's under 1v, I think it's like 1.15, or a little more.

[Winterwind]

http://images.bit-tech.net/content_i...9350e/cnqw.png
looks like 0.976v

[Manicdan]

dumb question.
if the the 45nm and 65nm were both at 2.3ghz, and lets say 1.25v...
whats the difference in watts they would run at?
i dont need exacts, just simple speculation

[Winterwind]

dumb question.
if the the 45nm and 65nm were both at 2.3ghz, and lets say 1.25v...
whats the difference in watts they would run at?
i dont need exacts, just simple speculation

look few post up
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=187

[gallag]

I demand surprise butt-sex

Way to come out man, Respect

[Karolis]

THAT I had forgotten.

Yeah, only 58W at 1,25V is very nice. Maybe if they up the clock a bit to see what impact that has on the total used power.

58W? 95-~47=48W.