MMM
Results 1 to 25 of 525

Thread: Intel Q9450 vs Phenom 9850 - ATI HD3870 X2

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    612
    Quote Originally Posted by JumpingJack View Post
    All clocks were the same, 2.5 GHz (default stock for the Phenom 9850).
    If you investigate how these processors work you will find that AMD is gaining speed with faster I/O and bandwidth communication.
    Intel QX9650 = 12 MB L2 cache at 15 clocks
    AMD 9850 = 2 MB L3 cache at 43(?) clocks running at 2 GHz (?) and 512 KB L2 cache for each core.

    If these processors worked similar then Intel should win these tests and it should win by some margin. The HUGE L2 cache that is so much faster will do a lot on the work that is done by the processor (games normally loves cache). The L2 cache is about three+ times faster compared to L3 cache and also very big. AMD will need to go to memory more often than Intel so there is also one performance hit. Fast memory will do more to AMD because of this.
    Now if these results are that similar on 1680x1050 and the FSB isn’t a problem, then the only solution would be that the GPU is very slow. So slow that it isn’t possible to notice the difference between these processors because Intel should win.
    The performance hit by lowering the FSB to 200 MHz seems ok, I have tested this to and what I have noticed is that lowering the FSB doesn’t seem to change bandwidth as much as it changes latency.
    I am pretty sure that you will find more and more speed improvements when you are using fast video cards on high res with AMD when the resolution goes up and you have high settings. Doubling the I/O load on the FSB will do some damage to the total speed. AMD will not notice this on memory because it handles the I/O with hypertransport.
    Besides that you have the problem if threads are shifting cores on Intel.

    About this list
    LIST - Processors Bottom to Top

    They are running Grid at 640x480 and AMD seems to perform better on that very low resolution. The reason for this might be that on that VERY low resolution the cache (L2) for AMD is enough. Maybe you don’t need that very LARGE L2 cache then and that makes AMD even to Intel. AMD synchronize threads faster and that might be the reason why you get a bit better performance.
    When you increase the resolution the game is needing more memory and AMD is going to the memory sooner than intel, it is first going to the L3 cache but there is one performance hit for more than 3 times slower. Going to memory the performance hit is even larger. If they had tested on 800x600 intel would probably win, it would win on 1024x768, as the resolution goes up AMD will gain performance again and at some point it will pass Intel.


    gOJDO Do you have any other explanation?
    Last edited by gosh; 08-12-2008 at 07:48 AM.

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
  •