Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 198

Thread: AMD X2 6500+ coming

  1. #76
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    cleveland ohio
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Kuroimaho View Post
    The other danger with the chip is if it becomes too successful and they run out of broken chips will they disable working cores to fill the demand ?
    lol single core K10 anyone

    anyone know how much AMD pays for a silicon ingot ?.....
    HAVE NO FEAR!
    "AMD fallen angel"
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamekiller View Post
    You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.

  2. #77
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Slovakia
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Kuroimaho View Post
    The other danger with the chip is if it becomes too successful and they run out of broken chips will they disable working cores to fill the demand ?
    good thinking. either that or the price will go up substantially. but there is no much room to go higher since the tri-core prices. all depends on how much garbage chips they get from wafer. and i hope this is only temporary, amd needs to offer true dualies with new process.

  3. #78
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,663
    If AMD runs out of broken chips that's good news for us. That would mean they no longer fab flawed K10 quads at all!!!! Nobody on the planet has a process that amazing so I doubt they will run out anytime soon.

  4. #79
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    235
    This little chip could be a nice stopcap solution before the 45nm phenoms roll out

  5. #80
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  6. #81
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by techpowerup
    As performance evaluations will soon show, the Phenom/Athlon 6500 isn't anywhere close to the performance of the X2 6400+.
    Sad.

  7. #82
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by Periander6 View Post
    Sad.
    so, you expected 2.3ghz to outperform 3.2? It's not like this is a new architecture...

  8. #83
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    I still wonder how "some people" could make a 2.3Ghz Phenom beat a 3.2ghz K8...
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  9. #84
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    EvE-Online, Tranquility
    Posts
    1,978
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    I still wonder how "some people" could make a 2.3Ghz Phenom beat a 3.2ghz K8...
    OC's?

    And IPC wise it's better too. But stock, hardly to not. X2 6000+ is 'hard' enough.
    Synaptic Overflow

    CPU:
    -Intel Core i7 920 3841A522
    --CPU: 4200Mhz| Vcore: +120mV| Uncore: 3200Mhz| VTT: +100mV| Turbo: On| HT: Off
    ---CPU block: EK Supreme Acetal| Radiator: TCF X-Changer 480mm
    Motherboard:
    -Foxconn Bloodrage P06
    --Blck: 200Mhz| QPI: 3600Mhz
    Graphics:
    -Sapphire Radeon HD 4870X2
    --GPU: 750Mhz| GDDR: 900Mhz
    RAM:
    -3x 2GB Mushkin XP3-12800
    --Mhz: 800Mhz| Vdimm: 1.65V| Timings: 7-8-7-20-1T
    Storage:
    -3Ware 9650SE-2LP RAID controller
    --2x Western Digital 74GB Raptor RAID 0
    PSU:
    -Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W
    OS:
    -Windows Vista Business x64


    ORDERED: Sapphire HD 5970 OC
    LOOKING FOR: 2x G.Skill Falcon II 128GB SSD, Windows 7

  10. #85
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Lansing, MI / London / Stinkaypore
    Posts
    1,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    I still wonder how "some people" could make a 2.3Ghz Phenom beat a 3.2ghz K8...

    We don't. I'd say that it sometimes gets close to or exceeds the 6000+, but definitely not the 6400. Maybe if you stopped pushing people's words with insults attached you'd get taken barely seriously.
    Quote Originally Posted by radaja View Post
    so are they launching BD soon or a comic book?

  11. #86
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    review X2 6500+ on expreview





    CPU Z



    load 5000+ system 215W and 6500+ 237W.

    A OC, 30minutes wprime ok 1.44V:


    1.45V



    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  12. #87
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    746
    SO, it uses 22W more at 2.3ghz vs a K8 at 2.6? Seems unlikely, as the B3's are capable of 65W rating at 2.0ghz for 4 cores....

  13. #88
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by ryboto View Post
    SO, it uses 22W more at 2.3ghz vs a K8 at 2.6? Seems unlikely, as the B3's are capable of 65W rating at 2.0ghz for 4 cores....
    Look at the rest then. At 2.3Ghz Quadcore the TDP rating is what?

    http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...E15347,00.html

    But again, Nice PR stunt to cheat customers. 6500 rating...5000 performance.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  14. #89
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    it is maybe only 1 cons for this CPU, performance is good

    maybe now 65w TDP (new 9950 125W, 9750 new 95W, new 8450 65W)
    Last edited by FlanK3r; 09-20-2008 at 11:34 AM.
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  15. #90
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    cleveland ohio
    Posts
    2,879
    Conroe has 4mb of cache and this Kuma has 3mb.

    thats 25% less cache and 1-2% slower pre clock.

    the Deneb should come to have about 512kb L2 x2 plus 6mb L3 thats 7mb's that's more then Wolfdale has (6mb)

    if it where just added cache it would be 2-5% faster but where getting a bouns of added IPC to that it.

    Looks like it's going to be a great 45nm chip for AMD.
    HAVE NO FEAR!
    "AMD fallen angel"
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamekiller View Post
    You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.

  16. #91
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    Quote Originally Posted by demonkevy666 View Post
    Conroe has 4mb of cache and this Kuma has 3mb.

    thats 25% less cache and 1-2% slower pre clock.

    the Deneb should come to have about 512kb L2 x2 plus 6mb L3 thats 7mb's that's more then Wolfdale has (6mb)

    if it where just added cache it would be 2-5% faster but where getting a bouns of added IPC to that it.

    Looks like it's going to be a great 45nm chip for AMD.
    And total difrenet architecture (core vs Agena) ...Phenom, Deneb is more similar as Nehalem
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  17. #92
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    Look at the rest then. At 2.3Ghz Quadcore the TDP rating is what?

    http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...E15347,00.html

    But again, Nice PR stunt to cheat customers. 6500 rating...5000 performance.
    But look to LostCircuits, the B2 9600 only consumes 73W before the VRMs, that's the same speed, with 2 more cores.

  18. #93
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    290
    It looks like the 6500 won't be a bad CPU for gaming compared to what AMD has out now, when overclocked at least. If you can get the 6500 to 3.3GHz, it will perform fine in games and easily outrun any Brisbane or the X2 6400+. If it ends up costing somewhere around ~$80 or so, then it won't be that bad of an option. If it costs $100 or more though, then it is a really bad deal in comparison to the E7200.
    Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.8GHz - Asus P6T Deluxe X58 - 6GB (2GBx3) G. SKILL DDR3-1600 @ 8-8-8-20 - 2 x EVGA GTX 280 1GB SLI - Corsair TX750 PSU - Windows Vista HP 64-bit

  19. #94
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    157
    Whoa, 3.3 Ghz stable? I might get this if the price is right, it should match great with the SB750 DFI I wanna buy next month.
    And I think they called it 6500+ because, at max OC, it's way faster than what a 6400 OC-ed can achieve.

    Btw, this guy Shintai hates AMD or what's wrong with him?!
    the state is universally evil, there is no good country only good people

  20. #95
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by azraeel101 View Post
    Btw, this guy Shintai hates AMD or what's wrong with him?!
    Perhaps he's a little blunt, but in the end all desktop derivatives of the 65nm Phenom core have been lousy CPUs compared to their Intel competitors. The 2.3 Kuma looks to be no exception given it will be outperformed by the E5200 while using significantly more power.

  21. #96
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by accord99 View Post
    Perhaps he's a little blunt, but in the end all desktop derivatives of the 65nm Phenom core have been lousy CPUs compared to their Intel competitors. The 2.3 Kuma looks to be no exception given it will be outperformed by the E5200 while using significantly more power.
    Not even to talk about the 2.6Ghz K8 with lower power consumption.

    Performance/watt K10 loses to K8 in the dualcore shootout.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  22. #97
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    Not even to talk about the 2.6Ghz K8 with lower power consumption.

    Performance/watt K10 loses to K8 in the dualcore shootout.
    Like I said, it's strange, since K10 performance/Watt is technically greater than K8. Maybe the disabled cores are the issue?

  23. #98
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,204
    Quote Originally Posted by ryboto View Post
    Like I said, it's strange, since K10 performance/Watt is technically greater than K8. Maybe the disabled cores are the issue?
    Backlash only because if its name! Its not like a Tech Gimmick put there to mislead but Named to mislead. Intel named some of the slower Core processors Pentium while everyone knows Core is faster.
    Quote Originally Posted by Movieman
    With the two approaches to "how" to design a processor WE are the lucky ones as we get to choose what is important to us as individuals.
    For that we should thank BOTH (AMD and Intel) companies!


    Posted by duploxxx
    I am sure JF is relaxed and smiling these days with there intended launch schedule. SNB Xeon servers on the other hand....
    Posted by gallag
    there yo go bringing intel into a amd thread again lol, if that was someone droping a dig at amd you would be crying like a girl.
    qft!

  24. #99
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,978
    Quote Originally Posted by ryboto View Post
    Like I said, it's strange, since K10 performance/Watt is technically greater than K8. Maybe the disabled cores are the issue?
    It boils down to simply scaling of two variables that have terms within them that are not interdependent nor scale 1:1, and the fact that power has an inherent offset -- leakage current. The overall affect is it will cause a different perf/watt ratio... example, if the IPC at a given clock improves 10%, but the circuit/architecture increases power consumption by 15%, then the Perf/Watt ratio will go down.

    Another example is the preliminary Nehalem results, Anandtech leaked that power increased 10% over a similarly clocked Yorky, but performance was up 20-40% so Perf/Watt will go up. Logic/circuits added that improve IPC will also affect power consumption .... after reading around, the Nehalem design was contrained to a ratio of 2% perf to only 1% consumption increase, if it did not meet this goal then the feature was not included.
    One hundred years from now It won't matter
    What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
    How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
    -- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft

  25. #100
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,084
    Not much to see here, and no reason to grab one of the last 65 nm CPU's now.
    Sure, some people want AMD, but if you haven't already got a K10 then you might as well wait for 45 nm.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

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
  •