i was making sure someone told himOriginally Posted by Hornet331
actually you just did.
i was making sure someone told himactually you just did.
amd 720
M4A78T-E
i gig of crap
visionek 4850
seagate 320 GB 7200.10
WD 640 GB
swiftech MCR320 swiftech MCP355
Apogee GTZ
XPSC Restop
I can say one thing I learned out of all this, I am not buying any Intel SSDs thats for sure...
I see you're spreading more of your fud. Francois already explained that there is no overclocking protection and what everyone is calling "overclocking protection" can be turned off from your your BIOS.
Anyway, if Deneb is competitively priced and offers 5%-15% performance improvement over Agena (clock for clock), I think it will be a good alternative to Yorkfield and Nehalem for the AMD fans.
I think so too. Especially everyone who has a supporting motherboard already
I see you're spreading more of your fud. Francois already explained that there is no overclocking protection and what everyone is calling "overclocking protection" can be turned off from your your BIOS.
Anyway, if Deneb is competitively priced and offers 5%-15% performance improvement over Agena (clock for clock), I think it will be a good alternative to Yorkfield and Nehalem for the AMD fans.
i3 2100, MSI H61M-E33. 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws.
MSI GTX 460 Twin Frozr II. 1TB Caviar Blue.
Corsair HX 620, CM 690, Win 7 Ultimate 64bit.
YupI think so too. Especially everyone who has a supporting motherboard already
It was one time in one shop for one guy!
Come on it's nowhere available
AMD Phenom II X2 550@Phenom II X4 B50
MSI 890GXM-G65
Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C9 2x2GB
Sapphire HD 6950 2GB
Just out of curiosity If deneb is 10-15% faster + if they were able to fix the errata wouldn't that equivalate to a 25% performance increase over they're current product?
Maybe i'm wrong, been out of the amd camp/loop for a while. I'm not sure how much the "patch" cost the phenoms in % / performance.
heatware chew*
I've got no strings to hold me down.
To make me fret, or make me frown.
I had strings but now I'm free.
There are no strings on me
It´s precisely 25%.
It all depends on how AMD managed to tweak K10 in this shrink. The 3x bigger L3 cache will bring 6%-10% speed boost easily I think.
AMD talked albout IPC improvements in this K10.5. I expect improvements with all together from 5%-10%-15% depending on the benchmark.
In the end it will be faster then yorkfield? It will be very very difficult to happen.
There are 4 cenarios:
- K10.5 brings close to nothing performance improvement over K10 clock-for-clock. (not probable)
- K10.5 with same performance as Kentsfield (very probable)
- K10.5 sit between Yorkfield-Kentsfield. (very probable)
- K10.5 catch yorkfield (not probable)
So, lets just way for full reviews
Forget him. In the time of 780G when where reports and people on foruns with some 780G he said that there was no 780G on market. Now there is one Corei7 in one forum and he says that it´s available.It was one time in one shop for one guy!
Come on it's nowhere available
Last edited by v_rr; 11-04-2008 at 07:21 PM.
actually if you tally up results from Anandtech, Tech report, digit life, THG etc do any minor clock speed corrections required, you'll get
Kentsfield 9-11 % faster than agena
Yorkfield 14-17% faster than agena.
the matbe review is highly skewed towards Core 2 compared to 90% of the reviews out there.
I think it's because a couple of the benchmarks are very heavily core favoured.. i.e 50%+ / clock like Excel and it skews the results.. as does The Cool and Quiet issue that only Anandtech have discovered.. Which is of course AMD's own fault
PS Just look at the Core 2 vs K8 results on Matbe, they're the same, don't match the accepted IPC difference over the last 2 yrs of benchmarks
i am thinking Deneb is going to end up a tiny bit faster than Kent. however what will make it an option will be prices and overclockablitiy. if they can have a $200 CPU that will hit from 3.5-4.0ghz on AIR then they will definetly be worth a look. However i just hope they don't have the same problem Phenom does that being how inconsistent they are in performance. some things are right there or ahead of Yorskfield clock per clock others they lose out to K8. time will tell i guess but they could be a real budget player again!
CPU: Intel Core i7 3930K @ 4.5GHz
Mobo: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
RAM: 32GB (8x4GB) Patriot Viper EX @ 1866mhz
GPU: EVGA GTX Titan (1087Boost/6700Mem)
Physx: Evga GTX 560 2GB
Sound: Creative XFI Titanium
Case: Modded 700D
PSU: Corsair 1200AX (Fully Sleeved)
Storage: 2x120GB OCZ Vertex 3's in RAID 0 + WD 600GB V-Raptor + Seagate 1TB
Cooling: XSPC Raystorm, 2x MCP 655's, FrozenQ Warp Drive, EX360+MCR240+EX120 Rad's
Yorkfield 3MB maybe? Compare the Q9450 to the 9950BE, its 32% faster, yes I realise its 2% higher in clockspeed too, which is why I said ~30%.
I agree with your possible scenarios btw, I think it'll be difficult for Deneb to exceed Yorkfield as Charlie claims but it could very well catch Kentsfield or slightly exceed it.
I agree to an extent, my point was to illustrate that there is no clear cut way to 'measure' IPC, it depends entirely on the mix of chosen benchmarks/apps. Therefore it is entirely possible for one site to have Deneb matching Yorkfield whilst another shows it lagging way behind, and we'll have the diehard fans from both camps touting the favourable reviews as gospel, isn't that how it always works?actually if you tally up results from Anandtech, Tech report, digit life, THG etc do any minor clock speed corrections required, you'll get
Kentsfield 9-11 % faster than agena
Yorkfield 14-17% faster than agena.
the matbe review is highly skewed towards Core 2 compared to 90% of the reviews out there.
I think it's because a couple of the benchmarks are very heavily core favoured.. i.e 50%+ / clock like Excel and it skews the results.. as does The Cool and Quiet issue that only Anandtech have discovered.. Which is of course AMD's own fault
As for apps like Excel/Photoshop 'skewing' the results, maybe so, but where are the outlier benches where AMD doubles Core 2 performance outside of synthetic memory benches? I've never seen any, and I actually do think Excel and Photoshop has more relevance to most people than say Cinebench. Its a reviewers favourite and is obviously less 'skewed' towards Core 2 but in terms of usage I'd say Excel and Photoshop users outnumber Cinema4D users by orders of magnitudes... I guess reality is often skewed towards Core 2 as well.
Last edited by Epsilon84; 11-04-2008 at 07:12 PM.
It's hard to tell ... the only leaked data set would suggest that Deneb is only clock for clock improvement over Agena of about 8% on average for desktop workloads, this is not enough to Yorksfield, but will put it about par with Kentsfield ... but power will be good and they will clock better.
AMD will compete well with price if they can bring it out in volume before Intel floods the market with lower priced Nehalem derivatives... so they should do very well, it will be a much more competitive part.
BTW: Rumor mill is grinding -- we may find out sooner than later: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20081104PD203.html
Last edited by JumpingJack; 11-04-2008 at 07:47 PM.
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
Gawd, I hate reading threads like these.
/goes off to watch moar breasts... err phones.
I will buy one for lower power consumption and reduced Heat out put.
SuperMicro X8SAX
Xeon 5620
12GB - Crucial ECC DDR3 1333
Intel 520 180GB Cherryville
Areca 1231ML ~ 2~ 250GB Seagate ES.2 ~ Raid 0 ~ 4~ Hitachi 5K3000 2TB ~ Raid 6 ~
The bug is already fixed in B3.
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
Data encryptionAs for apps like Excel/Photoshop 'skewing' the results, maybe so, but where are the outlier benches where AMD doubles Core 2 performance outside of synthetic memory benches? I've never seen any, and I actually do think Excel and Photoshop has more relevance to most people than say Cinebench.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-ph...essor-tested/7
http://www.guru3d.com/article/intel-...-965-review/14
I want a 3.0ghz Deneb in 64 bit vista because I can't get 3.0ghz with out 1.625 volts, 60C at full load 41C idle.
HAVE NO FEAR!
"AMD fallen angel"
You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.
This is why I never really like PR/Marketing from most all companies ... it seems they want to confuse as many people as possible.
AMD released Phenom with B2 stepping, the TLB errata, but when they demoed the chip to the press, the chip was not patched with the performance hit... what you saw was basically what you got.
The TLB patch turns off the tlb and the performance hit is massive, those numbers never made it into mainstream reviews, though some sites a few really good ones and some second tier, did a nice TLB vs non-TLB follow up.
B3 came out earlier this year, and fixed that TLB errata -- it was irrelevant since the B2 was basically rock solid, I have never seen the bug manifest itself (as is the case with most errata). B3 was equivalent IPC (Clock for clock) to B2 but with several bug fixes (bugs you would have never seen in the first place).
Last edited by JumpingJack; 11-05-2008 at 07:37 PM.
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
I will be getting a couple of them regardless of any improvements just on the reason I have 2 unused 790fx boards. If 3.4-3.6ghz is possible on air it will be quite the upgrade from agena.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Wasn't B3 more of a bandaid for the problem than an out-right fix? It was my understanding that the problem was eliminated, but the hardware didn't operate in the way that was originally intended. As in, B2 without the patch is slightly faster than B3.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Thats news to me.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
B3 is a faster rev and a complte fix for the TLB bug
Yep that's correct.
No it's not and Particle is more or less right.
B3 fix for TBL errata was a bypass. It didn't fix originally planned functionality. The fix brings minimal performance penalty, because TLB is flushed every time there can be some dirty data in it. I think Anand was doing more in-depth analysis.
Last edited by Lightman; 11-05-2008 at 09:06 AM.
RiG1: Ryzen 7 1700 @4.0GHz 1.39V, Asus X370 Prime, G.Skill RipJaws 2x8GB 3200MHz CL14 Samsung B-die, TuL Vega 56 Stock, Samsung SS805 100GB SLC SDD (OS Drive) + 512GB Evo 850 SSD (2nd OS Drive) + 3TB Seagate + 1TB Seagate, BeQuiet PowerZone 1000W
RiG2: HTPC AMD A10-7850K APU, 2x8GB Kingstone HyperX 2400C12, AsRock FM2A88M Extreme4+, 128GB SSD + 640GB Samsung 7200, LG Blu-ray Recorder, Thermaltake BACH, Hiper 4M880 880W PSU
SmartPhone Samsung Galaxy S7 EDGE
XBONE paired with 55''Samsung LED 3D TV
Can you refresh me on the details, Lightman? I can't remember why I thought what I said, just that that was my impression.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks