AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

[Astennu]

In that review phenom II 940 3.0Ghz is very near of Qx9770 3.2Ghz...even running at -200mhz. Looks good..waiting for more reviews to compare.

In some tests. But The HD4850 is to slow. They sould try a HD4870 / X2 or a GTX280.

When there are crunching tests the Intel CPU's are way faster. Just as i feared. Integer performance of the K10,5 is as bad as that of the K10 and K8. AMD did not upgrade that for a wile. And now that the i7 has all the good things like on die MC and a fast bus. AMD i lost again.

PHII realy stands against the 45nm Penryn cpu's. I hope there next cpu (bulldozer ??) will be on par with the refresh of Nehalem. (Sandy Bridge ??)

[informal]

In some tests. But The HD4850 is to slow. They sould try a HD4870 / X2 or a GTX280.

When there are crunching tests the Intel CPU's are way faster. Just as i feared. Integer performance of the K10,5 is as bad as that of the K10 and K8. AMD did not upgrade that for a wile. And now that the i7 has all the good things like on die MC and a fast bus. AMD i lost again.

PHII realy stands against the 45nm Penryn cpu's. I hope there next cpu (bulldozer ??) will be on par with the refresh of Nehalem. (Sandy Bridge ??)

You judge integer perf. by Sisoft sandra?

[ajaidev]

In some tests. But The HD4850 is to slow. They sould try a HD4870 / X2 or a GTX280.

When there are crunching tests the Intel CPU's are way faster. Just as i feared. Integer performance of the K10,5 is as bad as that of the K10 and K8. AMD did not upgrade that for a wile. And now that the i7 has all the good things like on die MC and a fast bus. AMD i lost again.

PHII realy stands against the 45nm Penryn cpu's. I hope there next cpu (bulldozer ??) will be on par with the refresh of Nehalem. (Sandy Bridge ??)

For crunching it stands even below the Penryn in some cases but how many of us do you think regularly have to crunching data. On the other hand people who buy such CPU's do game a lot and that is where the improvements made to the core seem quite good.

Would you rather spend money on an i7 that performs almost same as a cheaper PhII does??? Plus on top the added cost of M/b etc

[Astennu]

You judge integer perf. by Sisoft sandra?

Nope i dont like that kind of bensh marks. More like encoding and RTS games.

For crunching it stands even below the Penryn in some cases but how many of us do you think regularly have to crunching data. On the other hand people who buy such CPU's do game a lot and that is where the improvements made to the core seem quite good.

Would you rather spend money on an i7 that performs almost same as a cheaper PhII does??? Plus on top the added cost of M/b etc

True. Well i'm folding if my pc is on so it would get me a higher score :P
But the most important thing for me is performance in games and the power it uses when running 100% load. (performance per watt in gaming)

Cant wait to test one myself.

[Jazzman]

....But the most important thing for me is performance in games and the power it uses when running 100% load. (performance per watt in gaming).

Some early Phenom II testers/players are concluding that Phenom II plus the dragon platform is better for gaming than i7. That i7 is superior for number crunching and multi-threaded apps. From what I gather, the ability to jump the NB to 2400-2700 gives the Phenom II the edge plus the high overclocks at relatively low temps. (My sense is that you will need a very highend video card to reach these lofty heights.)

Maybe tomorrow we will have more data to support or disprove these early conclusions.