Retail AMD Phenom II X4 (Deneb) OC spotted

[Stukov]

Well, if it was loaded for a long time I think they would have rightfully bragged about it lol

Since they doesnt say for how long, I'd assume first run

I believe the initial reports that it was looping for the entire presentation, however long that took.

[Tonucci]

I believe the initial reports that it was looping for the entire presentation, however long that took.

If thats the case than

[JumpingJack]

Thinking about this.... this is like pre-labor pains, false contractions to actual birth -- the anxiety is almost unbearable.

[Uncle Jimbo]

But yeah, cool chip with 125 W TDP. I doubt it.

Here's an interesting result on i7 - 105C on a 4G OC!!! now THAT's hot!
http://www.tbreak.com/articles/13/1/...ing/Page1.html
The 965EE running stock is 77C at load.

A friend of mine who has been testing i7 says gaming performance is 'disappointing' compared to his previous Intel OC results, and that the chip runs up against the 130W TDP protection (and clocks down) pretty quickly. When he turns off TDP protection, the chip gets hotter than a firecracker.

deneb looks to be running very cool - one poster shows 38C at 3.6G on air
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=354

I'm sure we will see a lot more benchmarks in a few weeks when the AMD tester NDA is lifted. But from what has been leaked, it looks like these chips will produce a lot less heat while running at or better than i7 in most real world situations. And, they plug in to existing boards, so a buyer is looking at <$300 to upgrade versus board, ram and processor for i7 ~$800 or more. Also a lot easier to pop in a CPU than re-rig a whole box.

They also seem to be available in the channel and some retail chips are being put out for 'evaluation' - http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/rea...msgid=25275998

[RVWinkle]

I think a realistic expectation is that it will be closer to the core quad on a clock for clock basis. The only realistic scenario where a Phenom II will likely beat an i7 is under extreme overclocking in benchmarks that favor high clock speeds. I look forward to some reviews.

[ownage]

A friend of mine who has been testing i7 says gaming performance is 'disappointing' compared to his previous Intel OC results, and that the chip runs up against the 130W TDP protection (and clocks down) pretty quickly. When he turns off TDP protection, the chip gets hotter than a firecracker.

disappointing?
Overclocking a quadcore 2.67ghz to almost 4.4ghz bootable on stock cooling is disappointing? I can't remember any other cpu architecture other then wolfdale (dualore) doing that.

If you compare Nehalem with a Kentsfield both on 3.6ghz Nehalem will be faster and won't get hot. If you compare a Nehalem with a Yorkfied, both on 4ghz, the Nehalem gets hotter. But who cares? Nehalem is still faster.

Even when Deneb won't get as hot as Nehalem, its allot slower actually.
In the end temps don't matter, but the performace and price does.

I will buy a Yorkfield because I already own 4gb ddr2 and a P35 board, or I will spend more money and get a Phenom2. If I had the money, I would buy Nehalem.

[Rammsteiner]

disappointing?
Overclocking a quadcore 2.67ghz to almost 4.4ghz bootable on stock cooling is disappointing? I can't remember any other cpu architecture other then wolfdale (dualore) doing that.

Opteron.

If you compare Nehalem with a Kentsfield both on 3.6ghz Nehalem will be faster and won't get hot. If you compare a Nehalem with a Yorkfied, both on 4ghz, the Nehalem gets hotter. But who cares? Nehalem is still faster.

Although I wouldnt care, it's just funny as K10 was all crap, also because of the horrible temps

Even when Deneb won't get as hot as Nehalem, its allot slower actually.
In the end temps don't matter, but the performace and price does.

In what applications, because that's really a very wierd statement as i7 hardly beats Yorkfield in some cases while gaming

I will buy a Yorkfield because I already own 4gb ddr2 and a P35 board, or I will spend more money and get a Phenom2. If I had the money, I would buy Nehalem.

If you've already a fully Intel system it's indeed the best way to get a PhII. Although AM2+/AM3 platform is cheap, if you've got to purchase most of it, it's still money

[ownage]

Opteron
:

Opteron isn' exactly desktop stuff.

In what applications, because that's really a very wierd statement as i7 hardly beats Yorkfield in some cases while gaming
:

Let me explain
Performance and price is important is what I said.
I compared Deneb with Nehalem and not with Yorkfield in this statement.

It depends on the money you have to spend.
And yes at this moment Nehalem is not much faster then Yorkfield so indeed if you look at the price Yorkfield might be a better buy.



The fun thing about Deneb is unlocked multiplier for a 'normal' price. Good boards for a decent price. PhII + DFI m2rs would be awesome. I always wanted to own a DFI board

[Rammsteiner]

Opteron isn' exactly desktop stuff.

Well, I meant the old socket 939's of course

Let me explain
Performance and price is important is what I said.
I compared Deneb with Nehalem and not with Yorkfield in this statement.

I know, but what I meant is that, although far from everybody plays games, if you look at gaming Nehalem doesnt do a whole lot better in some cases. Since Agena already was pretty much around (read not equal) Yorkfield, it's quite weird to say Deneb would be a lot slower If you dont game though, but do some heavy mutitasking, hands off

It depends on the money you have to spend.
And yes at this moment Nehalem is not much faster then Yorkfield so indeed if you look at the price Yorkfield might be a better buy.

Certainly. i7 is attractive because it starts to feature certain things K10 already did, but now only the price (and the availability at launch was... usual again) So sod that really, for me then.

The fun thing about Deneb is unlocked multiplier for a 'normal' price. Good boards for a decent price. PhII + DFI m2rs would be awesome. I always wanted to own a DFI board

DFI's board is nice, although I do advice to take care of the MOSFET cooling, serious.

[Uncle Jimbo]

disappointing?
Overclocking a quadcore 2.67ghz to almost 4.4ghz bootable on stock cooling is disappointing? I can't remember any other cpu architecture other then wolfdale (dualore) doing that.

If you compare Nehalem with a Kentsfield both on 3.6ghz Nehalem will be faster and won't get hot. If you compare a Nehalem with a Yorkfied, both on 4ghz, the Nehalem gets hotter. But who cares? Nehalem is still faster.

Even when Deneb won't get as hot as Nehalem, its allot slower actually.
In the end temps don't matter, but the performace and price does.

I will buy a Yorkfield because I already own 4gb ddr2 and a P35 board, or I will spend more money and get a Phenom2. If I had the money, I would buy Nehalem.

He had an E8800 at 3.8G and says that his gaming performance was as good or better than i7 at 3.8G, and cooler too. At 4G the i7 is somewhat faster but way too hot for his taste and takes a big noisy cooler. I don't do any gaming so I don't really know.

[Zucker2k]

He had an E8800 at 3.8G and says that his gaming performance was as good or better than i7 at 3.8G, and cooler too. At 4G the i7 is somewhat faster but way too hot for his taste and takes a big noisy cooler. I don't do any gaming so I don't really know.

Does your friend know a quad/8 threads mean jack if a game can't take advantage of it? An E8800? Are those out yet?

[Sentential]

disappointing?

.......Even when Deneb won't get as hot as Nehalem, its allot slower actually.
In the end temps don't matter....

Ah and that is where you are mistaken. If you lived in a hot climate like say central florida where it is not unheard of to have 30-35c* ambient temps, heat is a HUGE deal.

My old intel Q9300 box used to heat my room up into the 90*F range and made my gaming experience absolutely unbearable. I had to redirect the central AC of the house to my room and open the door and add box fans to keep myself cool enough to not be miserable.

Deneb having a much more manageable heat load is the main reason I am going to it (note I have the money to go i7 but chose not to) With i7 having 80c*+ load temps it is absolutely out of the question for me to purchase unless I get a window mounted AC unit (also out of the question).

[ownage]

Ah and that is where you are mistaken. If you lived in a hot climate like say central florida where it is not unheard of to have 30-35c* ambient temps, heat is a HUGE deal.

My old intel Q9300 box used to heat my room up into the 90*F range and made my gaming experience absolutely unbearable. I had to redirect the central AC of the house to my room and open the door and add box fans to keep myself cool enough to not be miserable.

Deneb having a much more manageable heat load is the main reason I am going to it (note I have the money to go i7 but chose not to) With i7 having 80c*+ load temps it is absolutely out of the question for me to purchase unless I get a window mounted AC unit (also out of the question).

Very good point.

[Shintai]

I think some people need a wakeup call regarding temperatures. There is a reason 3Ghz Phenom is 125W TDP, or even 95W if you want for the 2.8Ghz AM3 version.

AMD uses an uncalibrated sensor. Intel uses a calibrated one inside the hottest part of the core(s). Plus there is the tjmax etc values. Do I even have to tell that story? Its only recently we got actual track on 45nm Core 2s.

For some odd reason the power consumption=heat have been lost somewhere for a bunch of people. Lets be honest here. If CPU A uses 100W and CPU B uses 100W. Then 1 CPU wont be 60C and the other one 30C unless their cooling solution is pretty different. Its only different in the illusion.

Here is a cute example. 3 programs. 3 different temperatures.


http://download.intel.com/design/pro...nex/320837.pdf

PDF doc pg 46 wrote:
Intel does not test any third party software that reports absolute processor
temperature. As such, Intel cannot recommend the use of software that claims this
capability. Since there is part-to-part variation in the TCC (thermal control circuit)
activation temperature, use of software that reports absolute temperature can be
misleading.
See the processor datasheet for details regarding use of IA32_TEMPERATURE_TARGET
register to determine the minimum absolute temperature at which the TCC will be
activated and PROCHOT# will be asserted.

[Sentential]

I think some people need a wakeup call regarding temperatures. There is a reason 3Ghz Phenom is 125W TDP, or even 95W if you want for the 2.8Ghz AM3 version.

AMD uses an uncalibrated sensor. Intel uses a calibrated one inside the hottest part of the core(s). Plus there is the tjmax etc values. Do I even have to tell that story? Its only recently we got actual track on 45nm Core 2s.

For some odd reason the power consumption=heat have been lost somewhere for a bunch of people. Lets be honest here. If CPU A uses 100W and CPU B uses 100W. Then 1 CPU wont be 60C and the other one 30C unless their cooling solution is pretty different. Its only different in the illusion.

You point about power draw is very valid. However what you fail to note is that there is a difference between power draw and heat dissipation. Simply because you make a chip with a low wattage count does not gaurntee that it will not spew all of the power as heat disspation due to leakage.

Phenom = High Power Draw + SSDOI = Low Leakage = Low Temps
i7 = Lower Power Draw + High K = High Leakage = High Temps

Also you need to factor that Intel and AMD historically measure TDP differently. One is theoritcal TDP max (AMD) the other is normal operating enviroment (Intel)

[accord99]

You point about power draw is very valid. However what you fail to note is that there is a difference between power draw and heat dissipation. Simply because you make a chip with a low wattage count does not gaurntee that it will not spew all of the power as heat disspation due to leakage.

For CPUs, one can safely assume every watt consumed by it will turn into heat.

Also you need to factor that Intel and AMD historically measure TDP differently. One is theoritcal TDP max (AMD) the other is normal operating enviroment (Intel)

But the power measurements of the last 2.5 years indicate that this is no longer the case.

[Shintai]

You point about power draw is very valid. However what you fail to note is that there is a difference between power draw and heat dissipation. Simply because you make a chip with a low wattage count does not gaurntee that it will not spew all of the power as heat disspation due to leakage.

Phenom = High Power Draw + SSDOI = Low Leakage = Low Temps
i7 = Lower Power Draw + High K = High Leakage = High Temps

Also you need to factor that Intel and AMD historically measure TDP differently. One is theoritcal TDP max (AMD) the other is normal operating enviroment (Intel)

In a CPU power is used for 2 things. 1 is radiation. 2 is heat. And lets agree first that any radiation is so tiny its useless to count. Everything else is heat.

You dont pump 100W into a CPU and have say some 50W go somewhere else and 50W gets turned into heat.

100W power=100W heat in a CPU.

[Jazzman]

I think some people need a wakeup call regarding temperatures. There is a reason 3Ghz Phenom is 125W TDP, or even 95W if you want for the 2.8Ghz AM3 version.

AMD uses an uncalibrated sensor. Intel uses a calibrated one inside the hottest part of the core(s). Plus there is the tjmax etc values. Do I even have to tell that story? Its only recently we got actual track on 45nm Core 2s.

For some odd reason the power consumption=heat have been lost somewhere for a bunch of people. Lets be honest here. If CPU A uses 100W and CPU B uses 100W. Then 1 CPU wont be 60C and the other one 30C unless their cooling solution is pretty different. Its only different in the illusion.

There is abundant evidence both here in XS and throughout the web that i7 runs hot and Phenom II does not. An informed reader knows this.

AMD has given us a great gift for Christmas (for delivery on Jan.8). Let's not look a gift horse in the mouth, so-to-speak.

[Brother Esau]

I think some people need a wakeup !

For some odd reason the power consumption=heat have been lost somewhere for a bunch of people. Lets be honest here. If CPU A uses 100W and CPU B uses 100W. Then 1 CPU wont be 60C and the other one 30C unless their cooling solution is pretty different. Its only different in the illusion.

Kinda like the Illusion that Intel is a Better Platform then AMD? Thats the Biggest Illusion and B.S yet everyone swears its true

[Sentential]

In a CPU power is used for 2 things. 1 is radiation. 2 is heat. And lets agree first that any radiation is so tiny its useless to count. Everything else is heat.

You dont pump 100W into a CPU and have say some 50W go somewhere else and 50W gets turned into heat.

100W power=100W heat in a CPU.

Then if this were true explain:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7301204.html

US Patent 7301204 - SOI component with increased dielectric strength and improved heat dissipation

SOI by its design was made to combat heat related leakage hence Phenom runs cooler than Intel chips as a whole while power draw remained higher.

http://engineering.dartmouth.edu/mic.../194sem_1.html

I. Introduction: What is SOI and why is it useful?
The term silicon-on-insulator refers to a group of technologies in which a thin layer of single crystal silicon is formed over a layer of insulator. The primary objective is to fabricate electronic devices in the silicon layer. The advantages of circuits formed in this manner over those formed in a uniform silicon substrate are principally the following:

Reduced parasitic capacitance
Electrical isolation of devices
Increased resistance to radiation

[ownage]

Kinda like the Illusion that Intel is a Better Platform then AMD? Thats the Biggest Illusion and B.S yet everyone swears its true

That is not what he says, that is what you make of it. I don't see anything wrong with his statement.
And change your sig man, it hurts my eyes.

[Jazzman]

You point about power draw is very valid. However what you fail to note is that there is a difference between power draw and heat dissipation. Simply because you make a chip with a low wattage count does not gaurntee that it will not spew all of the power as heat disspation due to leakage.

Phenom = High Power Draw + SSDOI = Low Leakage = Low Temps
i7 = Lower Power Draw + High K = High Leakage = High Temps

Also you need to factor that Intel and AMD historically measure TDP differently. One is theoritcal TDP max (AMD) the other is normal operating enviroment (Intel)

Your point is supported by the measured evidence. Here is a clue:

AMD's transistors exhibit very low channel leakage. Our transistor benchmarks indicates that leakage current is less than one-third of the value measured on AMD's 65-nm process. It's also significantly lower than the Intel 45-nm HKMG process. In fact the Ion/Ioff ratio for AMD's PFET is nearly 10 times better than that for the Intel PFET.

[Sentential]

Your point is supported by the measured evidence. Here is a clue:

Ty People have such short memories and forget why AMD went to such lengths to get SOI working in the first place. Also ironically enough the reason why Phenoms wont clock worth a damn is the same reason they run cooler than Intel chips. SOI does not scale well at higher switching frequencies hence AMD will never have the clock advantage against Intel unless Intel is hampered by heat related leakage. HINT HINT

[accord99]

SOI by its design was made to combat heat related leakage hence Phenom runs cooler than Intel chips as a whole while power draw remained higher.

So where does the power used go? Conservation of energy dictates it must go somewhere.

[Shintai]

So where does the power used go? Conservation of energy dictates it must go somewhere.

Im waiting for that answer too. Seems we have to rewrite the laws of physics soon.