Retail AMD Phenom II X4 (Deneb) OC spotted

[Spacemaster]

wobs sry looked at the wrong screens

well its near my former QX9650 @ 3,5ghz it scored 5,5K on 3dm06. (thought i t was not a good run, there are CPUS on orb that get with 3,5ghz 5,6k. )

4ghz C2D scores ~6,1-6,2k in 3dm06

For the record, I do not hate AMD, and I am not Intel fan!
AMD P2 is more AMD vs AMD product, and if we must compare it with Intel, I think that C2Q CPUs is more for that job. Is AMD P2 better then Intel C2Q? I think it is in some benchmark, and in some benchmark C2Q is better, but i7 and render tests is just some other story…

[RPGWiZaRD]

Not too bad result, Yorkfield scores like ~6000 at 445x9 and ~6400 at 500x8 with Win XP when looking at the ORB. Looks like it's only ~5% behind in 3DMark06 clock for clock. That's like 4.2GHz vs 4.0GHz and looks like PII can surpass Q9450 and Q9550 typical max overclocks rather easily making them about as fast.

[Hornet331]

For the record, I do not hate AMD, and I am not Intel fan!

Neither is me, im only a fan of performance (i dont really care for the price ).

[Rammsteiner]

You're fighting a loosing battle against folks who think Intel is always wrong or never is right, never did anything good or worthwhile, lol, as was said they suck. You can't get anywhere with folks like that? No matter how RIGHT YOU ARE

Oh damn, grow up

"When I looked at Putin's eyes I saw 3 letters: K G B" ... (Senator McCain, September 2008)

Oh dear, the phailure hurts my head.

I vote throw New Rock Boots at McCain's head

[Macadamia]

For some reason Cinebench 32bit is treating Phenom 1/2s pretty poorly.

At 64-bit current data (Phenom Is in reviews, Phenom 2 - check iocedmyself's post on Cinebench @ 3.2) shows the P-I at <5% difference between kentsfield, Phenom II unquantifiable, but probably the same (either faster or slower by a bit depending on your relative QX9770 setup)


3DMark has even more headroom in terms of NB clocks, memory (timings and bandwidth). Most "nice" penryn scores I presume are DDR3.

[freeloader]

No it is not fake http://www.techpowerup.com/?79688

Cinbench 10R
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/asroc...ebench10-9.htm

this is more interesting
http://forums.anandtech.com/messagev...readid=2260139

Something is seriously wrong with that Cinebench score.
http://www.techspot.com/review/93-am...ion/page2.html

[Spacemaster]

Not too bad result, Yorkfield scores like ~6000 at 445x9 and ~6400 at 500x8 with Win XP when looking at the ORB. Looks like it's only ~5% behind in 3DMark06 clock for clock. That's like 4.2GHz vs 4.0GHz and looks like PII can surpass Q9450 and Q9550 typical max overclocks rather easily making them about as fast.

So CPU score with AMD P2 is beter than C2Q at same clock, any comparation pic?

Something is seriously wrong with that Cinebench score.
http://www.techspot.com/review/93-am...ion/page2.html

At techshop you can see the vista 64bit results and those result above are made at 32bit OS.

[RPGWiZaRD]

So CPU score with AMD P2 is beter than C2Q at same clock, any comparation pic?

Didn't get what I said? Phenom II looks to be about 5% slower clock for clock in 3DMark06 CPU score. Just lookup the ORB for Yorkfield @ 3GHz or 4GHz scores man. Of course it depends what CPU multi is used a bit, with 9x multi the difference is like only 2~3% and at 8x multi 7~8% in favor for Intel Core 2 Quad (45nm) at 4GHz. This is just one PII 06 score result though so we don't know how other mobo/ram/configs will score like though, could be easily 100 - 300 points difference.

[Jazzman]

So CPU score with AMD P2 is beter than C2Q at same clock, any comparation pic?

HERE on ORB is the 3DMARK06 for a Q9550 at 4.0Ghz = 5776 verses 5846 for Phenom II 940 @ 4.0 Ghz seen HERE.

[Zucker2k]

Just did a quick run with my Q9550 @ 4Ghz (8.5 x 471): Score = 6008

http://service.futuremark.com/result...&resultType=14

[AbelJemka]

PII 940 at 5846 is DDR400 cas 5.
What's yours?

[Spacemaster]

Didn't get what I said? Phenom II looks to be about 5% slower clock for clock in 3DMark06 CPU score. Just lookup the ORB for Yorkfield @ 3GHz or 4GHz scores man. Of course it depends what CPU multi is used a bit, with 9x multi the difference is like only 2~3% and at 8x multi 7~8% in favor for Intel Core 2 Quad (45nm) at 4GHz. This is just one PII 06 score result though so we don't know how other mobo/ram/configs will score like though, could be easily 100 - 300 points difference.

Thanks for answer ! I think that Q9550 will be equivalent with AMD P2 940 in 60-90% applications, but this is my thoughts, and soon all assumptions will be gone

HERE on ORB is the 3DMARK06 for a Q9550 at 4.0Ghz = 5776 verses 5846 for Phenom II 940 @ 4.0 Ghz seen HERE.

Q9550

With NV

http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=144647&thumb=false

http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=165460&thumb=false

http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=151451&thumb=false

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5315/21142mv5.jpg

http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=156390&thumb=false

With ATI 4870

5875 - http://service.futuremark.com/result...eResultType=14

6181 - http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=145358&thumb=false

6070 - http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=139843&thumb=false

With ATI 4870 X2

6324 - http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=171762&thumb=false

6056 - http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=144647&thumb=false

I do not say that Q9550 is better, but it is comparable with AMD P2 big time

[Zucker2k]

PII 940 at 5846 is DDR400 cas 5.
What's yours?

DDR 471 4-4-4-10. Notice that PII screenshot with NB @ 2600? I can drop my multi and run 8x500. With better ram, I can run a 5:6 ratio at DDR2 1200 5-5-5-12 PL7.

[ownage]

Just did a quick run with my Q9550 @ 4Ghz (8.5 x 471): Score = 6008

http://service.futuremark.com/result...&resultType=14

Yes and it should be 6k.
I've seen many fanboys on several forums claim that PhII @ 4ghz is faster then C2Q @ 4ghz in 3dmark06. It simply isn't faster then C2Q.
I don't say that Jazzman is a fanboy, but there are people who are and compare phII with F* C2Q scores

[Spacemaster]

Ok, what about 3DM Vantage?
At 4GHz P2 manage to hit 13520 CPU points.

Q9550 at 4 GHz and lower clock
3875 MHz (with lower GPU clock) – 15876
http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=172774&thumb=false

3911 MHz (with lower GPU clock) – 15450
http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=155864&thumb=false

3706 MHz (with lower GPU clock) – 14948
http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=155797&thumb=false

The results with higher clock than 4GHz

4084 MHz – 16593
http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=157015&thumb=false

4030 MHz – 16711
http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=172882&thumb=false

...

[DX_Medic]

AMD Propaganda !!

[Daveburt714]

I have to admit some of these CB10 results from PhII look odd...
Here's a run using XP64 on a fairly well tuned 9950 just as a point of reference. I find it hard to believe a PhII couldn't at least better these results.

CLICKABLE:

[Spacemaster]

I have to admit some of these CB10 results from PhII look odd...
Here's a run using XP64 on a fairly well tuned 9950 just as a point of reference. I find it hard to believe a PhII couldn't at least better these results.

CLICKABLE:

See this please (64 bit OS)
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...-965-review/10

[mongoled]

Oh guess what? Yeah, sorry to spoil the party, but this thread is titled

'Retail AMD Phenom II X4 (Deneb) OC spotted'

So whats with the all the off topic posts, AGAIN the usual culprits , just what is stopping you peeps starting a different thread comparing I7 vs PII, oh yeah, that was it, PII isnt released yet

Recently started reading threads at overclockers.com, and guess what, there aint no off topic posting as those who continually decide to post in this manner are handed a warning and are then BANNED.

I hope to see the admins start conducting a similar sort of stratedgy here at XS as I am FEDUP of seeing the same bull arguments occuring.

What is some of you peeps problem?

This thread AINT about I7 its about retail AMD Phenom II being spotted. Until then could you IGNORANT peeps please stay ontopic. Ofcourse it is already understood which of the wisecracks will argue this point. So to save me having to respond to them, I dont give a toss what you are going to say.

STAY ON TOPIC

Or dont post

Have got passed fed up of this happening, but love XS too much just to let you simple pigheaded peeps force me to start posting/reading elsewhere.

I want the XS forum moderators to tighten up the moderation so that all the OFFTOPIC posting can be erradicated.



oh and

MERRY CHRISTMAS

[Ghostbuster]

So whats with the all the off topic posts, AGAIN the usual culprits , just what is stopping you peeps starting a different thread comparing I7 vs PII, oh yeah, that was it, PII isnt released yet

This thread AINT about I7 its about retail AMD Phenom II being spotted. Until then could you IGNORANT peeps please stay ontopic. Ofcourse it is already understood which of the wisecracks will argue this point. So to save me having to respond to them, I dont give a toss what you are going to say.

They are comparing C2Q with PhII, not I7 and PhII... so who is the IGNORANT one?

I hope to see the admins start conducting a similar sort of stratedgy here at XS as I am FEDUP of seeing the same bull arguments occuring.

What is some of you peeps problem?

STAY ON TOPIC

Or dont post

Have got passed fed up of this happening, but love XS too much just to let you simple pigheaded peeps force me to start posting/reading elsewhere.

I want the XS forum moderators to tighten up the moderation so that all the OFFTOPIC posting can be erradicated.

This is a discussion. If you are FEDUP yourself, then don't come here and rant.

[mongoled]

They are comparing C2Q with PhII, not I7 and PhII... so who is the IGNORANT one?

This is a discussion. If you are FEDUP yourself, then don't come here and rant.

For you and all those who have reading problems

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...91#post3526091

Have fun, that is if you can grasp the concept

[Ghostbuster]

For you and all those who have reading problems

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...91#post3526091

Have fun, that is if you can grasp the concept

All I see is another rant there..

[Ashraf]

Enough.

[Drwho?]

But that is not ok!

AMD is doing great job with new P2 CPUs, and with prices that they offering, I think that costumers will be pleased. But comparision with i7 is too silly. Results of the 45nm C2Q is comparable, that is for shore

I spot this link here

http://www.ocxtreme.org/forumenus/showthread.php?t=4302

Let see some test of this link

1. Super pi 1m - C2Q is better
2. Super pi 32m - C2Q is better
3. Cinbench R10 (this is interesting)
AMD P2 at 3000 MHz - 9754
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 at 2664 MHz - 10471
Intel Core i7 940 at 2930 MHz (HT on) - 13792
4. Wprime 32m
AMD P2 at 3000 MHz - 13,437
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450, Q9550 ... can not find results
Intel Core i7 940 at 2930 MHZ - 8,46
5. Wprime 1024m
... i7 - 264,475
AMD p2 - 428,625 ...

Please can some one find rest of the results ( Q9550 and Q9450 at default clock )

The point is that i7 can not compare with AMD P2 it is not same platform ...

This is what you are going to see in the press.

who?

[Spacemaster]

This is what you are going to see in the press.

who?

In my country I am part of the press, and son we will se results.