AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

[Oliverda]

[Calmatory]

little early to predict amd's future. as we know anything can change at any time as seen by the 4870 even tho those weren't the performance leader they still came out ahead over the 280 because of its price. phenom II could end up the same way and it has been showing promise in what we have seen so far.

ATI vs. Nvidia is purely up to the microarchitecture design because both companies have the same chip manufacturer(TSMC). AMD vs. Intel is up to the microarchotecture design, manufacturing process and manufacturing volume. Remember the K8 vs. P4, the reason why AMD dominated was the fact that Intel failed with their microarchitecture while AMD succeeded very well with theirs. Soon after Intel got theirs very right(C2D was huge success like K8), AMD got their ass kicked.

CPU produced at Intel's fab will cost less than the same CPU produced at AMD's fab for at least two reasons; Intel can pack transistors more tightly resulting in smaller die and Intel has better yields. More working dies per wafer. This means that the only way AMD can keep Intel behind is Intel struggling with their designs and fabs, which is not likely due to their superb expertise and knowledge. Both companies have extremely talented designers and engineers working for them, but Intel has better fabs, so they can sell for cheaper, and sell way more.

Well, this is off topic, but where is the thread to discuss this anyway?

[knopflerbruce]

ATI vs. Nvidia is purely up to the microarchitecture design because both companies have the same chip manufacturer(TSMC). AMD vs. Intel is up to the microarchotecture design, manufacturing process and manufacturing volume. Remember the K8 vs. P4, the reason why AMD dominated was the fact that Intel failed with their microarchitecture while AMD succeeded very well with theirs. Soon after Intel got theirs very right(C2D was huge success like K8), AMD got their ass kicked.

CPU produced at Intel's fab will cost less than the same CPU produced at AMD's fab for at least two reasons; Intel can pack transistors more tightly resulting in smaller die and Intel has better yields. More working dies per wafer. This means that the only way AMD can keep Intel behind is Intel struggling with their designs and fabs, which is not likely due to their superb expertise and knowledge. Both companies have extremely talented designers and engineers working for them, but Intel has better fabs, so they can sell for cheaper, and sell way more.

Well, this is off topic, but where is the thread to discuss this anyway?

AMD doesn't need a market share of 50% to survive, they can sell alot less than Intel and still do just fine.

[OverClocker_gr]

Here is a greek(full of charts so you will understand everything ) review for Deneb.

We have deneb 920 + 940 compared to Core i7 920 + 940 Q6600 , Q9450 & Q9550.

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?p=27568

I the next couple of days we will upload a clock to clock comparison; deneb vs bloomfield vs yorkfield vs kentsfield.


Stay tuned

[roofsniper]

ATI vs. Nvidia is purely up to the microarchitecture design because both companies have the same chip manufacturer(TSMC). AMD vs. Intel is up to the microarchotecture design, manufacturing process and manufacturing volume. Remember the K8 vs. P4, the reason why AMD dominated was the fact that Intel failed with their microarchitecture while AMD succeeded very well with theirs. Soon after Intel got theirs very right(C2D was huge success like K8), AMD got their ass kicked.

CPU produced at Intel's fab will cost less than the same CPU produced at AMD's fab for at least two reasons; Intel can pack transistors more tightly resulting in smaller die and Intel has better yields. More working dies per wafer. This means that the only way AMD can keep Intel behind is Intel struggling with their designs and fabs, which is not likely due to their superb expertise and knowledge. Both companies have extremely talented designers and engineers working for them, but Intel has better fabs, so they can sell for cheaper, and sell way more.

Well, this is off topic, but where is the thread to discuss this anyway?

the reason why i was referencing towards the 4870 was because the 8800gt owned the 3870 but ati turned around and whipped out the 4870. what if amd comes around and whips out something amazing?

yep that image says a lot for people who think amd is taking 2009 and 2010 off. and i see November 13th 2008 on there too so its up to date.

Basically AMD has two advantages regarding current leakage, SOI and IL, while Intel has HKMG.

looks like amd has soi and hkmg.

[Calmatory]

the reason why i was referencing towards the 4870 was because the 8800gt owned the 3870 but ati turned around and whipped out the 4870. what if amd comes around and whips out something amazing?


yep that image says a lot for people who think amd is taking 2009 and 2010 off. and i see November 13th 2008 on there too so its up to date.

looks like amd has soi and hkmg.

Oh, didn't know AMD is going HKMG with 32nm. So Intel will have IL with 32nm and AMD will have HKMG.

The reason why AMD can't do "RV770" with CPU's is the way CPU's are. The reason why RV770 turned out to be good was that it had plenty of SP's, TMU's and ROPs and no major bottlenecks. The current GPU's are improved by adding more primitive processors and increasing parallelism. This can't be done to CPU's as the design is VERY much different. CPU consists out of many more complex parts than GPU does. To improve existing uarch you need to redesign quite a bit more of the more complex core. To improve a GPU you need to redesign/modify existing logic and add more units to the core and modify the drivers to be efficient with the improved core.

Basically GPU is a bunch of small, simple cores slapped together and a CPU is a huge, complex core. Thats why it is not possible to radically improve the existing uarch like it is with GPU's. Once a uarch fails, there won't be a new chance until new uarch is finished.

[JohnJohn]

AMD vs. Intel is up to the microarchotecture design, manufacturing process and manufacturing volume. Remember the K8 vs. P4, the reason why AMD dominated was the fact that Intel failed with their microarchitecture while AMD succeeded very well with theirs. Soon after Intel got theirs very right(C2D was huge success like K8), AMD got their ass kicked.

CPU produced at Intel's fab will cost less than the same CPU produced at AMD's fab for at least two reasons; Intel can pack transistors more tightly resulting in smaller die and Intel has better yields. More working dies per wafer. This means that the only way AMD can keep Intel behind is Intel struggling with their designs and fabs, which is not likely due to their superb expertise and knowledge. Both companies have extremely talented designers and engineers working for them, but Intel has better fabs, so they can sell for cheaper, and sell way more.

Well, this is off topic, but where is the thread to discuss this anyway?

That is a way of seing it, the way i see it, and the way AMD saw it and because of that they took the fabless way is this:

You have 20% market share, you need to invest constantly a lot in the latest manufacturing technology in order to be competitive,

because of low sales + huge amortization cost(because fabs cost money) = HUGE LOSS. This is exactly what has happened theese last years

So if you take the huge burden of constant renewall of fabs, and the anual amortization cost from the equation = Profit!

Is like this, what you prefer, low production cost + huge cost in constant retooling of the fabs + huge amortization cost

Or, higher production cost, were you pay for what you sell. This is the way Amd went

[cumec]

@Calmatory

The costs of production at intel may be cheaper, but the yealds at AMDs fabs are very very good.

[roofsniper]

really the selling of amds fabs to me seems like a good idea. they badly needed the cash now and they are still getting their chips produced from the same place just at a higher price. the only time they will ever regret it is once they become profitable and they are doing very well and maybe even have the performance crown. which really the only thing to look foward to in 2009 is breaking even.

[AbelJemka]

Here is a greek(full of charts so you will understand everything ) review for Deneb.

We have deneb 920 + 940 compared to Core i7 920 + 940 Q6600 , Q9450 & Q9550.

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?p=27568

I the next couple of days we will upload a clock to clock comparison; deneb vs bloomfield vs yorkfield vs kentsfield.


Stay tuned

Weird results
Why PII seems to better support high resolution gaming than Penryn?
Like more stressful it becomes the more global PII architecture shines!
Very Intriguing

[demonkevy666]

Weird results
Why PII seems to better support high resolution gaming than Penryn?
Like more stressful it becomes the more global PII architecture shines!
Very Intriguing

I think it's because of the large L1 cache and IMC.

[Mav451]

Here is a greek(full of charts so you will understand everything ) review for Deneb.

We have deneb 920 + 940 compared to Core i7 920 + 940 Q6600 , Q9450 & Q9550.

http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?p=27568

I the next couple of days we will upload a clock to clock comparison; deneb vs bloomfield vs yorkfield vs kentsfield.

Stay tuned

Holy crap, Farcry 2 and Crysis Warhead bench

I think that's all I needed to see, holy .

[AbelJemka]

I think so and i find it quite impressive

[Zucker2k]

I think so and i find it quite impressive

The lower res bench is harder on the cpu, and the Q6600 does better than the higher clocked PII in that bench? ouch!

[AbelJemka]

The lower res bench is harder on the cpu, and the Q6600 does better than the higher clocked PII in that bench? ouch!

3 games benchs and Q6600 win one bench and is far from 920 and 940 in two others.
Zucker2K conclusions : Q6600 owns them = blindly pathetic

[roofsniper]

you know for a few days we had no trolls in here at all and it was pretty nice. i understand that some people are intel fanboys and some people think deneb sucks. but what do you gain by coming in here and saying it sucks? and the funny thing is that the people saying it can never produce a legit argument.

[Calmatory]

@Calmatory

The costs of production at intel may be cheaper, but the yealds at AMDs fabs are very very good.

As I've understood, Intel has the best manufacturing fabs worldwide. Right now I have no time to dig for articles/other material but if someone has some regarding AMD/Intel fabs then please share.

For other post: L1 cache sizes should not have big influence on performance really, if they did, they would be bigger than what they are currently.

you know for a few days we had no trolls in here at all and it was pretty nice. i understand that some people are intel fanboys and some people think deneb sucks. but what do you gain by coming in here and saying it sucks? and the funny thing is that the people saying it can never produce a legit argument.

I understand your point. However, IMO even though this is AMD section and Deneb thread, it shouldn't mean that pointing out (in proper and mature way) the facts regarding results shouldn't be frowned upon in any way - even if they show that Deneb would be thrashed by early P3's or something similar.

[roofsniper]

i just can't understand how people can judge a product even before it has been released or formal benchmarks have been released. and the problem is most intel fanboys pick the thing intel is better at and just rave about it. you don't see me going into the intel section says i7 sucks because it uses too much power or that it costs too much. here is a perfect example of what i am talking about.

The lower res bench is harder on the cpu, and the Q6600 does better than the higher clocked PII in that bench? ouch!

as i recall the phenom owned intel in memory latency benchmarks but i don't think that mattered. if people would look at the things that mattered like how it actually performs in things that you do then you can talk about it.

things that i think that matter:

game performance(for people who play games)
power usage
price
platform
overclockability

we see the phenom getting trashed by people just because it gets owned in certain benchmarks that don't matter. then if you look at the overall game performance the results are very similar. and any results with fps over 150 don't even matter. im talking about stuff that matters. the phenom II holds its own in games and is very close to the performance of i7 for a way cheaper price and lower temps. plus we see the performance of the phenom II being compared to the performance of i7 when both are at stock. this is xs and most people overclock here. just because the cpu doesn't perform well at stock doesn't mean you should pass it up. it the thing overclocks like a dream then it could come out as a performance leader. all of these things i said will come into play after it actually gets released. i highly doubt seeing someone walking into a computer store and picking up a i7 over a phenom II just for the fact that he saw that the i7 beat the phenom II in some pi benchmark. but thats the way people are acting now. it will be nice one it is released and there is nothing to troll about anymore because everything that is ignored before it is released will actually matter when the time comes.

[Blaber]

I think we need more complete reviews that what we saw at Greek website.

Moreover as Roofsniper said the real deal is overclocking PII , no ones gona run it @stock.Thats when the fun begins.

@Zucker2k stop trolling and stop posting if u can't post anything usefull.

[demonkevy666]

I think we need more complete reviews that what we saw at Greek website.

Moreover as Roofsniper said the real deal is overclocking PII , no ones gona run it @stock.Thats when the fun begins.

@Zucker2k stop trolling and stop posting if u can't post anything usefull.

I though this XS running your system to the extreme, not trashing every produced that fall by 1% behind the competitor.

[Throwed]

All current and future comments that are off topic will be notified to the mods. I suggest all other people that don't want to here this crap do the same. This way we can put an end to all of this Intel nonsense. This will also help clean up disruptive users via BAN.



@Calmatory......Wanna place to discuss Intel or comparisons? GO MAKE YOUR OWN THREAD ELSEWHERE!

[Calmatory]

@Calmatory......Wanna place to discuss Intel or comparisons? GO MAKE YOUR OWN THREAD ELSEWHERE!

Like where?

[roofsniper]

Like where?

the amd or intel section after deneb has been released. im cool with comparisons against intel cpus but first the cpus being compared need to be released. i just hope nothing embarrassing happens when it is released. something like a tlb bug or some performance bug that would tarnish its reputation even if it got fixed with a bios update down the line.

[Gener_AL (UK)]

The lower res bench is harder on the cpu, and the Q6600 does better than the higher clocked PII in that bench? ouch!

You do realise you are wrong on every aspect of that statement ?

[mongoled]

Like where?

Here

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=212186

Post to your hearts content, goes for everybody else who wants to post comparitive benchmarks.

In the 'General Hardware' section

Lets see who post just to get attention and who posts because they actually want to have a discussion...............