I'm not sure about ACC or AOD or w/e for higher then 3.6 I think you must have read 3.8, since from what we've been shown from a lot of people playing with them 3.6 can be achieved at stock voltage.
Yes I'm an addict keeping up with any info about this I can![]()
Great review, guys. Answered pretty much all the questions except for how retail samples will clock. That could make all the difference.
i5 750 4.20GHz @ NH-D14 | 8GB | P7P55DLE | 8800U | Indilinx SSD + Samsung F3 | HAF922 + CM750W
Past: Q6600 @ 3.60 E6400 @ 3.60 | E6300 @ 3.40 | O165 @ 2.90 | X2 4400+ @ 2.80 | X2 3800+ @ 2.70 | VE 3200+ @ 2.80 | WI 3200+ @ 2.75 | WI 3000+ no IHS @ 2.72 | TBB 1700+ @ 2.60 | XP-M 2500+ @ 2.63 | NC 2800+ @ 2.40 | AB 1.60GHz @ 2.60Originally Posted by CompGeek
Actually retail samples may have slightly difference performance overall as well...such as fixing areas that they didn't do so well in with the ES's.
Perhaps not but as a price/performance based consumer I have to hope so.
In addition to the Intel favored software, as suggested above, maybe you could add some encoding and 7zip. But thanks for the numbers, as they are perfect for what matters to me!Definitely looking forward to this purchase.
![]()
I've only tested with laptops; a 1.73GHz Merom 2M Dell 640m with WI-FI and display set to minimum uses a total of 29W from the battery while running dual P95 at stock voltages, and 19W when undervolted to 0.95v. A 2.53GHz T9400 Penryn Thinkpad W500 uses 41W running P95 at stock and 33W running at 2.4GHz/1.15v. I haven't bothered with desktops but I've read enough of Silentpcreview forums to see that the results are accurate.
Knowing my luck, my 1st "Deuce" will be an 0843BPMW...![]()
Last edited by Daveburt714; 12-25-2008 at 07:50 PM. Reason: spelling
AMD FX-8350 (1237 PGN) | Asus Crosshair V Formula (bios 1703) | G.Skill 2133 CL9 @ 2230 9-11-10 | Sapphire HD 6870 | Samsung 830 128Gb SSD / 2 WD 1Tb Black SATA3 storage | Corsair TX750 PSU
Watercooled ST 120.3 & TC 120.1 / MCP35X XSPC Top / Apogee HD Block | WIN7 64 Bit HP | Corsair 800D Obsidian Case
First Computer: Commodore Vic 20 (circa 1981).
Well, let's hope at this point that PII does overclock as well as initially rumored. And not just 1 in 10,000 chips.
It'll be a pretty big disappointment if 3.6 is around all that people can get, but we'll see. I'm not going to be buying
a PII in any case as I already have a board I love and a Q9650 to upgrade to, but I've always liked AMD and would
love to see them return to XS prime time.
*sigh* With all these performance results starting to surface it's painting a rather grim picture of the Phenom II. Rather than even hoping for clock-for-clock parity with Yorkfield, we're just wanting it to be a close match with its price-equivalent competitor at this point. It looks as though for the most part, not even that is going to happen.
As someone who wanted to keep the AMD family "tradition" alive (never owned an Intel system), I was really hoping for a return to form with this series. Sadly what does even comparable overclocking matter when 3.6GHz on Yorkfield gets you so much more than 3.6GHz on a Deneb? Forgive me if this seems "ranty", but I'm just really disappointed right now. Obviously I'll refrain from final judgement until the big-name reviews appear, but I'm not holding onto false hope.
DFI LANParty DK 790FX-B
Phenom II X4 955 BE (1003GPMW) @ 3.8GHz (19x200) w/1.36v
-cooling: Scythe Mugen 2 + AC MX-2
XFX ATI Radeon HD 5870 1024MB
8GB PC2-6400 G.Skill @ 800MHz (1:2) 5-5-5-15 w/1.8v
Seagate 1TB 7200.11 Barracuda
Corsair HX620W
Support PC gaming. Don't pirate games.
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
people seem to forget this a great drop in upgrade for anyone with a AM2 mobo. As long as the price is right can't really say AMD failed. Now if this was a totally new chip for AM3 it be another story.
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.
P2 is about what I was expecting.
Totally buying it. I better start shining my boot to kick Q6600's @ss good bye.
You were not supposed to see this.
too expensive, but i hope the price will go down.
E6600"L630A446"? @3600@1.?v cooled by Tunic Tower sitting on Abit AB9 Quad GT played on ASUS 8800GTX opperated by a lazy slacker!
OverClocker_gr,
First, Thanks for your great review.
Well, Would it be possible you to test with SLI of GTX 260-216 and test in 1920x1080 ?
Thank You.![]()
Sorry for my bad english.
I sure have heard of overclocking, Thats why my q6600 is at 3.6ghz, What I am asking you is that since you find i-7 a complete waste of money why are you so excited to change a whole platform for = performance?
And how is AMDS platform better? Any links or is this just your opinion?
That sums up what we have been hearing for weeks , PII still slower clock per clock even when compared to two years old kentsfield and that shows that Core 2 wasn't just small jump in performance but still waiting for that OC review thought .
Intel Core I7 920 @ 3.8GHZ 1.28V (Core Contact Freezer)
Asus X58 P6T
6GB OCZ Gold DDR3-1600MHZ 8-8-8-24
XFX HD5870
WD 1TB Black HD
Corsair 850TX
Cooler Master HAF 922
Nehalem?
Nehalem would be a complete platform overhaul (CPU, board, memory [of which 2 latter are way too expensive]). That means i7 is an option I don't even consider. Besides, what would be the gain? Nothing in performance in applications I care about.
Yorkfield?
LGA775 mobos and bios' suck (and are boring), so Yorkfield is not an option. All i965Ps and P35s I've used since the launch of Core 2 have let me down.
What else?
That leaves Deneb - which uses a platform I've used before (pre-K10) and was pleased with. I loved tweaking (RAM especially) back in the days of S939s but when I moved to Core 2 tweaking became tedious due to quirky LGA775 mobos and bios'. Sure, the CPUs are quick, but in the end, I have no use whatsoever for CPU power. I don't have the need to experience the illusion: "Wow. Is this CPU is blazing fast..." That is, while I browse the internet, listen to music and the system uses maybe 1-2% of CPU resources. Even in gaming (casual) - there is no difference.
But before anything; I want the fun back in OC'ing. And a better conscience.
Then again, the most effective way to gain overall system performance would be to get an SSD. No CPU is fast enough to match that kind of gain.
Last edited by largon; 12-26-2008 at 01:20 AM. Reason: option #4
You were not supposed to see this.
Why are so many of you saying this? Am I looking at a different set of graphs or something?
From what I saw it was quite comfortably duking it out with the Q9550 90% of the time, it was only the tests that have always favored Intel that it was at the same level as the Q6600....
Jesus christ even now some of you seem to be trying to highlight the few bad points over the masses of good ones.![]()
oooh, exciting.
I think people mean clock for clock, Dont forget that the q6600 is 2.4ghz, If they clocked it up to 2.8-3.0ghz ph2 would be having a hard time with it, Even if you clock them both to the max I doubt that ph2 would be much better. Thats why I am disappointed, Ph2 looks to be 2 years late.
Bookmarks