put a phenom 1 in that bench setup. it would get murdered. Thats actually a pretty good bench considering they are still using last gen metals. Some of the scores make you wonder like the resolution differences in gaming. but all in all they have kind of come back as core did against socket 939 before core 2 was launched. so all in all it does look promising. Once hafnium is implemented , HKMG etc it should perk things up a little for AMD. intercore bandwidth and latency was lower and respectively higher than youd expect for a second or 3rd revision (or whatever) native quad. Alot of room for improvement on that. but really quite a jump from the limp wristed am2 faire.
Bachelor of Science in Music Production 2016, Mid 2012 mack book Pro i7 2.6 8gb ram Nvidia 250m 1gb . Pro Tools , Logic X, Presonus one, Reaper, Garage Band. Cubase, Cakewalk.
Cpu:Phenom ΙΙ 965 c3 @ 4.1Ghz/2.8nb (air cooled)
Mobo: Asus M3a79-T Deluxe
Ram:A-data 2x2 800+ @ 1000
Gpu:Asus Hd4850 512mb @ 700/1050(sycthe Musashi)
Hdd:500gb Seagate 7200.11
Psu:Corsair Hx620
Cooling: TRue(dual fan)
Case: Coolermaster Haf 932...
So far the Phenom II confirms what a legend the Q6600 is.
it was cheap (cheaper than the 6700, of course) and still performs well, after years
its still THE chip to get in the 150€ sector
lucky guys who paired it with 8800gtx in 2006, its still an awesome system
system:
Phenom II 920 3.5Ghz @ 1.4v, benchstable @ over 3,6Ghz (didnt test higher)
xigmatek achilles
sapphire hd4870 1gb @ 820 1020
Gigabyte GA-MA790GP-DS4H
8gb a-data 4-4-4-12 800
x-fi xtrememusic
rip 2x 160gb maxtor(now that adds up to 4...)
320gb/250gb/500gb samsung
it's not about "smoothness" it puts the scene together in a different way.
I've seen screen shots where they're minor detailed differences.
Last weekend I was in their stores, but the representatives gave me no info about when it will arrive.
Yeap, overpriced compared to any other quad-core alternative.Some folks bought it but it is clearly overpriced....
Anyway it is a very good chip and deserves my time to play with it. I'll get one for sure when it will be priced properly.
Taking into account the 5.7% frequency difference , it seems Yorkfield is faster than Phenom 2 by 9.5% clock/clock.
How exactly is it unbalanced? Where does it lack ? And don't point to gaming at low vs. high resolution , the jury is still out until we get optimized drivers.
wait so im a little confused. i keep hearing this q6600 cpu is better than phenom II. what is this cpu? i don't think i have ever heard of it. because i have heard of the q6600 cpu that they happened to have in this review and somehow i can't see how it is better than phenom II.maybe im just blind but idk. w/e i guess fanboys will be fanboys. i wonder what will happen after it is released. will people still be in denial?
The Q6600 stock speed is 2.4ghz so it has a 400-600mhz disadvantage to the 920, 940 PIIs. The rationale is that if you clock them the same then the Q6600 will probably edge out the PIIs. No one here is in denial, it's just that the OP has enough credibility with members of XS to believe the numbers. BTW this is a "limited" review that will not satisfy everyone but at least I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe the numbers are correct.
Is it a videocard issue or the platform isn't fully mature yet?
Leaving this review aside, other reviews have shown a very mixed benefit in gaming over C2Q.
I am glad I don't need to buy a computer right now and I look forward to the 32nm shrink which I suspect will address most if not all of my concerns.
yes i understand that but it is not proven. and if you are taking ocing the q6600 into consideration then why not oc the phenom II? sure maybe an oced q6600 can be better than a stock phenom II but who says a oced phenom II can't be better than a stock q9xxx or an i7? if you are gonna oc one then you oc them all. the clock to clock at 3.7 will help some but you still have to remember the fact that if the q6600 maxes at 3.7ghz then you should max out the phenom II as well.......
Bookmarks