AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

[flippin_waffles]

To me, having a uniform chipset, gpu, and processor makes an attractive proposition. All combined to form a firey Dragon. heh

[BertM]

most stores in holland have them in stock now !!!

[iandh]

To me, having a uniform chipset, gpu, and processor makes an attractive proposition. All combined to form a firey Dragon. heh

I have to admit that while not the fastest gear on the market, this 790GX/9950/4870 rig has been one of the most enjoyable gaming rigs I've owned to date, and I started on Wolfenstein 3D.

Both C2 and PII are equal as far as "platform" is concerned. MB, memory, etc. are about equal with C2 having a better MB selection. PII prices haven't been released but make no mistake about it, Intel can easily beat them in a price to performance ratio.

I disagree. Maybe if you are talking dual cores, but as far as quads go, the Q6600 is being phased out, and intel's cheaper penryn quads have low multis which can limit OC unless you are on a decent (read: more expensive) motherboard. I think it will be neck and neck in the $250-$350 range.

You are also missing part of his point, actually something that many people seem to miss. I am not the first person who finds their AMD platform running a bit "cleaner" than their previous Q6600 rig. As I stated before I still have my Q6600/P35 combo sitting in the closet and would surely be running that instead if I liked it better. I am going to turn it into a crunching rig when I get around to it but I am sticking with my current rig for gaming for the moment.

[qurious63ss]

I disagree. Maybe if you are talking dual cores, but as far as quads go, the Q6600 is being phased out, and intel's cheaper penryn quads have low multis which can limit OC unless you are on a decent (read: more expensive) motherboard. I think it will be neck and neck in the $250-$350 range.

You are also missing part of his point, actually something that many people seem to miss. I am not the first person who finds their AMD platform running a bit "cleaner" than their previous Q6600 rig. As I stated before I still have my Q6600/P35 combo sitting in the closet and would surely be running that instead if I liked it better. I am going to turn it into a crunching rig when I get around to it but I am sticking with my current rig for gaming for the moment.

My point was that Intel can and will drop prices on Penryn to keep the price/perf ratio on their court.

Please elaborate on the "cleaner" notion.

[iandh]

My point was that Intel can and will drop prices on Penryn to keep the price/perf ratio on their court.

Please elaborate on the "cleaner" notion.

Ok. Following is a description of my hardware addiction:

The AMD chips I currently have in my possession are: X2 3600+, 4000+, 5000+ BE, Phenom 8450, and Phenom 9950.

The intel chips I currently have in my possession are: (had) E2180, E5200, E7200, E8400, Q6600.

For AMD mobos I have a Biostar Tforce550, and Biostar 790GX. For intel, Gigabyte P35 DS3L, and MSI X48 (dead).

I have three different sets of DDR2 800 memory. One G.Skill 2x2Gb, one Corsair XMS 2x1Gb, and one Kingston value 2x1Gb.

For GPU's I have (had) an evga GTX 260 core 216, (had) Visiontek 4850, (had) Visiontek 4870 512, and my current card, Powercolor 4870.

I have played with nearly every conceivable configuration of this hardware, and the "cleanest" or "smoothest" (evidently BS from what I hear) running setup out of them all has been my 790GX/9950/4870 combo. That means least stuttering, best framerate stability, least crashes (stock or OC), least trouble with driver errors, least trouble with hardware changes.

Why is this?

Could be:

1. Mobo peculiarities

2. Ram peculiarities

3. Defective CPU's (umm not likely)

4. An all AMD platform runs better (dunno, maybe)

5. Luck of the draw?



I prefer my Phenom/790GX over my Q6600/P35 in gaming, whether stock or OC'ed. It just seems to run games smoother. Although the average framerate is lower, I seem to get better framerate stability.

Some may say I am imagining it or spouting BS, but I most certainly do not feel that I am.

I am not necessarily saying that AMD or intel is "better" for gaming, all I am saying is "Here is the hardware I have, and here is what I consider to run the best out of the hardware I currently possess"



The funny thing is that I am not the only person I have seen have the same experience, so either we are all imagining it, or there is something going on that can't easily be shown with benchmarks and graphs.

[roofsniper]

many people have said it is smoother and the only people i have seen turn it down are people who prefer intel. and the people that are saying it is smoother are mostly people that are neutral and have had experiences with both platforms. i can't say for myself if it is smoother or not but if you look at the design it makes sense. there is no way you can show this on paper that it is smoother its only something you can learn by word of mouth. and if it is smoother then imo its better for gaming. many people refuse to believe this but hey most of those people have never even ran amd before.

[_Lone_Wolf_]

there is no way you can show this on paper that it is smoother its only something you can learn by word of mouth.

I don't understand how this information cannot be captured in Fraps.

[roofsniper]

I don't understand how this information cannot be captured in Fraps.

how so? i guess if you took videos of both and compared them together it might work. but the best way to tell is by comparing them side by side. and there are many people that have tested this and have said that it is smoother. so you would just have to trust them. kinda want to avoid this topic since as g0ldbr1ck has said it will just lead to flames.

[iandh]

I don't understand how this information cannot be captured in Fraps.

Fraps does not record stuttering and framerate drops, it records average framerate.

[sundancerx]

Ok. Following is a description of my hardware addiction:

The AMD chips I currently have in my possession are: X2 3600+, 4000+, 5000+ BE, Phenom 8450, and Phenom 9950.

The intel chips I currently have in my possession are: (had) E2180, E5200, E7200, E8400, Q6600.

For AMD mobos I have a Biostar Tforce550, and Biostar 790GX. For intel, Gigabyte P35 DS3L, and MSI X48 (dead).

I have three different sets of DDR2 800 memory. One G.Skill 2x2Gb, one Corsair XMS 2x1Gb, and one Kingston value 2x1Gb.

For GPU's I have (had) an evga GTX 260 core 216, (had) Visiontek 4850, (had) Visiontek 4870 512, and my current card, Powercolor 4870.

I have played with nearly every conceivable configuration of this hardware, and the "cleanest" or "smoothest" (evidently BS from what I hear) running setup out of them all has been my 790GX/9950/4870 combo. That means least stuttering, best framerate stability, least crashes (stock or OC), least trouble with driver errors, least trouble with hardware changes.

Why is this?

Could be:

1. Mobo peculiarities

2. Ram peculiarities

3. Defective CPU's (umm not likely)

4. An all AMD platform runs better (dunno, maybe)

5. Luck of the draw?



I prefer my Phenom/790GX over my Q6600/P35 in gaming, whether stock or OC'ed. It just seems to run games smoother. Although the average framerate is lower, I seem to get better framerate stability.

Some may say I am imagining it or spouting BS, but I most certainly do not feel that I am.

I am not necessarily saying that AMD or intel is "better" for gaming, all I am saying is "Here is the hardware I have, and here is what I consider to run the best out of the hardware I currently possess"



The funny thing is that I am not the only person I have seen have the same experience, so either we are all imagining it, or there is something going on that can't easily be shown with benchmarks and graphs.

when amd users start talking about "responsiveness/smoothness" of their amd gaming rig compared to intel ones, people respond by saying amd users start hallucinating/spewing bs to justify their rig having a better gaming performance that doesnt necessarily show on benchmarks/graphs.
the best way to do this to try to qualify/quantify these "feel" thingy which is very subjective.
since you have both intel and amd rigs, you are in the best opportunity to perform this. im not suggesting/asking you do this, just saying maybe if you want to make this "objective", you can actually do this.
this is what i have in mind:
1. load 2 or more games on intel/amd rig.
2. run fraps or equivalent utility.
3. alt-tab on different games.
4. observe drop in fps if theres any.
5. vary timing on alt-tabbing.
6. upload the result.
then people can see it for themselves which one is 'smoother/more responsive' machine.
just make sure you label the correct video matches the right rig lol.
just my 2 cents. btw, im pro amd .

[Hornet331]

when amd users start talking about "responsiveness/smoothness" of their amd gaming rig compared to intel ones, people respond by saying amd users start hallucinating/spewing bs to justify their rig having a better gaming performance that doesnt necessarily show on benchmarks/graphs.
the best way to do this to try to qualify/quantify these "feel" thingy which is very subjective.
since you have both intel and amd rigs, you are in the best opportunity to perform this. im not suggesting/asking you do this, just saying maybe if you want to make this "objective", you can actually do this.
this is what i have in mind:
1. load 2 or more games on intel/amd rig.
2. run fraps or equivalent utility.
3. alt-tab on different games.
4. observe drop in fps if theres any.
5. vary timing on alt-tabbing.
6. upload the result.
then people can see it for themselves which one is 'smoother/more responsive' machine.
just make sure you label the correct video matches the right rig lol.
just my 2 cents. btw, im pro amd .

your "test" is nothing more then a artifical stress test for the memory sub system of a cpu.

Guess who will win this.

For my personal experience there was no more "smoothness increasment" after my first A64 X2, all other CPU i ever had since then never felt more smooth or slower or what else then the X2.

[sundancerx]

your "test" is nothing more then a artifical stress test for the memory sub system of a cpu.

Guess how will win this.

For my personal experience there was no more "smoothness increasment" after my first A64 X2, all other CPU i ever had since then never felt more smooth or slower or what else then the X2.

hmm, i dont really have extensive knowledge about cpus, so i really dont know if that would be true. if it is true then without even going through the tests, we have quantified/qualified that "smoothness" on phenoms is no longer relative/subjective but can be objectively attributed with phenoms having better memory sub system design compared to intel cpu's -except i7's i supposed.
you agree on this?
second, i assume i7's having "smoother feel" also compared to penryn's. any i7 owners can attest to this? esp those who upgrade from penryn's?
edit:btw, as i said im no expert and in no way im trying to sound one. just trying to offer my 2 cents as everytime i read someone mention smoothness, everybody freaks out. and its not just this forum, ive read it across multiple review sites. so...

[keithlm]

this is what i have in mind:
1. load 2 or more games on intel/amd rig.
2. run fraps or equivalent utility.
3. alt-tab on different games.
4. observe drop in fps if theres any.
5. vary timing on alt-tabbing.
6. upload the result.

Even better: If someone has machines with various brands of CPU they can make a type of benchmark that CAN be measured and repeated. If they ADD other benchmark(s) at the SAME TIME then they can create some interesting Xtreme conditions. They could try to find something that slows down one machine but not the other AND is repeatable.

For example: What happens on various CPU if you are running Prime95 WHILE playing a game? Does it make one system bog down and the other doesn't even notice? Does the Prime95 go slower?

If you run 4 threads of Prime95 (perhaps 8?), a game benchmark, and everything works without problems... then add something else like a virus scanner. You can keep adding different things that use up various resources one at a time until either one or both machines slow down. Then back off a bit and see if you can determine which machine had problems first. It this process is repeatable then you have found a method to determine "smoothness".

Of course if one brand works better than the other when this process is done... you can expect some people to claim: "I never run all of that stuff at the same time so it doesn't matter to me." However if this kind of thing can be measured AND proven then it is definitely something to consider.

The problem is that this type of "Xtreme" benchmark is not easy to find. In fact various people have already tried the 4xPrime95 + Game test. We didn't really see any differences between brands. So the hypothetical "slowdown" would take a lot of work to actually find and will require more work.

EDIT: BTW: I do actually expect this process to happen... but it very probable that it will be done by somebody testing between the new Intel i7 and and older Intel chip of comparable speed.

[Hornet331]

hmm, i dont really have extensive knowledge about cpus, so i really dont know if that would be true. if it is true then without even going through the tests, we have quantified/qualified that "smoothness" on phenoms is no longer relative/subjective but can be objectively attributed with phenoms having better memory sub system design compared to intel cpu's -except i7's i supposed.
you agree on this?
second, i assume i7's having "smoother feel" also compared to penryn's. any i7 owners can attest to this? esp those who upgrade from penryn's?
edit:btw, as i said im no expert and in no way im trying to sound one. just trying to offer my 2 cents as everytime i read someone mention smoothness, everybody freaks out. and its not just this forum, ive read it across multiple review sites. so...

My CPU history beginning from P4 and skipping everything before 2000
P4->X2->C2D/(A64 for HTPC)->C2D 45nm quad->C2D 45nm->Ci7

Ever since I switched from a P4 to a X2 there never was a feeling that is was more smoother even from dualcore C2D to quad core Ci7.

The only thing i noticed and made a habbit of mine, is that if os older then 6month it tends to get boged down by software installs and all the garbage that accumulates. So i reinstall my my os every 6-8 months (coincidently the last 2 years i buy new hardware every 6-8 months ).

Even better: If someone has machines with various brands of CPU they can make a type of benchmark that CAN be measured and repeated. If they ADD other benchmark(s) at the SAME TIME then they can create some interesting Xtreme conditions. They could try to find something that slows down one machine but not the other AND is repeatable.

For example: What happens on various CPU if you are running Prime95 WHILE playing a game? Does it make one system bog down and the other doesn't even notice? Does the Prime95 go slower?

If you run 4 threads of Prime95 (perhaps 8?), a game benchmark, and everything works without problems... then add something else like a virus scanner. You can keep adding different things that use up various resources one at a time until either one or both machines slow down. Then back off a bit and see if you can determine which machine had problems first. It this process is repeatable then you have found a method to determine "smoothness".

Of course if one brand works better than the other when this process is done... you can expect some people to claim: "I never run all of that stuff at the same time so it doesn't matter to me." However if this kind of thing can be measured AND proven then it is definitely something to consider.

The problem is that this type of "Xtreme" benchmark is not easy to find. In fact various people have already tried the 4xPrime95 + Game test. We didn't really see any differences between brands. So the hypothetical "slowdown" would take a lot of work to actually find and will require more work.

EDIT: BTW: I do actually expect this process to happen... but it very probable that it will be done by somebody testing between the new Intel i7 and and older Intel chip of comparable speed.

I dont see how this will prove anything, if you run max threads of prime on a quad core and then start a game every system will output less fps, it doesn't matter if its intel or amd or any other cpu.

As a matter of fact, i just benched a similar thing on my Ci7.

Running Boinc with 8 threads and benching crysis costs me ~2fps on avarage and 4fps on the min fps as compared to when i only run crysis alone.

But a note: boinc runs as low priority process so if i would run prime which has normal priority it will hurt the game even more.

By your defenition Ci7 would be smother then K10 be default, cause it can handle more threads better due to HT.

This whole "Smoother Myth" (yes i call it a myth cause i never expired it even though i had my share of expirience a lot of processors) is in my eyes more related to other things then just the cpu.

Imho the most important factor is the HDD, i have played around with some SDD and my old Notebook (Singelcore P-M 1,6GHz 1GB RAM) that had an old slow ass 4200rpm drive. Holy moly i never thought how responsive this old thing could get just by upgrading the HDD.

Another thing is RAM, you never can have enough ram, when the system starts swapping it slows down.