AMD Shanghai/Deneb Review Thread

[Uncle Jimbo]

I guess the "power consumption" depends on how you measure it. SOmeone used a temp probe and some elementary physics to get a pretty decent number

There are a whole lot of results out there now, and eve if it's not i7 killers they've released I'd say AMD did an A-W-E-S-O-M-E job - these chips are HUGE improvements over Agena, and that's the only fair comparison. The fact that they can compete with Intel quads is also a good sign.

I don't really see why Anandtech's conclusion should be so important, either. it seems obvious to me that that's just some Intel fan's opinion. "If Intel chooses to do this and that"... well, that's not the case TODAY, so its' a useless comment. The fact is that the Deneb platform gives you alot of performance for your $$$.

I agree - this seems to be a very good part.

Anandtech had an interesting chart on OC - and they pointed out that the production parts would probably move Phenom II 940 to 4.1G or more.

But even using their ES they got the following, which was done using STOCK cooler, and shows the Phenom II 940 looking pretty good:

Processor ............ Stock Voltage . Overvolt. % Increase . Vcore
AMD Phenom II 940 .. 3.2GHz ......... 3.9GHz ...... 30% ..... 1.52V
AMD Phenom 9950 BE 3.03GHz ....... 3.38GHz ..... 30% ..... 1.45V
Intel Core i7-920 ..... 3.83GHz ....... 4.0GHz ....... 50% ..... 1.35V
Intel Core 2 Q9550 ... 3.48GHz ....... 3.91GHz ..... 38%...... 1.35V

[roofsniper]

lol, You gotta be kidding. It will be closer to double that.

seems like a joke but jimbo does know what he is talking about. he is way above all of us in that field.

Correct - the 'I' you are measuring may or may not be going to the CPU, and likewise you don't know what 'E' actually gets supplied internally, but there is no question about the heat load.

Here's a good write-up on heatsink characterization by some guys who actually know what they are doing:
http://www.frostytech.com/testmethod_mk2.cfm

lol and everyone tells me that frosty tech sucks.

Are people really happy with ph2? I mean not even slightly disappointed? Read the comments on anandtech and others and it seems that most are disappointed, It still lacks clock for clock against all Intel quads and the overclocking and power consumption dont live up to the hype.

the thing here is that most of us are enthusiasts. we buy the parts because we like them. for more mainstream users they might look at the graphs and think differently and choose intel over amd but most of us here don't need absolute performance. most people just like tweaking and messing around with the systems to get more performance. so deneb is a dream for amd users. im really happy with the power consumption since it blows the original phenom out of the water and i bet running it at 3.5ghz would produce the same or less power than my phenom 9600 does at 2.3. it does stay really close to the core 2's power consumption even with the imc and large l3 cache too. and the fact that cool and quiet can reduce the clocks down to 800 mhz and the below 1V is just nice for me.

[TL1000S]

the thing here is that most of us are enthusiasts. we buy the parts because we like them. for more mainstream users they might look at the graphs and think differently and choose intel over amd but most of us here don't need absolute performance. most people just like tweaking and messing around with the systems to get more performance. so deneb is a dream for amd users. im really happy with the power consumption since it blows the original phenom out of the water and i bet running it at 3.5ghz would produce the same or less power than my phenom 9600 does at 2.3. it does stay really close to the core 2's power consumption even with the imc and large l3 cache too. and the fact that cool and quiet can reduce the clocks down to 800 mhz and the below 1V is just nice for me.

What he said.

Could not agree more.

[Uncle Jimbo]

lol and everyone tells me that frosty tech sucks.

I can't comment on their other review work, but their heatsink characterization method is perfect.

[roofsniper]

I can't comment on their other review work, but their heatsink characterization method is perfect.

yea thats what i use them for. i think many people look at it and see that they put the TRU above the TRUE and just disregard them. thanks for the info on this.

[The PyroPath]

Hmm at least idle it uses the same as my 9500 ;-) can't do much more atm because my PSU isn't too shabby... and still trying to find out why some things act a bit weird (got a Scythe Musashi with 2 fans, one runs @1250 while the other runs @2050, and my all new artic freezer extreme is going fast/slow/fast/slow/etc and give unreliable RPM numbers, while my fancontroller works flawless with all other PWM fans....

[Uncle Jimbo]

yea thats what i use them for. i think many people look at it and see that they put the TRU above the TRUE and just disregard them. thanks for the info on this.

I meant to comment on FrosyTech TRU vs TRUE ratings - they used a higher velocity fan with the TRU which is why they got lower ratings. There is no question that for identical airflow, the extreme is a better cooler. They discussed fan selection in both reviews. I suppose they could have tested with a variety of fans to show the tradeoff in cooling vs noise - the one they used on the original TRU review was pretty loud (53.7 dB), while they used a much quieter fan for the TRUE review (44.5 dB). If they had used the same high velocity fan as on the TRU review, they would have gotten lower thermal numbers, but the noise performance would not have been anywhere near as good.

One advantage of the TRUE is that the added heat pipe capacity means you can handle larger total power levels - basically 50% more raw watts. But since the overall number of fins did not change between the designs, the performance at lower wattage (and for that cooler, any normal load is 'lower wattage'), will not be a 50% difference between them.

I guess you can shoot holes in any reviewer's choice of tests - but FrostyTech does a very rigorous and repeatable set of tests, and if you read carefully, you can usually extract what you need to know.

[CH33TAH]

Here is another review that I did:

http://www.benchmarkextreme.com/Arti...%20940/P1.html

Interesting, how it compares to Yorkfield clock for clock.