AMD Phenom II Review Thread

[Miss Banana]

Erm Shintai, I just linked to that article, and said that in a few cases the memory did bring performance improvements.
That's fairly accurate as far as I can see.

And we simply do not know what faster memory brings for the phenom II, untill someone actually does some benchmarks with both types of memory.
Your pro-intel speculation is predictable and useless.

I wonder what you will throw at me next. More links that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject? More speculation about how faster memory will do next to nothing for Phenom II?
How about we skip all that, do you have anything that does make sense, if even slightly?

[Miss Banana]

Even if the performance gain is less than 0,1% it does not justify the difference in setups! No one would EVER conduct a serious research with such lacking method, or at least not any serious research. If the memories don't have to be the same speed or timings, why bother with the same GFX? Or PSU? You use as standardised equipment as possible to reduce number of potential errors. It's just stupid to defend his choice of hardware - no one would ever "allow" a PII to outrun an i7 simply because the first uses a 4870X2 while the latter has a 8600GS and 512MB of RAM in a review and not call it biased (because it would have been, just as this one).

If he didn't get the 1066 memory to work on the PII, why not using the same 800 on the C2Q? If the performance loss/gain is close to nothing - what sense does it make to make them different?! If one wants to be taken seriously, the reviews have to have at least a bit scientific approach. This one clearly lacks quite many of those requirements.

Agreed. The difference in memory speed and especially memory size is completely unacceptable, even if there are no gains whatsoever.

[chew*]

phenom II am2+ supports ddr2 1066 while the am3 ones will support ddr3 1333.

The gigabyte AM3 board is claiming DDR 3 1666 support although I'm guessing its a typo and is supposed to be 1600..

[roofsniper]

The gigabyte AM3 board is claiming DDR 3 1666 support although I'm guessing its a typo and is supposed to be 1600..

na i wish they supported 1600 but its 1333. thats why im not expecting much out of it.

[chew*]

na i wish they supported 1600 but its 1333. thats why im not expecting much out of it.

Actually after typing the above I double checked and it's clearly stamped on the board as well "DDR 3 1666+"

So maybe the cpu only offiicially supports ddr 3 1333 however you can run at higher via Ocing?

Quick guess but to compete with 1066 @ 5-5-5-12 1666 would need to run 8-8-8-24 If the memory controller can handle it.

[roofsniper]

Actually after typing the above I double checked and it's clearly stamped on the board as well "DDR 3 1666+"

So maybe the cpu only offiicially supports ddr 3 1333 however you can run at higher via Ocing ?

o im sure you can. there are some crazy ddr3 modules out there that can overclock pretty well. when i get am3 i might just buy some 1600 modules.

[chew*]

OT but whats the jedec standard for ddr 3?

[keithlm]

Agreed. The difference in memory speed and especially memory size is completely unacceptable, even if there are no gains whatsoever.

I Disagree on this issue.

The difference in memory IS acceptable if they use the fastest memory that a particular CPU can support. If it supports DDR2-1066 then that is what you use. If it supports DDR3-1600 then that is what you use.

In other words... use common sense and use the RAM that people would actually be using.

I think the problem here is that the issue is clouded by people that are used to the motherboards that determine the speed of of RAM; and not the CPU. With these older CPU/MB people would determine what ram to buy based on what they wanted to spend. Things are just a bit different now with IMC on the CPU.

You won't see anyone using DDR3-1066 with an i7 940 or 965... so if anyone used that ram in a review I would be just as critical of their review.

[chew*]

FYI i did a test with intel with 2 1x1 gig ddr 800 4-4-4-12 in 06

I then added 2 more identical sticks which required me to back off timing to 5-5-5-15 and scored 1000 points more in 06.......Had to do with the paging file with only 2 gigs installed.

Links

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=8958751 2 gigs 4-4-4-12 ddr2 800
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=8967323 4 gigs 5-5-5-15 ddr2 800

Not saying this is what happned in the review but it can happen in some instances and applications.

[Donnie27]

Does that need any kind of explanation?

Using slow speed ram in a review for the platform you dislike, 2 GB instead of 4 GB ram, and then acting like an immature lame fanboy in the entire review is just not going to get you any oscars.

It does not even matter whether or not people who buy AMD would upgrade memory, neither is it relevant that some programs Kyle used to bench do or do not use the full 4 GB.

A person that reviews should at least make some sort of effort to appear to be giving objective info about a product. Not all reviews are perfect, but some of Kyle's reviews are so idiotic that it makes me wonder whether his entire site is ment as some sort of joke or parody on biased reviews.
Sadly he is dead serious.

I saw your explanation and its still off by a mile or 1.6 Kilometers. Kyle made every excuse in the world for AMD Conroe did the AM2's worse than the X2's did the P4. Kyle did the same thing again when 4 X 4 launched. Maybe like Rammsteiner, Kyle is pissed AMD lost yet another round and he's depressed?

Where were the AMD leaning folks claiming to want fair and unbiased benchmarks for AM2 he gave a , 4 X $ he gave a and Conroe he gave yes, a uh? Again, he's revised, hell, rewrote his whole Conroe conclusion when other web sites like Tech Report that you quoted, called him out.

Kyle's whatever but Phenom 2 still did worse in even the most favorable review. You do know that Intel's score were up and down as well, or were you only looking at AMD's?

For the record, I was basing my AM3 comments NOT solely on DDR3 but faster base Clock + DDR3 right now DDR3 on a slow HT link is like RAMBUS on a P3. P3 couldn't take advantage of the extra Bandwidth.

[roofsniper]

OT but whats the jedec standard for ddr 3?

what do you need it for? i know that the jdec standard for 1066 is CL7 but lol i think i have only seen like 2 or 3 CL7 sticks.

[chew*]

what do you need it for? i know that the jdec standard for 1066 is CL7 but lol i think i have only seen like 2 or 3 CL7 sticks.

Nah just curios, AMD has only ever specced cpu's to run at jedec standards so if the standard is 1333 then it makes sense.

Etc max jedec standard for SD 133, ddr was 400, ddr2 1066, etc etc....

[roofsniper]

Nah just curios, AMD has only ever specced cpu's to run at jedec standards so if the standard is 1333 then it makes sense.

Etc max jedec standard for SD 133, ddr was 400, ddr2 1066, etc etc....

hmmmmm i see jedec max for ddr3 is 1600. im pretty sure that the first am3 chips only support 1333 but i wouldn't doubt it if amd sneaked in 1600 or released 1600 chips later.

[chew*]

hmmmmm i see jedec max for ddr3 is 1600. im pretty sure that the first am3 chips only support 1333 but i wouldn't doubt it if amd sneaked in 1600 or released 1600 chips later.

Yah they did that with athlon xp if your remember, they snuck th axp 3200 in and I think it was one of 2 chips that actually supported ddr 400. I remember cuz i bought it...my 1700 jiuhb clocked better

[Donnie27]

Yah they did that with athlon xp if your remember, they snuck th axp 3200 in and I think it was one of 2 chips that actually supported ddr 400. I remember cuz i bought it...my 1700 jiuhb clocked better

IIRC, it got a higher model number merely because it supported faster RAM. AMD caught flack because in many cases it was still slower than the older 2800+ plus that had slower RAM but ran at a higher MHz. I hope they don't pull that one again.

[roofsniper]

IIRC, it got a higher model number merely because it supported faster RAM. AMD caught flack because in many cases it was still slower than the older 2800+ plus that had slower RAM but ran at a higher MHz. I hope they don't pull that one again.

lets stay on topic please. im sure if i felt like it i can name everything wrong intel has done in the past yet im not.

[Zucker2k]

Erm Shintai, I just linked to that article, and said that in a few cases the memory did bring performance improvements.
That's fairly accurate as far as I can see.

And we simply do not know what faster memory brings for the phenom II, untill someone actually does some benchmarks with both types of memory.
Your pro-intel speculation is predictable and useless.

I wonder what you will throw at me next. More links that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject? More speculation about how faster memory will do next to nothing for Phenom II?
How about we skip all that, do you have anything that does make sense, if even slightly?

So all the noise was for nothing? It could be a platform issue for all we know; I mean who knows if the chipset had problems supporting three beefy gpus and 4GB Ram at 1066? Point is no one has tried this yet, so let's not be quick in condemning. PII is a good cpu for extreme overclockers; it loves cold, it overclocks like a wolfdale, and it's cheap so you can kill one every week and your finances would be relatively same.

Came close to picking a 940 at the Microcenter on Sunday, but I want to wait out and see what Intel does first.

[chew*]

So all the noise was for nothing? It could be a platform issue for all we know; I mean who knows if the chipset had problems supporting three beefy gpus and 4GB Ram at 1066? Point is no one has tried this yet, so let's not be quick in condemning. PII is a good cpu for extreme overclockers; it loves cold, it overclocks like a wolfdale, and it's cheap so you can kill one every week and your finances would be relatively same.

Came close to picking a 940 at the Microcenter on Sunday, but I want to wait out and see what Intel does first.

Zucker your honestly better off waiting a tad anyway, they usually do better after the initial batches.

@ donnie nah it got a clock increase as well. 2.2gig and 400 FSB, just didn't clock to well from an enthusiast stand point. I had the 2800 as well ( i think your refereing to the 3000 model or was it 2800 with lower clock higher bus )

Realistcally we may see improvements with DDR 3 as we did with intel, although thats an IMC versus non IMC comparison.

[Donnie27]

lets stay on topic please. im sure if i felt like it i can name everything wrong intel has done in the past yet im not.

More personal snipes uh?

Yah they did that with athlon xp if your remember, they snuck th axp 3200 in and I think it was one of 2 chips that actually supported ddr 400. I remember cuz i bought it...my 1700 jiuhb clocked better

That's what I replied to, so take your strawman on topic BS where it matters

[roofsniper]

More personal snipes uh?

didn't think it was being personal by saying to stay on topic.

[Donnie27]

Zucker your honestly better off waiting a tad anyway, they usually do better after the initial batches.

@ donnie nah it got a clock increase as well. 2.2gig and 400 FSB, just didn't clock to well from an enthusiast stand point. I had the 2800 as well ( i think your refereing to the 3000 model or was it 2800 with lower clock higher bus )

Realistcally we may see improvements with DDR 3 as we did with intel, although thats an IMC versus non IMC comparison.

Yup, you're right, it was the 3000+, not the 3200+! Note, I agree with the side that's saying higher HT plus DDR3 will make a difference in the next round of reviews for AM3. Beware, others are using personal dislikes and not common sense here?

[Donnie27]

didn't think it was being personal by saying to stay on topic.

It is personal when you pick out certain folks to ask to stay on topic It was a reply, now what part of that do you NOT understand? If I made a statement and NOT part of reply then please make that request. If not, ask the person I replied to. That's the way it has always worked.

[eleeter]

99% sure Phenom II X4 945 will support DDR3-1600, as will AM3 motherboards.

[roofsniper]

99% sure Phenom II X4 945 will support DDR3-1600, as will AM3 motherboards.

i asked about 2 hours ago and they support 1333. 1600 might come in the future tho.

[eleeter]

i asked about 2 hours ago and they support 1333. 1600 might come in the future tho.

I must have missed it. Asked who? And what comes later, support from the processor itself? Thanks.