Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: (mini review) MHz per MHz from Phenom II 940 vs QX9770

  1. #1
    Champion
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    1,375

    (mini review) MHz per MHz from Phenom II 940 vs QX9770

    Hi everyone, on this weekend i tried to play a bit with AMD Phenom II 940 compare with Core 2 Extreme QX9770 for performance per MHz between it at same clock so clock speed is i test at 4.0GHz and run 3DMark for compare, ok let to see what happen from it

    AMD System...
    Phenom II 940@4.0GHz
    ASUS M4A79 Deluxe
    4x Crucial Ballistix PC8500@1066C5-5-5-15
    ASUS HD4870X2 Top@832/1000MHz
    WD Raptor
    GIGABYTE ODIN 1.2kW
    Vista SP1

    Benching results...

    2k3


    2k5


    2k6


    Vantage


    Intel System...
    Intel QX9770@4.0GHz
    Biostar TP45 HP
    4x Crucial Ballistix PC8500@1000C4-4-4-12
    ASUS HD4870X2 Top@832/1000MHz
    WD Raptor
    GIGABYTE ODIN 1.2kW
    Vista SP1

    Benching results...

    2k3


    2k5



    2k6


    Vantage


    --------------
    Thank you !
    Sorry For My English
    OverclockZone Team
    THAILAND

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    59
    nice work zolkorn
    Intel Q9650 | EK Supreme
    G.Skill 4x2gb DDR3 1600mhz
    Foxconn Blackops | Stock Block
    ATI HD4870x2 | EK FC 4870x2
    X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium
    T.C Electronics Konnect 24D
    Tegan Piperock 1300w
    2 Velociraptor 300gb (RAID0)
    Caviar Black 1tb
    LG Blu-Ray Writer/Pioneer DVD Writer
    LianLi v1000+
    Samsung 26" 1920*1200 Monitor
    Lycosa/Mamba/G13
    Genelec 8040a pair
    PA120.3/Laing DDC 18w/Single Bay Res
    Zalman 6fan controller/Card reader and floppy drive

    Vista Ultimate rocks with 8GB

  3. #3
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Prestonsburg, KY
    Posts
    545
    Doesn't that just go against what all the review sites said? Thanks for posting this.

  4. #4
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    332
    wouldn't it of been better with a X48-X38 mobo since that one runs @x8 in CF

    but nice review

  5. #5
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Athens-Greece
    Posts
    248
    Very interesting Zolkorn... Though, P45 chipset is not the best possible choice for CrossFireX.
    Maybe an X48 motherboard would be more representative for a relevant comparison.

  6. #6
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Prestonsburg, KY
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by Dom7184 View Post
    wouldn't it of been better with a X48-X38 mobo since that one runs @x8 in CF

    but nice review
    No one complains about the 16x8x8 link on most X58 chipsets. I know it's a little different but I just haven't seen that big of a difference betweeen x8 to x16 unless you're at high res.

  7. #7
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fortaleza
    Posts
    109
    Very interesting.... but who would buy a QX9770 today

  8. #8
    Xtreme Enthusiast Shocker003's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    725
    Nice work and thanks for showing me my next cpu
    Last edited by Shocker003; 01-26-2009 at 10:42 AM.


    MAIN RIG--:
    ASUS ROG Strix XG32VQ---:AMD Ryzen 7 5800X--Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT--:ASUS Crosshair VIII HERO---
    32GB G-Skill AEGIS F4-3000C16S-8GISB --:MSI RADEON RX 6900 XT---:X-Fi Titanium HD modded
    Inter-Tech Coba Nitrox Nobility CN-800 NS 800W 80+ Silver--:Cyborg RAT 8--:Creative Sound BlasterX Vanguard K08

  9. #9
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,676
    Wow I ready didn't think AMD 940 would win, nice work

  10. #10
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Flying through Space, with armoire, Armoire of INVINCIBILATAAAAY!
    Posts
    1,939
    good work, i've been waiting for a clock for clock comparison.
    Sigs are obnoxious.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Dom7184 View Post
    wouldn't it of been better with a X48-X38 mobo since that one runs @x8 in CF

    but nice review
    True but he is only running one 4870x2, so it will run at x16

  12. #12
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    738
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.BSEL View Post
    True but he is only running one 4870x2, so it will run at x16
    gpu-z says 4 gpus enabled


    Quote Originally Posted by Dom7184 View Post
    wouldn't it of been better with a X48-X38 mobo since that one runs @x8 in CF

    but nice review

    I totally agree with ya.

    in vantage the gpu score:
    AMD: 25445
    INTEl: 21831


    An almost 4k difference id say would be due partially to the pci-e bandwidth especially for 4 gpu's if you look at vantage the gpu scores between the two are quite different. I'd say run the tests with both using the same pci-e bandwidth.




    Quote Originally Posted by chuchnit View Post
    No one complains about the 16x8x8 link on most X58 chipsets. I know it's a little different but I just haven't seen that big of a difference betweeen x8 to x16 unless you're at high res.

    thats only when 3 cards are used other wise is dual x16 bandwidth. For 4 gpu's which gpu-z is claiming are enabled i think the bandwidth is more of a factor.
    Last edited by Wiggy McShades; 01-26-2009 at 12:10 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Manicdan View Post
    real men like the idea of packing lots of stuff into a very small space, which is what the mac mini is
    ----------------------------------------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by Baron_Davis View Post
    PS. I'm even tougher IRL.

  13. #13
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    715
    I like how you carefully kept the CrossFireX display line out of the pictures for the AMD setup, but you forgot about GPU-Z displaying the GPU count. Not any good, even as a mini-review, when you deliberately are messing with your results.

  14. #14
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Posts
    423
    Nice review man. But you could just post results at the end even thoe there are screenshots. I had to scroll up and down to compare, then going back to remmember it etc etc Come on

  15. #15
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    108
    What's up with the big jump in GPU performance? HT, PCIe bandwidth?

    Workstation: D5400XS Skulltrail : 2x Xeon E5420 Quads @ 2.58GHz + 8GB FB-DIMM DDR2-800
    Rocketfish (LL) case painted black // OCZ EliteXStream 800W
    2x VisionTek HD 4850 in CrossFire (I want 8800 Ultras in SLI) --> Sony GDM-FW900 + LVM-37w3se // HT Omega Striker ~ (optical) Pioneer SE-DIR800C ~+ SE-DHP800 / HD 280 Pro
    HTPC: E1200 @ 2.8 + 610i + 2GB DDR2-800 + 8600GT + Silverstone Kublai KL02
    Router (in progress): Intel Atom 230 + Intel PRO/1000 GT + GS108T gigE switch + WRT54GL + a drawer
    Reply With Quote

  16. #16
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Arizona - USA
    Posts
    2,200
    Quote Originally Posted by S_G View Post
    What's up with the big jump in GPU performance? HT, PCIe bandwidth?
    AMD system is using 4 GPU's an INTEL is using 2 and a Half
    //RETIRED-o00o--°(_)°--o00o-OVERCLOCKER//


  17. #17
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    373
    ขอบคุณครับ
    • i7 920 D0
    • Gigabyte X58A-UD3R
    • Corsair Dominator 12GB
    • MSI GTX 660 Ti Power Edition OC 2GB
    • OCZ Vertex 4 128GB
    • WD1002FAEX 1TB
    • Corsair HX850W
    • CaseLabs Magnum TH10
    • Dell UltraSharp U2410
    • Logitech G500
    • SteelSeries QcK Mass
    • Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 THX

  18. #18
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,653
    Quote Originally Posted by PaRn ssR View Post
    ขอบคุณครับ
    /agree

    i5 2500K @ 4.9GHz+ 8GB G-Skill RipJaws DDR3-2000 @1600Mhz CAS 6 Asus P8P67 Pro CrossFire 6970's @ 950/1450
    Xeon X5677 @ 4.5Ghz 6GB G-Skill RipJaws DDR3-2000 @1600Mhz CAS 7 Gigabyte EX58-UD5 4870x2
    i7-880 @ 4.2Ghz+ (still playing) 4GB G-Skill RipJaws DDR3-2000 @2300Mhz CAS 9 Asus Maximus III Formula MSI Hawk 5770

  19. #19
    Champion
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    1,375
    Thank you for all comment

    well for some question or doubt with this results from i testing, so on intel system i'm enable CFx same as AMD system too if don't enable CFx it'll impossible is 3d03 can did 100k

    one more with Pci-e bandwidth i'm understand too and i'll tried for intel system on X48 or X38 mobo with DDR2 again about next weekend and will come to update results again too

    Best regards

    Quote Originally Posted by PaRn ssR View Post
    ขอบคุณครับ
    English dude... English !

    btw. ขอบคุณครับ (kob koon krab) = Thank you
    Sorry For My English
    OverclockZone Team
    THAILAND

  20. #20
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    17,242
    nice testing zolkorn

    not sure about biostar P45 board but with Gigabyte there was bugger all difference between P45 and X48 in scores so bandwidth probably wont be that big a deal imo
    Team.AU
    Got tube?
    GIGABYTE Australia
    Need a GIGABYTE bios or support?



  21. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    81
    คุณ Zolkorn

    ขอบคุณมากครับสำหรับรีวิว...ว่าแต่ว่า...ลืมภาษาอังก ฤษซะ 555

    Sorry For My Thai.... pom pud pasat Thai dai nit noi krab
    Last edited by rdrash; 01-27-2009 at 03:42 AM.

  22. #22
    Champion
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    1,375
    Quote Originally Posted by rdrash View Post
    คุณ Zolkorn

    ขอบคุณมากครับสำหรับรีวิว...ว่าแต่ว่า...ลืมภาษาอังก ฤษซะ 555

    Sorry For My Thai.... pom pud pasat Thai dai nit noi krab
    ขอบคุณครับ

    Nice to meet you here
    Sorry For My English
    OverclockZone Team
    THAILAND

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    1,716
    ZoLKoRn, I appreciate your effort, but your mini review is not very usefull. Can you try some real-world apps and games? And try to set equal DRAM clocks and latencies.

    Oh, and BTW, nice setups and clocks.

  24. #24
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bilbao (Spain)
    Posts
    371
    Try real programs, not benchmarks






  25. #25
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Prestonsburg, KY
    Posts
    545
    I would like to see some gaming comparisons, but zolkorn is a bencher so I see why benches were a part of his review.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •