Strange trend with GPU and CPU combo

[charged3800z24]

And feel free to neglect the rest of the post which addressed the core of your "arguments" . Especially the graph which shows the average performance in office,games and multimedia of i7-870 and 965BE being 6% apart

Anyhow the trend is repeatable in non-gaming apps which proves there is no "problem" ,it seems the I/O system on AMD hardware just works a bit better with NV cards.

I really like that review, and no not cause AMD faired so well. They did a great job of including so many bench test and showing more of the "whole" picture. One of the best reviews I have seen.

[Voodoo²]

I saw those numbers in AT and if I have to make a conclusion based solely on those graphics I would say that the GTX275 is a better performing card than the HD4890 but has problems with the i7 platform. Also what about all the reviews done when the HD4890 and GTX275 were launched? That reviews in the vast mayority were done with a Core i7 platform.

[Cheffy]

This comes from an old article, but would seem to add some backup to the idea its down to a system bottleneck:



http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...is,1572-8.html

if the 275gtx and 4890 are both scaling like their older siblings, in pcie limited situations the ati card should handle it much better, so any platform advantage in bandwidth/latency will not show up on the ati card. but, would show prominently on the nvidia card.

easy enough to test also, see if the cards scale nicely if the # of slots is reduced. if the pattern persists, or becomes more pronounced - nail in coffin. if the change has little effect, its not pcie limitations

[informal]

Our friend justapost did his own i5(turbo on) Vs Phenom II tests and this is his post at phoronix forum:

I received an i5 750 today, together with an GBT P55-UD4 mobo. I compared it with my 955BE + GBT GA-MA785GMT-UD2H. Only mobo and cpu differ between setups. Both used 4GB OCZ Plats at 1333MHz CL7 and an nvidia 8800GT 1GB gfx. As os I choose sidux 2009-2 dist-updated. I left all power saving features on and also enabled turbo on the 750. cpufreq-acpi seems to ignore the two and one core increases. The chip ran at 2.8GHz most of the time.
http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...5168-12682-147
I plan to run the full universe suite and more clock vs. clock comparisons in the next days.

this is a comment on his results:

Similar results with Michael's tests which show Phenom to beat i5 in general, whether the windows' benchmarks shows the opposite...

These are his results,note that his OS is different from the one Phoronix used.

[Zucker2k]

Our friend justapost did his own i5(turbo on) Vs Phenom II tests and this is his post at phoronix forum:

this is a comment on his results:

These are his results,note that his OS is different from the one Phoronix used.

Sidux what.....? Have you made the switch from Windows to Sidux $@%*&%^ yet? I do get your point, lynnfield runs poorly on some unstable alpha linux OS platform.

OS: Debian unstable
Kernel: 2.6.31-0.slh.3-sidux-amd64 (x86_64)
Desktop: KDE 4.3.1
Display Server: X.Org Server 1.6.3.901 (1.6.4 RC 1)
OpenGL: 3.0.0 NVIDIA 185.18.36
Compiler: GCC 4.3.4
File-System: ext3
Screen Resolution: 1600x1200

[informal]

Sidux what.....? Have you made the switch from Windows to Sidux $@%*&%^ yet? I do get your point, lynnfield runs poorly on some unstable alpha linux OS platform.

Yeah more excuses. BTW your selective replying skills are now becoming better . Still haven't replied to the post I made the other day . To sum it up again,across a whole range of Windows apps,the difference on average between stock i7-870 and stock 965BE is 6%.Think about it .

[Zucker2k]

Yeah more excuses. BTW your selective replying skills are now becoming better . Still haven't replied to the post I made the other day . To sum it up again,across a whole range of Windows apps,the difference on average between stock i7-870 and stock 965BE is 6%.Think about it .

The "pot" calling the "kettle" black? Well, according to the link in that post I "selectively" replied to, a Q9550=i5 750=PH II 965! I'm sure you agree that the 1% that separates the first two from the third cpu is within the margin of error? I mean you're known to shave off as much as 3-4% in other cases. The fact is that you would go to lengths to muddy the numbers, even if it means shooting yourself in the foot. There is also one very simple fact, if you sum up all the tests in all reviews, the i5 750 is the all around better processor. This is not saying AMD's flagship processor is bad; it simply means it is bested by Intel's latest low end mainstream cpu. The i5 750 compared to the 965 BE you get:

Same or better performance
Lower price
Lower power consumption
A far more robust and feature-rich selection of motherboards

What's not to like?

[beta]

Sidux what.....? Have you made the switch from Windows to Sidux $@%*&%^ yet? I do get your point, lynnfield runs poorly on some unstable alpha linux OS platform.

sweet ignorance

[justapost]

Sidux what.....? Have you made the switch from Windows to Sidux $@%*&%^ yet? I do get your point, lynnfield runs poorly on some unstable alpha linux OS platform.

Ehh, I picked sidux because it uses the latest kernel and gcc, and I expect this system is better optimized for lates hardware than older debian or ubuntu releases. Turbo works fine it seems but I need to do more testings.
Michael from phoronix had problems with iinconsisten results using an ubuntu alpha release, my results are repeatble consistent. The packages in debian unstable are not alpha versions from git repositories, normaly they are just the latest available stable versions.