Some benchmarks of Thuban X6 1090T

[BenchZowner]

All I see is that the i7 950 had a clockspeed of 4ghz
..is that stock?

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750

The point being that AMD has something that can perform on par with Intels best processors

Well...it's not exactly like that, isn't it ?
It can only battle the Bloomfields which are... well, introduced since late 2008.
Who needs an i7 950 or 960 when most of the 920's can do 4.2GHz 24/7 on air cooling ?
There goes the price tag difference when overclocking isn't "forbidden" or taken out of the question.

For $300 Intel only offers you a i7 930

Which can match/beat the Phenom II x6 in a lot ( if not most ) cases if you simply overclock it to 4GHz or so.
Unless AMD's x6 can clock 250MHz or so higher, granted that we'd overclock both CPUs.

Other than i7 975/980x the 1090T is in a very good position

I'm tired of "if you overlook this or that" when it comes to progress.
I want to see AMD surpassing Intel again, even if it's just 1% faster.

also the i7 950 was not launched in 2008 it was launched in Q4 2009.

You know what I meant. I meant that it's an i7 920 just with a higher default clock frequency, it's not like it's any faster clock per clock or a crazy overclock untouchable by a 2008 i7 920 C1.

and the 8 and 10 cores you mentioned they are not coming out as soon as you think.

I've got 2 birdies saying two different stories, I wouldn't disregard the possibility of getting released earlier

So i think you'd better save words and just post i7 980X.

All I'm going to post is:



That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

[informal]

Posting a super pi score in the era of multicore processors is like driving your Porsche on the narrow village road going 20Km/h... (I know yup posted it to prove how "fun" that Opty was,yet Super Pi is fail from perf. evaluation POV when you count multicore MPUs).
Also comparing Bloomfield and Istanbul is valid since Bloomfield is still very high end with only 1 Westmere hexa core being faster. Bloomfield design relies massively on added logic(SMT aka Hyperthreading) which adds ~20% on the die size while giving similar perf. increase on average in poorly coded multithread-capable applications .Each core inside Bloomfield is MASSIVELY larger than one in Deneb/Istanbul,thing 15.3mm2 Vs 24.5mm2,that's staggering 60% more added core logic area. Deneb is actually doing great compared how much smaller its cores are.So Istanbul/Thuban with 50% more cores actually levels the field in core logic area investment .The only real downside in AMD's Deneb is quite large sram cell size and this is why Deneb and Bloomfield take up similar die size in total(while very cores in Deneb are,like i previously said 60% smaller and bound to be slower in MT applications).

As for your wet dream of 6-10 cores on desktop let's see how that turns out.I heard not so soon.

[wuttz]

Posting a super pi score in the era of multicore processors is like driving your Porsche on the narrow village road going 20Km/h... (I know yup posted it to prove how "fun" that Opty was,yet Super Pi is fail from perf. evaluation POV when you count multicore MPUs).

reminds me of my old post.

SuperPi is an antiquated benchmark that assesses core performance using an antiquated fpu x87 instruction set. It is a grossly inefficient computer program that uses floating point units to calculate pi and "evaluate" processor cache performance. It's not by any means a "real world" reflection of todays modern cpu's microarch capabilities. It's like running a horse(fpu x87 instructions) down today's paved interstate(the cpu hardware), when all the while a car(newer simd's) are available.

SuperPi fails to take advantage of newer instruction sets, and hence also fails to evaluate modern-day hardware capabilities that newer processors support and are designed with. The FPU X87 instruction set was developed for an external co-processor dedicated to computing mathematical tasks and worked with the 80286/80386 microprocessors. Now if you havent heard of the 286/386, then you know SuperPi is that old.

//more at [ OCN ]

[Titan7171]

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750



Well...it's not exactly like that, isn't it ?
It can only battle the Bloomfields which are... well, introduced since late 2008.
Who needs an i7 950 or 960 when most of the 920's can do 4.2GHz 24/7 on air cooling ?
There goes the price tag difference when overclocking isn't "forbidden" or taken out of the question.


Which can match/beat the Phenom II x6 in a lot ( if not most ) cases if you simply overclock it to 4GHz or so.
Unless AMD's x6 can clock 250MHz or so higher, granted that we'd overclock both CPUs.



I'm tired of "if you overlook this or that" when it comes to progress.
I want to see AMD surpassing Intel again, even if it's just 1% faster.



You know what I meant. I meant that it's an i7 920 just with a higher default clock frequency, it's not like it's any faster clock per clock or a crazy overclock untouchable by a 2008 i7 920 C1.



I've got 2 birdies saying two different stories, I wouldn't disregard the possibility of getting released earlier



All I'm going to post is:



That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

Really I dont see what your point is? We know the performance of intels cpu's already. We've all seen the numbers, and guess what? , we are not interested

This is a new release and here you are filling the thread with useless information no one wants to see or read about. You already stated you feel AMD needs to make more progress......ok, Thats not going to change the fact of what these cpu's can do. And arguing that the performance is not up to your standards compared to Intel In the AMD forums is not going to go down to well here either.

So what are you going to do? try to convince us that we should instead all change our systems over to Intel? I mean I dont understand if we havent already what makes you think we would want to now or even care about the performance Intels cpu give? we trying to see the performance of these cpu's. Now move on if you not interested In AMD's new offering. Dont spam the thread with Intel propaganda

[ajaidev]

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750

Well...it's not exactly like that, isn't it ?
It can only battle the Bloomfields which are... well, introduced since late 2008.
Who needs an i7 950 or 960 when most of the 920's can do 4.2GHz 24/7 on air cooling ?
There goes the price tag difference when overclocking isn't "forbidden" or taken out of the question.

Which can match/beat the Phenom II x6 in a lot ( if not most ) cases if you simply overclock it to 4GHz or so.
Unless AMD's x6 can clock 250MHz or so higher, granted that we'd overclock both CPUs.

Sandy Bridge will come in 2011 and so will bulldozer and llano. I have been told that dual/quad cores will be out of the gate first. As far as i have heard these will be better than nehalem but not by a huge degree, so a quad llano will murder a dual sandy bridge but not a quad sandy bridge.

Phenom II x6 can also overclock look in the other thread the Phenom II x6 already OCed to 3850Mhz

I'm tired of "if you overlook this or that" when it comes to progress.
I want to see AMD surpassing Intel again, even if it's just 1% faster.

2011 is the year they may do that with bulldozer, i have been told Intel is in process of tweaking the 6/8 core sandy bridge specially for bulldozer.

This is why 6/8 core sandy bridge will come later than the quad one.

You know what I meant. I meant that it's an i7 920 just with a higher default clock frequency, it's not like it's any faster clock per clock or a crazy overclock untouchable by a 2008 i7 920 C1.

Well the multi is different and as such so is the price. If we use your logic then the cheapest processor with a specific arc is same as the high end one.

Also what is the difference between extrema editions of intel and normal ones?

I've got 2 birdies saying two different stories, I wouldn't disregard the possibility of getting released earlier

There is no way the 6/8 cores sandy bridge will come in Q4 2010 or Q1 2011 i have been told that the high end sandy bridge is being tweaked to perform better.

All I'm going to post is:

[*mg]http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=351735&thumb=false&iehack=.jpg[/img]

That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

Doesn't beat my old q6600 @ 3.7ghz

Core 2 Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz on Win7 64bit does 4.00 in cinebench 11.5 what are you talking about?

[[XC] Oj101]

All I'm going to post is:



That was the last time AMD was at least desktop-wise in front and VERY fun to overclock and bench with.

That was the last time I stayed up for 16 hours playing with SuperPi Overclocking has never been as much fun since, but you know I have to remove you now, right? I retired from overclocking for a year due to personal reasons but now I HAVE to have a session tonight

[Jowy Atreides]

Edit: server doubletoast glitch.

[Jowy Atreides]

All I see is... that you need to clean your glasses or pay a visit to a doctor to have your eyesight checked, the only 4GHz thing in the screenshot is an overclocked i5 750

All I see is you missing my satire on numberplay
The bench had a 960 in it, not a 950. The only 50 was a 750.

You need you number keys tested.