Ridiculous scores.
I already posted about it on another forum.
If you look at the chiphell topic ,the OP is confused.He lists the ES which is clearly 6 core by the code,but then posts a screenshot of an 8 core ES from different week and with different revision marker.
Then comes the C10 result of 2340pts for single core,which is on the level of ~2.58Ghz Phenom II.You can see 32bit C10 results here:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2511&page=10. Scaling of 4.85x is close to 6 core scaling number but CPUz now shows alleged 8 core Zambezi ES.
Similar goes for Super pi in which alleged Zambezi has 12% less performance than 2.8Ghz Phenom II:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...id=2511&page=8
Lastly ,we have a lowly CPU score from 3dmark06,4900pts,which is a tad lower than what 6 core 1055T gets as can be seen here.Also note that 945 QuadCore Phenom II at 3 Ghz has 14% lower score than this supposed 8 core 2.8Ghz Zambezi. Just ridiculous.
So we have a 10%-30% decrease,according to this "info",when going to Bulldozer.Mind you ,this is almost all fp intensive workload we see and somehow Bulldozer is sucking in it. We've already seen AMD slide which lists 8 core XX Ghz Zambezi as having around 1.88x the score of 1100T Thuban in C11.5. So we can easily dismiss this whole "test" as either fake one or done on some barely running hardware.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks