Zambezi ES performance weirdness

[XRL8]

There is not a bug. I am sorry that you can't comprehend this fact. There is nothing more I can say because you just aren't getting it.

Well , you could.Just explain why they perform worse than the athlon II.Not give out ALL possibile reasons for it.

Of course if im led to believe what youre saying, it means BD will have lower performance than deneb clock for clock.Ok.

Guys.
Do you really think statement "tuned for lower performance due to lower clocks" explains the behaviour of this samples ? And not only low clocks ?
If the chip doesnt have a bug and isnt crippled (ie microcode) on purpose.It just means That IPC wise it should perform like the final product.

So yes, im probably to stupid to comprehend something explained this vaguely.
"Chip performs as expected due to lower clocks, it has no bug, nor was intentionally crippled,it is slower than Athlon II CLOCK FOR CLOCK but it isnt"

@Allmighty, no bugs, no kinks to iron out, mainboards are final, only problem could be in CPU.

[SEA]

XRL8

What is your point, you posting and posting all this stuff?
What you need from samples that were never meant to be any fast?
Of course they must have erratas that fixed by microcode. This lets to use them as normal chips running with no errors though slow.

Again, what you are trying to tell?
You think production chips will be just little bit faster? Everybody had that thought (but dropped it because it won't make any sense)...
Or, you you think you caught JF lying and you have to bring this to everyone?
Or, what? Just aggressively guessing?

Wait just one month.

[LowRun]

First

And yes, im giving it a rest ;-)

And then...

Well , you could.Just explain why they perform worse than the athlon II.Not give out ALL possibile reasons for it.

Of course if im led to believe what youre saying, it means BD will have lower performance than deneb clock for clock.Ok.

Guys.
Do you really think statement "tuned for lower performance due to lower clocks" explains the behaviour of this samples ? And not only low clocks ?
If the chip doesnt have a bug and isnt crippled (ie microcode) on purpose.It just means That IPC wise it should perform like the final product.

So yes, im probably to stupid to comprehend something explained this vaguely.
"Chip performs as expected due to lower clocks, it has no bug, nor was intentionally crippled,it is slower than Athlon II CLOCK FOR CLOCK but it isnt"

@Allmighty, no bugs, no kinks to iron out, mainboards are final, only problem could be in CPU.