Page 41 of 181 FirstFirst ... 31383940414243445191141 ... LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,025 of 4519

Thread: AMD Zambezi news, info, fans !

  1. #1001
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomasis View Post
    but it is only 20c warm there?
    under 20 most of the time.
    Google tells me it's 14c right now

  2. #1002
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    145.21.4.???
    Posts
    319
    OBR blog updated.

    Googlish:
    For kids in the forum: I'm not saying there's always something else from the beginning, I argue that performance is poverty and IPC rose only moments (units per cent), that in my posts that you read your own performance projections, and God knows what, is your business. My general opinion of the performance has not changed, find the first and last post. The fact itself is unchanged at 4.6 GHz Ocing stabiulní for Spi ...

  3. #1003
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,215
    So he admits BIOSes are crippling the FX performance but "his opinion has not changed"?! That guy has no idea what he wants...
    Until FX launches and we have a review from some relevant hardware website,this guy is blowing smoke out of his ass with those BS ES numbers.He is just seeking attention,that's all.
    Not to mention he sold an BD ES over the web,an illegal thing to do.

  4. #1004
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Past
    Posts
    447
    to anyone wondering, he "whited out" all the results ,even the last one is partially whited out.

    @informal

    He said bios works badly on gigabyte, on msi it just doesnt work at all.And on Asus it works perfectly...
    However this shot could be from gigabyte.He didnt say.
    Last edited by XRL8; 06-24-2011 at 02:04 AM.

  5. #1005
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    145.21.4.???
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    Not to mention he sold an BD ES over the web,an illegal thing to do.
    One guy that update his blog frequently, to 'leak' secret, buy things from others, make flamebait in the message, everything indirectly prove that the guy doesn't have any trustable clue.

    EDIT
    Quote Originally Posted by XRL8 View Post
    to anyone wondering, he "whited out" all the results ,even the last one is partially whited out..
    B0 chip with no doubt.
    Last edited by undone; 06-24-2011 at 02:20 AM.

  6. #1006
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Past
    Posts
    447
    I looked at multithreaded results at anandtech.If 4 BD modules behave in multithreaded situations similarly to two PHII cores.BD would win pretty much all scores with 2600K,sometimes with a big margin.
    Thats just PHII cores at 1333mhz mem.If you add faster memory,new instructions, you have somewhat more boost.That leaves us with a cpu that is faster than current sandybridge in multithreaded situations.Just as expected.SuperPi with a statically set cpu frequency would look bad in that case, cause it doesnt use neither MT in any way, nor new instructions.But its useless as a real world scenario thing.

  7. #1007
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,755
    Could you please stop bringing some OBR stuff in here? The guy has always been a total joke like when he came and said the retail Q9600 G0 was a crappy OCer compared to the ES and that he tested two of them on two different mobos, then later on he came and said his bad results were due to faulty ram sticks (he edited out the faulty ram part afterward, probably realizing how dumb it did make him look). Who needs computer hardware lecture from someone who can't even spot faulty ram sticks?
    Crosshair IV Formula
    Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.7G
    6950~>6970 @ 900/1300
    4 x 2G Ballistix 1333 CL6
    C300 64G
    Corsair TX 850W
    CM HAF 932

  8. #1008
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    239
    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news....aspx?pageid=1

    AMD Insiders Speak Out: BAPCo Exit is An Excuse for Poor Bulldozer Performance

    When asked about core performance, surprising information was that a Bulldozer core versus the existing cores in Llano will result in minimal improvements overall.

  9. #1009
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by AKM View Post
    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news....aspx?pageid=1

    AMD Insiders Speak Out: BAPCo Exit is An Excuse for Poor Bulldozer Performance
    Well...that's disappointing.

  10. #1010
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,215
    LoL the same Theo Valich who "brought" us Reverse Hyperthreading? World has not been the same ever since.
    Guy is full of it and HE knows it.Unsuspecting masses don't,unfortunately.

    BTW He "saw" the Bulldozer Vs Sandybridge "integer" scores from "internal" AMD document in which BD supposedly destroys SB at the same clock,but fails in floating point.Another BS article written by that guy.

  11. #1011
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Posts
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    So he admits BIOSes are crippling the FX performance but "his opinion has not changed"?! That guy has no idea what he wants...
    Until FX launches and we have a review from some relevant hardware website,this guy is blowing smoke out of his ass with those BS ES numbers.He is just seeking attention,that's all.
    Not to mention he sold an BD ES over the web,an illegal thing to do.
    XS need to stop posting vaporware from this guy.

    In some other forums people(haters/negative guys/need a excuse to justify SB) take their cinebench numbers like the bible wich means that top FX 8000 cpu performs worse than my AII X4 620, even when costing 5x more
    Athlon II X4 620 2.6Ghz @1.1125v | Foxconn A7DA-S (790GX) | 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066
    | Gigabyte HD4770 | Seagate 7200.12 3x1TB | Samsung F4 HD204UI 2x2TB | LG H10N | OCZ StealthXStream 500w| Coolermaster Hyper 212+ | Compaq MV740 17"

    Stock HSF: 18°C idle / 37°C load (15°C ambient)
    Hyper 212+: 16°C idle / 29°C load (15°C ambient)

    Why AMD Radeon rumors/leaks "are not always accurate"
    Reality check

  12. #1012
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    746
    ah Theo Valich...I remember that name from somewhere in the "slag AMD" annals of time. whatever. my focus isn't on desktop but on server. consequently, I could really care less about Zambezi as a consumer exercise.
    Heat: 50 - 0 - 0 under "Argus333"

  13. #1013
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Past
    Posts
    447
    Quote Originally Posted by Nintendork View Post
    XS need to stop posting vaporware from this guy.
    Hate to be the devils advocate.
    but the numbers hes posting are the best of all the other leaks.He also confirms that most mainboards have bios issues with BD (which i find a bit worrying).
    He also shows that even that early BD sample overclocks very well.
    As for the single thread ,B0 may have low clocked uncore.Which can give for example weak gaming scores.Just a theory.
    Anyhow, its not like we have many leaks to choose from, the other ones posted crappy numbers and silenced.

  14. #1014
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Tennessee (from Minnesota)
    Posts
    241
    YAY Another long post due to not reading the thread for 2 pages lol [/sorry]

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalipse View Post
    As far as core scaling goes, when both BD cores in each module are being used, AMD themselves said multi-threaded performance would increase by 80% (remember 80% more than 100% is 180%)
    And that's not compared to K10. That's compared to doing one thread on one BD core.

    AMD also said they got "50% more performance from 33% more cores"
    Of course they didn't say what type of workload. But in that context I'd assume it means something that uses >=8 threads (still not THAT specific).
    I think the biggest thing you're forgetting is that those are all G34 Server related performance numbers. I've yet to see anything from AMD on Bulldozer talk about it in context of the consumer desktop chips. While yes, it's the same architecture between them, I have a feeling that it won't run on HT3.1 specs for 990FX. We all know what going from just 2000MHz to 2600 or 2800MHz can do for performance gains (I've been doing a lot of AIDA benching with my 1090T if you've not seen anyone show the difference). So not only is that something to consider, but also that those numbers might actually be in relation to server-oriented tasks. 50% more performance for serving content over the web or crunching simulations for what-have-you, doesn't necessarily equate to 50% more performance for gaming or raising your EP [e-peen] level when playing MMOBUC [benchmark, upload, compar] on HWBot lol Seriously though, who knows how it will pan out for us :\ OBR's memory scores in AIDA are rather odd (see: low), especially considering it's at 1866 :\ The L1 comparatively seems to be rather low, L2 is alright and parts of L3 seems quite low. Mem write is bad, with read being the only significant gain. Though I've gotten close to that with 1090T @ 3.2/3.6T with NB@2800 with 4x2GB DDR3-1600 8-8-8-20 1T 26 5-5-5-8-7-6-2-4-4 110ns (yea, those sub timings aren't JEDEC but I can translate if anyone cares).


    Quote Originally Posted by XRL8 View Post
    However the guy is known for having its connections and getting ES stuff, while he is disliked by most guys here, no one "in the know" dismissed tha fact that he gets samples.They are even irritated because he breaks NDA`s and still gets samples.
    Guy has pictures of samples, guy has sold one , he provided many screenshots.What more do you want ?
    UGH, tell me about it But, I guess that's the benefit of being a valued tester (it's the only thing that makes sense given what's happened...)


    Quote Originally Posted by XRL8 View Post
    As far as i remember there is only one price leak, and its a simple excel chart,and not confirmed in any way at that...
    Well I had asked my friend who has the dual Interlagos if he knew of what the 8100 FX models would run and that was before the leaked prices came out, which he had said "they're saying* low $300-400" [*general corporate 'campfire talk' from people privileged to know/access that info, I think he means]. So while both my info and the original can't be confirmed, I think it's a fair bet we'll see them arrive at those prices.


    Quote Originally Posted by undone View Post
    One guy that update his blog frequently, to 'leak' secret, buy things from others, make flamebait in the message, everything indirectly prove that the guy doesn't have any trustable clue.
    I think you're talking about just OBR in that msg, and if so then I think that's probably rather accurate lol Who knows, maybe he's something like the lead QC person at one of the big mobo makers and since AMD has gone through 2 steppings now, working on their third, those are the old test samples. BUT perhaps he is also and INTELamer and is 'sabotaging' the results lol [Disclaimer: OBR, if you read this, I'm speculatively joking, so don't get all bent out of shape lol]


    Quote Originally Posted by XRL8 View Post
    Hate to be the devils advocate.
    but the numbers hes posting are the best of all the other leaks. He also confirms that most mainboards have bios issues with BD (which i find a bit worrying).
    He also shows that even that early BD sample overclocks very well.
    As for the single thread ,B0 may have low clocked uncore. Which can give for example weak gaming scores. Just a theory.
    Anyhow, its not like we have many leaks to choose from, the other ones posted crappy numbers and silenced.
    BIOS issues on 990FX boards I assume was/is implied? I mean, I know it's the same chips and all, but some boards ARE new designs and so more than likely a fresh BIOS. Especially considering they are UEFI now too. Boards like the 890FX Extreme4 and 890FXA-GD65 though I'm quite certain are carbon copies of the 890FX variants. Doing a back and forth between the GD65 shows that the only difference layout-wise is no Clr_CMOS jumer installed on the 990FX model, some adjustments/additions to silkscreened labels and the change on the heatsinks from Blue to Black (though it does look like the 990's heatsink is a hair smaller). Then again these boards are likely to be simply ones that were already made for BD, but when things originally got delayed they just released them as a silly stop-gap under the 890 branding. Because the board model on the GD65 both say "MS-7640 VER: 3.0" heh Wonder if flashing the 990's BIOS (with it's 990 model number strings) on the "890" version will soft mod them to a 990, giving those owners SLI capability...?


    STOP! NOBODY POST FOR A SECOND SO THIS REPLY IS CURRENT!! lol
    Last edited by Formula350; 06-24-2011 at 08:01 AM.

  15. #1015
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by AKM View Post
    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news....aspx?pageid=1

    AMD Insiders Speak Out: BAPCo Exit is An Excuse for Poor Bulldozer Performance
    Because let's just ignore the fact that Nvidia and Via also decided to quit.
    Is Nvidia "angry about their GPU's being sub-par to Intel"? lol......
    Last edited by Apokalipse; 06-24-2011 at 12:58 PM.

  16. #1016
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    970
    Quote Originally Posted by dave_graham View Post
    ah Theo Valich...I remember that name from somewhere in the "slag AMD" annals of time. whatever. my focus isn't on desktop but on server. consequently, I could really care less about Zambezi as a consumer exercise.
    Will be interested to see your opinion once/if you get one, and when you can talk about it.

  17. #1017
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    235
    a 32nm part running at 1.5v...gimme a break
    ---
    ---
    "Generally speaking, CMOS power consumption is the result of charging and discharging gate capacitors. The charge required to fully charge the gate grows with the voltage; charge times frequency is current. Voltage times current is power. So, as you raise the voltage, the current consumption grows linearly, and the power consumption quadratically, at a fixed frequency. Once you reach the frequency limit of the chip without raising the voltage, further frequency increases are normally proportional to voltage. In other words, once you have to start raising the voltage, power consumption tends to rise with the cube of frequency."
    +++
    1st
    CPU - 2600K(4.4ghz)/Mobo - AsusEvo/RAM - 8GB1866mhz/Cooler - VX/Gfx - Radeon 6950/PSU - EnermaxModu87+700W
    +++
    2nd
    TRUltra-120Xtreme /// EnermaxModu82+(625w) /// abitIP35pro/// YorkfieldQ9650-->3906mhz(1.28V) /// 640AAKS & samsung F1 1T &samsung F1640gb&F1 RAID 1T /// 4gigs of RAM-->520mhz /// radeon 4850(700mhz)-->TRHR-03 GT
    ++++
    3rd
    Windsor4200(11x246-->2706mhz-->1.52v) : Zalman9500 : M2N32-SLI Deluxe : 2GB ddr2 SuperTalent-->451mhz : seagate 7200.10 320GB :7900GT(530/700) : Tagan530w

  18. #1018
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok,Thailand (DamHot)
    Posts
    2,693
    4.6xxxGHz @ 1.5xxxxV not look good
    Intel Core i5 6600K + ASRock Z170 OC Formula + Galax HOF 4000 (8GBx2) + Antec 1200W OC Version
    EK SupremeHF + BlackIce GTX360 + Swiftech 655 + XSPC ResTop
    Macbook Pro 15" Late 2011 (i7 2760QM + HD 6770M)
    Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014) , Huawei Nexus 6P
    [history system]80286 80386 80486 Cyrix K5 Pentium133 Pentium II Duron1G Athlon1G E2180 E3300 E5300 E7200 E8200 E8400 E8500 E8600 Q9550 QX6800 X3-720BE i7-920 i3-530 i5-750 Semp140@x2 955BE X4-B55 Q6600 i5-2500K i7-2600K X4-B60 X6-1055T FX-8120 i7-4790K

  19. #1019
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by PatRaceTin View Post
    4.6xxxGHz @ 1.5xxxxV not look good
    I assume that it has been read out correctly. If that is a modified base clock (original should be 3.2GHz) I'd like to know if any turbo modes had been switched off.
    Now on Twitter: @Dresdenboy!
    Blog: http://citavia.blog.de/

  20. #1020
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    I think yes...but
    1)u can nnot compare 32nm INtel and 32nm AMD. Look at AMD history...65nm Phenoms has about 1.45V as safe voltage, but Phenoms II at 45nm 1.55V! BD is still SOI with HK!
    2) its ES
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  21. #1021
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    145.21.4.???
    Posts
    319
    Few months have past, still no meaningful info, sigh.

  22. #1022
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    831
    Dont worry, litle baby-monster will come out of AMD in few months

    ::: Desktop's - Intel *** Intel 2
    2 x Xeon E5-2687W *** Intel i7 3930k
    EVGA SR-X *** Asus Rampage IV Extreme
    96Gb (12x8Gb) G.Skill Trident X DDR3-2400MHz 10-12-12-2N *** 32Gb (8x4Gb) G.Skill Trident X DDR3-2666 10-12-12-2N
    3 x Zotac GTX 680 4Gb + EK-FC680 GTX Acetal *** 3 x EVGA GeForce GTX780 + EK Titan XXL Edition waterblocks.
    OCZ RevoDrive 3 x4 960Gb *** 4 x Samsung 840 Pro 512Gb
    Avermedia LiveGamer HD capture card
    Caselabs TX10-D
    14 x 4 TB WD RE4 in RAID10+2Spare
    4 x Corsair AX1200

    ::: Basement DataCenter :::
    [*] Fibreoptic connection from operators core network
    [*] Dell PowerConnect 2848 Ethernet Switch [*] Network Security Devices by Cisco
    [*] Dell EqualLogic PS6500E 96Tb iSCSI SAN (40 2Tb Drives + 8 Spare Drives, Raid10+Spare Configuration, 40Tb fail safe storage)
    [*] Additional SAN machines with FusionIO ioDrive Octal's (4 total Octals).
    [*] 10 x Dual Xeon X5680, 12Gb DDR3, 2x100Gb Vertex 2 Pro Raid1 [*] 4 x Quad Xeon E7-4870, 96Gb DDR3, 2x100Gb Vertex 2 Pro Raid1

    [*] Monster UPS unit incase power grid failure backed up by diesel powered generator.

  23. #1023
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Tennessee (from Minnesota)
    Posts
    241
    The ONLY thing that I've got going for me with the whole Bulldozer thing, is I'll be on Vacation here from Jul 8 to Aug 5, so when I get back then Dozer will hopefully be out in the next couple days!

    GOD I hate this, but it better be for a damn good reason AMD! If you make it worth our while then I think you'll be unanimously forgiven -_-

  24. #1024
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    235
    even for the current AMD cpus 1.55v is borderline degrading.
    with or without SOI no way the new 32nm generation AMD cpus wont degrade at 1.55v...thats prolly just a suicide shot just to show that 4.6ghz is doable on the Bulldozer
    ---
    ---
    "Generally speaking, CMOS power consumption is the result of charging and discharging gate capacitors. The charge required to fully charge the gate grows with the voltage; charge times frequency is current. Voltage times current is power. So, as you raise the voltage, the current consumption grows linearly, and the power consumption quadratically, at a fixed frequency. Once you reach the frequency limit of the chip without raising the voltage, further frequency increases are normally proportional to voltage. In other words, once you have to start raising the voltage, power consumption tends to rise with the cube of frequency."
    +++
    1st
    CPU - 2600K(4.4ghz)/Mobo - AsusEvo/RAM - 8GB1866mhz/Cooler - VX/Gfx - Radeon 6950/PSU - EnermaxModu87+700W
    +++
    2nd
    TRUltra-120Xtreme /// EnermaxModu82+(625w) /// abitIP35pro/// YorkfieldQ9650-->3906mhz(1.28V) /// 640AAKS & samsung F1 1T &samsung F1640gb&F1 RAID 1T /// 4gigs of RAM-->520mhz /// radeon 4850(700mhz)-->TRHR-03 GT
    ++++
    3rd
    Windsor4200(11x246-->2706mhz-->1.52v) : Zalman9500 : M2N32-SLI Deluxe : 2GB ddr2 SuperTalent-->451mhz : seagate 7200.10 320GB :7900GT(530/700) : Tagan530w

  25. #1025
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    138
    Screenshot still shows 186W as TDP Which means that the chips would be like Power 7 chips? 5 Ghz+ at launch?

    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news....aspx?pageid=0

    I think Charlie should may be say something about this... could it be that Intel is paying bsn, or someone else is misleading them, plain and simple. Think about it this way... Intel is the only chip manufacturer there on BAPCo, rest all have left. If you take out credibility of someone, you don't have to discredit what they're saying.

    We have on one hand, a guy with SR2 rig, 'Rintamarotta!!!' ding ding ding... who's claimed in an earlier post that it would easily best 990X. On the other hand we have people who're saying the opposite. The again we have OBR who's just being a total tool... as he could share some information as long as he hasn't signed a NDA(even a gentleman's agreement), i think that's fairly ok.

Page 41 of 181 FirstFirst ... 31383940414243445191141 ... 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
  •