AMD Opteron Benchmarks?

[TriggerHappy101]

Everyone seems to be jumping up and down for the Opteron. I have yet to see any benchmarks comparing them to AMD 64 Athlons. (overclocked or not.)

Anyone know of any proffestional benchmarks?

 

[mykemyk2006]

Well they are bascially the same as the most 64's with 1mb cache. However they are tested more rigoursly and can overclock a hell of alot better.

 

[Erasertone]

there are lots of benches here if you're not lazy enough to search it especially in THG. but nowadays benches are somewhat "BIAS" almost 30% of ppl in any forum think that.

 

[EagleEye]

Yeah, cpu-z just reports it as 2 toledo cores for me. I thinkt hey perform the same as the non-server counterparts. Like if I clocked mine 80mhz faster, it would have the exact same bench as a stock FX-60.

 

[TriggerHappy101]

Originally posted by: Erasertone
there are lots of benches here if you're not lazy enough to search it especially in THG. but nowadays benches are somewhat "BIAS" almost 30% of ppl in any forum think that.

I did a search before posting and I didnt find any posts. And of course benchmarks are bias, but gives you a good idea where they stand.

 

[ribbon13]

If you want to see how my SO's Opteron 175 performs look at FX-60 benches.

 

[Greenman]

Originally posted by: TriggerHappy101
Everyone seems to be jumping up and down for the Opteron. I have yet to see any benchmarks comparing them to AMD 64 Athlons. (overclocked or not.)

Anyone know of any proffestional benchmarks?

They should bench the same as a sandy of the same speed. It's overclocking where they reall shine.

 

[TriggerHappy101]

bump

 

[nerp]

Think of it this way. I got an Opteron 148. It shares the same core as the FX-57. I overclocked mine to 2.8 Ghz. Thus, I have an FX-57 which I paid $207 for.

 

[eXx08]

Originally posted by: nerp
Think of it this way. I got an Opteron 148. It shares the same core as the FX-57. I overclocked mine to 2.8 Ghz. Thus, I have an FX-57 which I paid $207 for.

Same here.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

if you ovecloacked i too 2.8 isn't that a fx-60.

oh sorry i missed the fact that 148 has 1 core.

 

[imported_electron]

Originally posted by: Opteron Guy

Originally posted by: nerp
Think of it this way. I got an Opteron 148. It shares the same core as the FX-57. I overclocked mine to 2.8 Ghz. Thus, I have an FX-57 which I paid $207 for.

Same here.

What kind of HSF did you 2 use?

 

[t3h l337 n3wb]

Opterons are pretty much the exact same thing as Athlon 64's, but they overclock better, and you can get 1MB/2MB cache for cheap.

 

[TriggerHappy101]

I would still like to see benchmarks. And what kind of cooling do I need to overclock the proccessor? Lemme guess, a 40 dollar sink?

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: TriggerHappy101
I would still like to see benchmarks. And what kind of cooling do I need to overclock the proccessor? Lemme guess, a 40 dollar sink?

stock 144(1.8GHz) running normally, as in all the programs i normally have running -

+ 000h 00m 00s [ 32K]
+ 000h 00m 01s [ 64K]
+ 000h 00m 03s [ 128K]
+ 000h 00m 08s [ 256K]
+ 000h 00m 20s [ 512K]
+ 000h 00m 44s [ 1M]
+ 000h 01m 46s [ 2M]
+ 000h 03m 49s [ 4M]
+ 000h 08m 17s [ 8M]
+ 000h 18m 21s [ 16M]

 

[arcenite]

Originally posted by: Opteron Guy

Originally posted by: nerp
Think of it this way. I got an Opteron 148. It shares the same core as the FX-57. I overclocked mine to 2.8 Ghz. Thus, I have an FX-57 which I paid $207 for.

Same here.

oh yeahh????? Well for all intents and purposes I am 200mhz short of having two of them for the price of $270

 

[TriggerHappy101]

So would you suggest the Opteron over the athlon for performance for the money?

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: TriggerHappy101
So would you suggest the Opteron over the athlon for performance for the money?

since you can pick up the 144 for ~$150 and you are almost to have the same or better o/c ability over the normal a64, why not?

if you leave them both stock, a 144 @ 1.8GHz won't be too far behind a 3200 venice @ 2.0GHz(as in you will not notice it) or you could get a opteron 146 and be equal in GHz plus additional cache(again you would not notice the difference).

i went the opteron because i wanted to o/c...

 

[ValuedCustomer]

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Opterons are pretty much the exact same thing as Athlon 64's, but they overclock better, and you can get 1MB/2MB cache for cheap.

Not that I don't believe you (cuz I do) but if Opterons are so similar to Athlons then why'd AMD put these things on the market? There's gotta be some sort of advantage/disadvantage for either besides overclocking potential..

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Opterons are pretty much the exact same thing as Athlon 64's, but they overclock better, and you can get 1MB/2MB cache for cheap.

Not that I don't believe you (cuz I do) but if Opterons are so similar to Athlons then why'd AMD put these things on the market? There's gotta be some sort of advantage/disadvantage for either..

opterons are "server" cpus, meaning they are the best of the best and of the highest quality standards meant to be in mission critical equipment that will run 24/7/years.

you could say they are all the same, but some are better than others due to silicon etc and other stuff i don't know about.

i think they put them on the market for the price to try to take over or grab more of the server market from intel. we, the "power users" just get a bonus for our desktop machines

 

[Ike0069]

Bob is absolutely correct.
AMD released these chips for the server market, to try and gain more shares against Intel.
But the enthusiast crowd figured out how well they OC, and word spread quickly.

There are rumors that AMD will stop selling these resellers, and only let OEM builders get them because they are cutting into the X2 sales too much. Not sure if this is true or not, but they do seem to be getting more scarce.

 

[TriggerHappy101]

So what one is better for gaming? >< argh!

 

[RichUK]

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1780973&enterthread=y

This thread should help.

 

[TriggerHappy101]

Yeah, but doesnt really say much for singel core's. I posted a reply on the thread.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: TriggerHappy101
Yeah, but doesnt really say much for singel core's. I posted a reply on the thread.

its basically stating the fact that there is no difference.

For instance an Athlon 3700+ is the same as an Opteron 148, as is the Athlon 4000+ and a Opteron 150.

And also an FX57 with an OCed opteron at 2.8Ghz.

The only thing that is different is the name of the processor and the name of the core. Even with the different names they are identical and will perform the same at comparable speeds (they are all E4 revs). Although the opterons are the same processor to the equivalent Athlon, the silicon is binned differently, thus graded with higher yield silicon, which in turn produces better OC?s (which is quite evident). Hence all the fuss, when you can get a FX57 or 59 for that matter for a very cheap price

Moral: they just use different names, but Opterons OC better.