Originally posted by: soonerproud
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: soonerproud
Originally posted by: SolMiester
Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?
A Q6600 is a C2D processor. The 2 in the C2D does not represent the number of cores. It means it is the second architecture in the core family line up.
Core2 you mean. There's Core2Duo and Core2Quad
I thought about that when I went outside to smoke.
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: soonerproud
Originally posted by: SolMiester
Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?
A Q6600 is a C2D processor. The 2 in the C2D does not represent the number of cores. It means it is the second architecture in the core family line up.
Core2 you mean. There's Core2Duo and Core2Quad
Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
I say that 15% is a huge disappointment simply because it took an enormous team of engineers several years to reach that goal. I'll bet they would have made more gains by having those people research manufacturing and chipset design.
If K10 ends up 20% faster than K8 . I think the engineers did a great Job. On the low clocked K10 power consumpsion looked good. K10 is looking good. I think to many people had to high of expectations for this old core. Really how far back does this core really go? Links please!
Though you can say part of A64's success is Intel's fault with Prescott, and part of the reason Barcelona looks bad is because Intel exceeded everyone's expectations with Conroe. Nobody expected Conroe's performance before the numbers started trickling out. Everyone expected that with same FSB, it would be just like a Yonah. However, we have seen its much more than that. People also doubted Intel's ability to clock Conroe cores to more than 2.5GHz, thinking of Yonah. They came out with 2.93GHz EE.
Even tho I am new here . I have read the forums an articles here for years. I do recall a woman that actually called the Merom performance numbers right on the head. I tried to find the threads but can't remember her name. But she actually after the facts came out . Pawned all.
You can say this is like a Geforce 5800 vs Radeon 9700 comparison. Geforce 5800 would have been impressive if ATI didn't manage to pull out an even more impressive R9700.
Very true
Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.
If you have the force one must learn how to control it
Yes, of course, so why are you posting here at all?? It's about people that actually cares about the difference that's posting here. After all, if people buy what they only need, Intel wouldn't have been doing suddenly better by introducing Core 2, and AMD wouldn't have been in trouble.
Exactly
It's not unlikely to think that Phenom scores will improve by at least 10%. Memory gains from using higher speed non server DDR2 667 RAM should be somewhere around 5%. Mature chipset drivers catered specifically for desktop apps should yield another 5% as well. These preliminary scores are very promising in the server arena, but if AMD wants to regain lost share in the desktop arena they better pray they can get those clockspeeds up.
I would say between 5-10% is realistic
That sir, won't happen. Some people seem to have forgot Anand's early Conroe review at IDF, and how people complained of BIOS not recognizing K8 CPU and its a crappy chipset etc etc. We found out later how much the latest BIOS brought to the table. An average of 1-2%.
Well one could always go and get those early reviews and compare them to the up and coming X38 reviews . I think you will find that 2-3% is way low est.
About chipset and memory:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3042&p=6
Look above, look how irrevalent chipsets are to performance. Unless we are comparing totally ignored chipsets like Via's and SiS's, chipset, performance difference between the slowest and the fastest chipset don't exceed 3%, and majority of the time its under 2.5%. And one of major changes to Barcelona/Phenom is greatly enhanced memory controllers. If anything, it will benefit less than Opteron does from faster memory.
People like to dream .
Originally posted by: Phynaz
Jeez, think man!!
There is a switch between the HT lanes and the MC. They are not connected. Changing one does not affect the other.
Got it yet?
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: soonerproud
Originally posted by: SolMiester
Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?
A Q6600 is a C2D processor. The 2 in the C2D does not represent the number of cores. It means it is the second architecture in the core family line up.
Core2 you mean. There's Core2Duo and Core2Quad
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: Phynaz
Jeez, think man!!
There is a switch between the HT lanes and the MC. They are not connected. Changing one does not affect the other.
Got it yet?
I think you need to learn the difference between a hub and a switch...
When a hub receives a packet, it retransmits it to all connected devices...a switch creates a direct connection between the source and destination.
Both the cache and HT3 controller are connected to the MC via the crossbar switch, but this in no way changes the requirements of the MC to be able to communicate directly to either as the switch doesn't change the signalling at all...it just determines the source/destination.
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: Phynaz
Jeez, think man!!
There is a switch between the HT lanes and the MC. They are not connected. Changing one does not affect the other.
Got it yet?
I think you need to learn the difference between a hub and a switch...
When a hub receives a packet, it retransmits it to all connected devices...a switch creates a direct connection between the source and destination.
Both the cache and HT3 controller are connected to the MC via the crossbar switch, but this in no way changes the requirements of the MC to be able to communicate directly to either as the switch doesn't change the signalling at all...it just determines the source/destination.
Originally posted by: Regs
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
His point (I think) was that a rather large percentage of PC users do not need the best of the best. For what most people do with their PC's, a Celeron or Sempron is waaaaay more than enough and perhaps overkill. Depends on what they do. If all they do is browse the web and watch movies, Play their mp3's, burn CD's DVD's, etcetera, they don't need crazy super powered juggernaut CPU's. Gamers "might" have an occasion to need such power.
Distributed Computing folks like Mark, Duvie and others may need the most power they can get their hands on. Points are points after all .
The old saying is more is not always better but just more. However in today's buyers world, people who make over 100k a year will take out a 30 year loan just so they can spend money on a 6 million dollar house.
It's the marketers job to sell you a need with an item and not just an item. How many things have you bought in the past that you realized you didn't really need? I can think of plenty, like a new car.
We should stop kidding ourselves and realize that there is a performance craze out there. If people don't want or need performance, they want what's new and exciting and the Penryn and Core Duo are precisely that. It drives prestige and attention to the product.
does the opteron I bought 2 mos ago count?Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.
I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.
Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: Phynaz
Jeez, think man!!
There is a switch between the HT lanes and the MC. They are not connected. Changing one does not affect the other.
Got it yet?
I think you need to learn the difference between a hub and a switch...
When a hub receives a packet, it retransmits it to all connected devices...a switch creates a direct connection between the source and destination.
Both the cache and HT3 controller are connected to the MC via the crossbar switch, but this in no way changes the requirements of the MC to be able to communicate directly to either as the switch doesn't change the signalling at all...it just determines the source/destination.
So A hub is like a buss. And a switch is like what?A point to point interrupt or is it a lane change?
who's making a full sized suv with a 5.8L v8???? Ford has a 5.4, chevy has a 5.3, toyota has, um, something smaller than 5.8, nissan has 5.6... just looked it up, toyota is 5.7.Originally posted by: TekDemon
Originally posted by: fishmonger12
Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.
So I don't think this as big of a disappointment as people paint it to be, nor will it have a large effect on the business side of amd in the desktop space. It will matter in the server space, and guess what, it's actually competitive there.
you poor thing. you actually think modern consumerist culture cares about what's needed. Most Americans don't need a full size SUV with a 5.8liter v8, but that doesn't stop people from buying it.
ever read a car review where they recommended an otherwise comparable car with less power?
Seriously, the whole reason to even buy a new pc is to have more than enough power so it won't be obsolete for a while. So overkill is the name of the game.
And if overkilling it with a quad core intel is only an extra 80 bucks...
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
who's making a full sized suv with a 5.8L v8???? Ford has a 5.4, chevy has a 5.3, toyota has, um, something smaller than 5.8, nissan has 5.6... just looked it up, toyota is 5.7.Originally posted by: TekDemon
Originally posted by: fishmonger12
Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.
So I don't think this as big of a disappointment as people paint it to be, nor will it have a large effect on the business side of amd in the desktop space. It will matter in the server space, and guess what, it's actually competitive there.
you poor thing. you actually think modern consumerist culture cares about what's needed. Most Americans don't need a full size SUV with a 5.8liter v8, but that doesn't stop people from buying it.
ever read a car review where they recommended an otherwise comparable car with less power?
Seriously, the whole reason to even buy a new pc is to have more than enough power so it won't be obsolete for a while. So overkill is the name of the game.
And if overkilling it with a quad core intel is only an extra 80 bucks...
Originally posted by: SickBeast
The P4 is the *only* CPU I remember that had a lower IPC than anything that came before it.Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Well, I suppose what is really important is that AMD is showing signs of actual activity. A product was released. They are doing something. And the product is not half bad. 15% better than K8 clock for clock isn't bad at all. Consider how good the K8 was/is. Don't look at Intel for the moment. A 15+/- improvement over a previous gen is quite good.
And you can't really go by P4 to C2D because P4 was in big trouble compared to K8's. For all the hardships AMD is going through right now, I have to give them props for even getting that 15%. I was anticipating a flop to be honest. But this wasn't a flop, even though it's not spectacular either.
I say that 15% is a huge disappointment simply because it took an enormous team of engineers several years to reach that goal. I'll bet they would have made more gains by having those people research manufacturing and chipset design.
I suppose one could make the argument that the fastest P3s were faster than some of the P4s at launch, but really, I don't see the P4 as much of an engineering success...
The one saving grace for AMD may be higher memory clocks. I'm pretty sure Gary Key stated that the chips like high bandwidth memory. Maybe some of you with C2Ds can let us know what kind of hit you take by running at DDR667 speeds. :light:
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Most Americans DONT buy a full size SUV with a 5.8 liter v8. Best sellers are toyota's, Honda's, economical on fuel and well built.
sorry, keys, but other than the engine size he got it right. Ford/gm/dodge sell more suv's with a v8 than toyota and honda sell of their v6's by a very large margin. now, toyota and nissan do sell large v8 suv's, too, but they aren't even close to gm's sales in that category.
I've read that in several articles over the past year, too. Let me bust out my henri richard search info...Originally posted by: Phynaz
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: Phynaz
Jeez, think man!!
There is a switch between the HT lanes and the MC. They are not connected. Changing one does not affect the other.
Got it yet?
I think you need to learn the difference between a hub and a switch...
When a hub receives a packet, it retransmits it to all connected devices...a switch creates a direct connection between the source and destination.
Both the cache and HT3 controller are connected to the MC via the crossbar switch, but this in no way changes the requirements of the MC to be able to communicate directly to either as the switch doesn't change the signalling at all...it just determines the source/destination.
That's where you are wrong. Multiple people here have attempted to correct you. But hey, feel free to believe whatever you want.
BTW, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that Henri attempted to resign a year ago.
LOLOriginally posted by: keysplayr2003
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
who's making a full sized suv with a 5.8L v8???? Ford has a 5.4, chevy has a 5.3, toyota has, um, something smaller than 5.8, nissan has 5.6... just looked it up, toyota is 5.7.Originally posted by: TekDemon
Originally posted by: fishmonger12
Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.
So I don't think this as big of a disappointment as people paint it to be, nor will it have a large effect on the business side of amd in the desktop space. It will matter in the server space, and guess what, it's actually competitive there.
you poor thing. you actually think modern consumerist culture cares about what's needed. Most Americans don't need a full size SUV with a 5.8liter v8, but that doesn't stop people from buying it.
ever read a car review where they recommended an otherwise comparable car with less power?
Seriously, the whole reason to even buy a new pc is to have more than enough power so it won't be obsolete for a while. So overkill is the name of the game.
And if overkilling it with a quad core intel is only an extra 80 bucks...
Maybe he meant a "used" full sized SUV with a 5.8.
I used to have a Bronco with a 5.8. Holy gas guzzler and when I tell you th...................
..................oops......... so how bout them Barcelonas!!!!
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: Phynaz
Jeez, think man!!
There is a switch between the HT lanes and the MC. They are not connected. Changing one does not affect the other.
Got it yet?
I think you need to learn the difference between a hub and a switch...
When a hub receives a packet, it retransmits it to all connected devices...a switch creates a direct connection between the source and destination.
Both the cache and HT3 controller are connected to the MC via the crossbar switch, but this in no way changes the requirements of the MC to be able to communicate directly to either as the switch doesn't change the signalling at all...it just determines the source/destination.
So A hub is like a buss. And a switch is like what?A point to point interrupt or is it a lane change?
More like a lane change, with the SRI as the traffic cop.
Edit: BTW, there is no cache, buffer, or processer within the crossbar switch, so it would be impossible for it to change the signaling.
While I prefer your description as a bus, I chose hub because the MCH (Memory Controller Hub) on the Intel FSB model does a similar thing...just differently.
For the FSB model, a hub actually makes more sense than a switch as long as you have plenty of cache to overcome the latency issues. In general, a switch is far more expensive to make...you need to not only create the switchable interconnects, but you also need to create the switching control.
For a good description of the differences between a hub and a switch, check this link.
There's also a good article comparing the MCH and Crossbar here.
The hit is virtually non-existant, even when running the FSB at 333MHz.Originally posted by: SickBeast
Maybe some of you with C2Ds can let us know what kind of hit you take by running at DDR667 speeds. :light:
Originally posted by: jones377
If you are going to maintain that HT3 is going to have a positive effect on single-socket Phenom performance you need to provide technical details about its operation in conjunction with the memory controller. Show once and for all how it's going to happen. You can't just rely on other people's inability to disprove your fuzzy assertions by nitpicking on details that stray further and further from the subject at hand. If you cannot conclusively show how it's going to happen then admit that you are just hoping/speculating.
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: jones377
If you are going to maintain that HT3 is going to have a positive effect on single-socket Phenom performance you need to provide technical details about its operation in conjunction with the memory controller. Show once and for all how it's going to happen. You can't just rely on other people's inability to disprove your fuzzy assertions by nitpicking on details that stray further and further from the subject at hand. If you cannot conclusively show how it's going to happen then admit that you are just hoping/speculating.
Well firstly, that wasn't what I was doing...
My assertion was that since Phenom will require a new rev and new mem controller, there is no way that any conclusions can be drawn from this Engineering Sample of Barcelona.
My point in this is that any predictions of Agena's performance are "just hoping/speculating", no matter which way that speculation goes.
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Originally posted by: Regs
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
His point (I think) was that a rather large percentage of PC users do not need the best of the best. For what most people do with their PC's, a Celeron or Sempron is waaaaay more than enough and perhaps overkill. Depends on what they do. If all they do is browse the web and watch movies, Play their mp3's, burn CD's DVD's, etcetera, they don't need crazy super powered juggernaut CPU's. Gamers "might" have an occasion to need such power.
Distributed Computing folks like Mark, Duvie and others may need the most power they can get their hands on. Points are points after all .
The old saying is more is not always better but just more. However in today's buyers world, people who make over 100k a year will take out a 30 year loan just so they can spend money on a 6 million dollar house.
It's the marketers job to sell you a need with an item and not just an item. How many things have you bought in the past that you realized you didn't really need? I can think of plenty, like a new car.
We should stop kidding ourselves and realize that there is a performance craze out there. If people don't want or need performance, they want what's new and exciting and the Penryn and Core Duo are precisely that. It drives prestige and attention to the product.
um, do you own a house? a 6 million dollar house would have about a $60,000/month mortgage (give or take, depending on int rate, escrow, taxes, etc). You would need to make a LOT more than 100k a year to afford that...
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Is the difference in the conroe and k10 architecture primarily based on the 4 issue versus 3 issue ... issue? I thought even with a 3 issue core the k8 only averaged about 2.5. So is intel's overall architecture just more efficient?