Official Phenom 2 Review Thread

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: Atechie

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Here is a link to the Hexus.net review

HardOCP

I will update this thread as the reviews come in.

Interesting how these 2 reviews portray different feelings regarding the PhII.

TechReport has their review up.

I'm not sure where you get that from?
"The twin Phenom II processors from AMD, released today and available later on this month, are exactly what the company needed just over a year ago, when the original quad-core Phenoms were released. We say this because performance from the top-of-the-line Phenom II 940 is better than a £200 Core 2 Quad Q9300 (although pricing may well change), and AMD's achieved this by transitioning on to a more-efficient 45nm process and raising clock-speeds to 3GHz for the 940 and 2.8GHz for the 920. Had they been released 15 months ago, Intells Core 2 Quad may not have had it all their own way for so long in the high-end space."

and

"The good

Phenom II easily beats out Phenom X4 and gives mid-range Core 2 Quads a good fight
Overclocks well, suggesting significant headroom for 2009
Dragon platform makes implicit

The not so good

Quite power-hungry, as a platform, when compared to Core 2 Quad
Core i7 is still comfortably faster in most applications
940 price needs to drop <£200 and 920 to <£150 to entice enthusiasts away from Intel."

That is the same as Kyle said?

Just the overall tenor of the articles. HardOCP states that the PhII is "a loser", whereas Hexus considers it an above average product. HardOCP's benchies, for the most part, show PhII trailing C2Q, Hexus's benchies show PhII matching/surpassing C2Q on some occasions. Take from it what you will.

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Goty
Kyle at HardOCP has a number of issues that I find very disturbing in his review.

First of all, he has only supplied his Phenom-II rig with 2GB of RAM while the C2Q and i7 come with 4GB and 6GB respectively. His argument for this is evidently that running 4GB of RAM on the Phenom-II would slow it down (I kid you not, read their forums). Shenanigans? Yes, I think so.

Secondly, in his supposedly "CPU-bound gaming" benchmarks, you'll see that a nearly 20% increase in clockspeed leads to less than a 10% increase in performance for both the Phenom-II and the C2Q. Umm, somebody remind me, but doesn't "CPU-bound" mean that increasing the speed of the processor should increase the framerates in-game almost linearly? Looking at the rest of his data, this performance delta (or lack thereof) holds all the way up to 2560x1600.

Personally, I think he's just an idiot. The only people that are going to take that article seriously are his fanboys and people who don't know enough about hardware to question his obviously flawed results.

Kyle being an idiot non-withstanding... the bolded part IS indeed correct. The AM2+ Phenom 2 automatically drops the DDR2 clock to 800MHz when populated with 4 DIMMs. This is indeed a limitation of the CPU (for example, Gigabyte's memory information for their 790GX board - which I have - specifically states this).

It's not necessarily the PhII doing this - it's the motherboard, perhaps. Even so, who says you need to populate all 4 slots in order to attain 4GB?

I have fixed the bolding to identify the answer to your question.

 

[SlowSpyder]

That's one of the things I never liked about HOCP... so many of their reviews were never apples to apples. They had gotten better recently by including their 'max playable' and 'apples to apples' but it still looks like their review style lacks a bit. Why didn't he run 2x2GB?

 

[Regs]

I agree with Anand. 15 months late on delivery yet AMD wants us to pay full price for it like we didn't notice. It's a sign that they're at least trying to improve it more or less like how P4 was with Intel.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: Regs
I agree with Anand. 15 months late on delivery yet AMD wants us to pay full price for it like we didn't notice. It's a sign that they're at least trying to improve it more or less like how P4 was with Intel.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (since I've said this before), AMD is pricing high at the beginning, knowing the early adopters will pay the $$. Prices will drop very soon.

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Here is a link to the Hexus.net review

HardOCP

Tech Report

PCGH

AMD Zone

neoseeker

ClubOC

Here is a link to a list of a ton of reviews from the Inquirer

I will update this thread as the reviews come in.

You may wish to include the Anandtech Review on your list as well.

 

[error8]

All I want to see is the drop in price for the current Q9XXX series from Intel. Will the Phenom II manage to do that?

 

[Goty]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Why didn't he run 2x2GB?

By Kyle's reasoning? Because "they've never done it that way". He still can't explain why, if the move to 4GB provides no performance advantage, he used 4GB of RAM in the QX9770 system and 6GB instead of 3GB in the i7 system.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Here is a link to the Hexus.net review

HardOCP

Tech Report

PCGH

AMD Zone

neoseeker

ClubOC

Here is a link to a list of a ton of reviews from the Inquirer

I will update this thread as the reviews come in.

You may wish to include the Anandtech Review on your list as well.

Definitely some AMD hate going on these boards.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: error8
All I want to see is the drop in price for the current Q9XXX series from Intel. Will the Phenom II manage to do that?

Because it in most benches that matter (ie no synthetics) matches the q9550, Yes.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

AMD Zone

LOL @ this one.....

 

[Dravic]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: Regs
I agree with Anand. 15 months late on delivery yet AMD wants us to pay full price for it like we didn't notice. It's a sign that they're at least trying to improve it more or less like how P4 was with Intel.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (since I've said this before), AMD is pricing high at the beginning, knowing the early adopters will pay the $$. Prices will drop very soon.

Its not even that high for where it stands performance wise.. it matches the q9x00 pretty well.. is < $280 really high for a quad that does high 3ghz overclocks?

I mean as impressed as we all are with the 45nm intel i7 chips the platform is pricey. I'd rather get a c2d or now a PII and spend the extra $100-200 on my 8800gt upgrade.

Being a budget upgrader is making me want the PII because there IS an upgrade path. Intel has already moved on from LGA775. AMD may only be just now catching up to c2d but there is some upgrade room there over the course of at least AM3 releases.. Until i see tangible gains from DDR3 i see no reason to pay a premium for it.

Every penny I save on the platform gets me a better GPU.

 

[xusaphiss]

Come on, guys! I like a competitive market as much as the next guy but AMD is a whole generation behind. They should have had these when the 45nm C2s came out!

AMD is lapped!

It's time for them to die!

CPU standards will only go down if they actually resort to third-party distribution!

Their video cards are always run hotter than NVIDIA and are just less stable and overclockable. The only way they was able to stay alive in the race was pitting two of their GPUs against one on one board. NVIDIA hasn't even begun using GDDR5 yet!

Intel and NVIDIA is not really receiving competition from AMD. AMD is just lowering standards.

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Here is a link to the Hexus.net review

HardOCP

Tech Report

PCGH

AMD Zone

neoseeker

ClubOC

Here is a link to a list of a ton of reviews from the Inquirer

I will update this thread as the reviews come in.

You may wish to include the Anandtech Review on your list as well.

Definitely some AMD hate going on these boards.

I have noticed the same thing. I am wondering what the purpose of some of these posts are. I had no intention to bash AMD, I was just suggesting that the Anandtech review get added to the list of reviews.

I am wondering why so many people are disappointed with the reviews though. It isn't like this processor was hyped to be extremely fast. The only hype that I heard was that it would overclock very well; which does seem to be enbellished a bit after reading the reviews, but that was to be expected.

I have read the Tech Report review, which seems pretty well done (although they use DDR3 memory for the Q9400, and DDR2 memory for the X4 940 for some reason). Along with the Anandtech review, I believe that I know what I want to know about these new processors.

The processors are quite an improvement from the original Phenom, which is pretty impressive. They are still a little slower than I would like, so I will continue to wait before building a new system. Hopefully in the summer when the higher clocked AM3 CPU's and the i5 CPU's are released, they will both have the performance that I am looking for, and I can make a decision between the two of them.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: SickBeast

AMD Zone

LOL @ this one.....

ATI Catalyst drivers were the latest from AMD an updated version of 8.12 not currently on their site

Well that isn't exactly an approach that seems above-board.

I also like how they somewhat coincidentally do not have possession of any Intel processors capable of besting a PhII 940...so guess what gets the best showing on top spot in all the charts? Imagine that!

In Cinebench 10 the Phenom II 940 blows away all other processors finishing rendering ten seconds before the Intel Q9300

The hilarity continues...

No change here in Pov-RAY 3.7 either as the Phenom II 940 proves it's clearly capable of taking on Penryn.

Based on a comparison with the cache crippled Q9300!? Let's see a Q9450 in there at least. Come on.

Phenom II is a real challenger to Intel's Core 2 Quad series of Penryn chips and if they can ram up the clock speed they could take on the Core i7 from benchmarks we've seen

Sure, if they could ram clock speed then PhII could take on Westmere and a 64-way Power6+ cluster too...assuming they can ramp clock speed high enough.

As much as it insults our senses to read such a review I bet it insults the senses of AMD engineers even more. PhII is a good chip by the looks of the AT and THG reviews, but there is no need to hype it as a threat to i7 or full-cached yorkfields for the shill factor alone.

It still amazes me that a company can design/build a product as remarkable as PhII while operating in the business environment they have been under for the past decade. If anything it should shame a few Intel project managers for not having delivered even more than they have given the position of fiscal strength they have been operating from for the past decade. (although admittedly Intel did it with >50% GM's whereas AMD has been a non-profit entity for its operating lifetime)

PhII should not have even come close to yorkfield given the R&D $'s involved with the creation of these products...and yet there they are. To me that is simply amazing. Imagine if China or India had put a man on the moon 3-4 yrs after the USA did...sure the USA would have got there first but the real miracle was that much less fiscally endowed countries managed the same feat on nearly the same timeline.

The triumphs of the under-dog usually generates the human-interest story (see Anand's ATi human-interest story...everyone likes a good read on the biography of David, we care less about the trial and tribulations of Goliath)

Kind of like how the detroit 3 got overtaken despite all the odds ($, experience, business know-how, marketshare, etc) that Toyota should not have ever been able to challenge them globally.

 

[DrBombcrater]

Originally posted by: Martimus
I have read the Tech Report review, which seems pretty well done (although they use DDR3 memory for the Q9400, and DDR2 memory for the X4 940 for some reason).

That may be quite an important point. Most reviewers are using DDR3 for the Core 2s (including AT, if I'm reading the test setup page right) which is hardly fair given the price differential between DDR2 and DDR3.

Hexus used DDR2 for both systems, which could be why their numbers show the PhII looking rather better in comparison to the C2Q than most other sites.

 

[nyker96]

I must say I am quite impressed with AMD for this new chip. Although not top of the line yet, the improvements over PIs are tangible. And at the price it's going for, It's given AM2+ owners a real quad core upgrade option. But i would wait for the AM3 versions of the chip that's upcoming up. give you more upgrade flexibility.

And thanks to AMD, Intel will drop their prices on Quads, making my next 775 upgrade that much cheaper. Weather you are Intel/AMD fan, it's a good processor for everyone.

 

[zerocool84]

If Intel does cut prices at the end of this month as rumored to compete even better, I'll be looking at a Q9550.

 

[BigDH01]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: SickBeast

AMD Zone

LOL @ this one.....

ATI Catalyst drivers were the latest from AMD an updated version of 8.12 not currently on their site

Well that isn't exactly an approach that seems above-board.

I also like how they somewhat coincidentally do not have possession of any Intel processors capable of besting a PhII 940...so guess what gets the best showing on top spot in all the charts? Imagine that!

In Cinebench 10 the Phenom II 940 blows away all other processors finishing rendering ten seconds before the Intel Q9300

The hilarity continues...

No change here in Pov-RAY 3.7 either as the Phenom II 940 proves it's clearly capable of taking on Penryn.

Based on a comparison with the cache crippled Q9300!? Let's see a Q9450 in there at least. Come on.

Phenom II is a real challenger to Intel's Core 2 Quad series of Penryn chips and if they can ram up the clock speed they could take on the Core i7 from benchmarks we've seen

Sure, if they could ram clock speed then PhII could take on Westmere and a 64-way Power6+ cluster too...assuming they can ramp clock speed high enough.

As much as it insults our senses to read such a review I bet it insults the senses of AMD engineers even more. PhII is a good chip by the looks of the AT and THG reviews, but there is no need to hype it as a threat to i7 or full-cached yorkfields for the shill factor alone.

It still amazes me that a company can design/build a product as remarkable as PhII while operating in the business environment they have been under for the past decade. If anything it should shame a few Intel project managers for not having delivered even more than they have given the position of fiscal strength they have been operating from for the past decade. (although admittedly Intel did it with >50% GM's whereas AMD has been a non-profit entity for its operating lifetime)

PhII should not have even come close to yorkfield given the R&D $'s involved with the creation of these products...and yet there they are. To me that is simply amazing. Imagine if China or India had put a man on the moon 3-4 yrs after the USA did...sure the USA would have got there first but the real miracle was that much less fiscally endowed countries managed the same feat on nearly the same timeline.

The triumphs of the under-dog usually generates the human-interest story (see Anand's ATi human-interest story...everyone likes a good read on the biography of David, we care less about the trial and tribulations of Goliath)

Kind of like how the detroit 3 got overtaken despite all the odds ($, experience, business know-how, marketshare, etc) that Toyota should not have ever been able to challenge them globally.

It's AMDZone so not much should be expected.

If you visit their forums, you'll see that people there, in general, suffer from some sort of mass delusion. Perhaps my opinion is extreme, but it really is fascinating to read their forums and see how individuals feed off of each other to turn their desires into perceived reality. I find it particularly interesting as one might usually only find this in religious cults or other social groups where membership and information is often tightly controlled.

I think open forums like AMDZone (and others like the Hillary supporters forum) that exhibit the same pattern may be a useful case study for an aspiring doctor in Psychology and/or Sociology.

 

[vj8usa]

Wow, that HOCP review is so stupid it isn't even funny.

From the review:
"Now while some of you will whine loudly, ?That?s not fair! That flagship Core i7 is $1000!? Well you people just need to shut the hell up and go have a drink. You are already unreasonable, so a little alcohol won?t hurt you in the least."

They're comparing a QX9770 and an i7 965 to the PII 940.

Both the intel CPUs they used are over $1000 on Newegg, while the AMD CPU is $275.

 

[magreen]

You'll update the OP? Where's your link to AT's review?

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

But can we get it to OC to 3.8Ghz? If so, it'll be enough to push the C2Q prices down.

edit: oh darn, no it won't.

my friend who did a review says with a good board, 4.0 is possible.

but its just as we thought. A little shy off yorkfield. But definitely a good upgrade for current amd users.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

But can we get it to OC to 3.8Ghz? If so, it'll be enough to push the C2Q prices down.

edit: oh darn, no it won't.

my friend who did a review says with a good board, 4.0 is possible.

but its just as we thought. A little shy off yorkfield. But definitely a good upgrade for current amd users.

Anyone put this thing under a vapochill LS yet? Am curious where she goes at -50C.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: xusaphiss
Come on, guys! I like a competitive market as much as the next guy but AMD is a whole generation behind. They should have had these when the 45nm C2s came out!

AMD is lapped!

It's time for them to die!

CPU standards will only go down if they actually resort to third-party distribution!

Their video cards are always run hotter than NVIDIA and are just less stable and overclockable. The only way they was able to stay alive in the race was pitting two of their GPUs against one on one board. NVIDIA hasn't even begun using GDDR5 yet!

Intel and NVIDIA is not really receiving competition from AMD. AMD is just lowering standards.

Welcome to the AT forum. Now go away.


Here's Tom's look at the 'real world'.

Impressive in Winrar and AVG (bumps up to the Q9650) - not so much in Winzip and Acrobat

I don't know what the deal with PS CS3 is but all-in-all the Phenom II goes toe-to-toe with the Q9550 in Studio 12, Xvid, DivX, Cinema 4d & MainConcept and gives a major shot price wise at the Q9650.

Looks impressive in 3dSM, too. Not so hot in Nero ...

If AMD can crank that IMC/NB up to the 2.2GHz-2.4GHz range and dig in for the price war they gots a little somethin' for Chipzilla

 

[SlowSpyder]

In AMDZone's defense, I doubt Intel sends them sample processors. Isn't the Q9300 in the PhII price range? Obviously Intel still has a better line from top to bottom as the PhII is really priced to compete with the lower end to middle of the Intel line up.

Originally posted by: xusaphiss
Come on, guys! I like a competitive market as much as the next guy but AMD is a whole generation behind. They should have had these when the 45nm C2s came out!

AMD is lapped!

It's time for them to die!

CPU standards will only go down if they actually resort to third-party distribution!

Their video cards are always run hotter than NVIDIA and are just less stable and overclockable. The only way they was able to stay alive in the race was pitting two of their GPUs against one on one board. NVIDIA hasn't even begun using GDDR5 yet!

Intel and NVIDIA is not really receiving competition from AMD. AMD is just lowering standards.

Yay, another troll.

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: xusaphiss
Come on, guys! I like a competitive market as much as the next guy but AMD is a whole generation behind. They should have had these when the 45nm C2s came out!

AMD is lapped!

It's time for them to die!

CPU standards will only go down if they actually resort to third-party distribution!

Their video cards are always run hotter than NVIDIA and are just less stable and overclockable. The only way they was able to stay alive in the race was pitting two of their GPUs against one on one board. NVIDIA hasn't even begun using GDDR5 yet!

Intel and NVIDIA is not really receiving competition from AMD. AMD is just lowering standards.

Welcome to the AT forum. Now go away.
...

Welcome to the forums, xusaphiss.

What you wrote in your post, however, is unreasonable. Stick around here awhile, read the cpu forums, the graphics forums, and the general hardware forums. Read up and learn before you post opinions. You'll see that your first post is wrong on most all counts, and you'll come away a more educated person.