Phenom 2 at 6Ghz(!)

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: JackyP

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

Originally posted by: JackyP

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Unspossibles! THis may match i7 at 5.3 ghz!

I hate when these kinds of numbers drop before the important stuff.

Phenom was somewhat comparable to the C2Q, the biggest holdback for it was the the C2Q was able to overclock like mad. With the possibility that the phenom II overclocks like crazy, could be comparable to Penrynn in speed, and will possibly (most likely) be cheaper then intels offerings is good news.

Somewhat comparable? Yes 80% is somewhat comparable to 100%, still it was much slower - end of story.
No one cares about overclocking in terms of market size and money, so that surely wasn't the biggest holdback, stock clock, powerconsumption and performance was, but it's still lovely to see such a nice clocking chip from AMD.

Shanghai may be cheaper to the end user, but at the cost of margins. Shanghai's die is still at least 20% bigger than penryn, monolithic and using a new process. So the chip per se is not cheaper (i.e. cheaper to produce) at all.

I really think Phenom was more competitive then you give it credit for. The biggest problem with Phenom in my eyes was the performance you got for the amount of power it consumed. Intel really hit it out of the park with the C2D, it was almost always faster then Phenom, and did so using less power.

True, but I'm a sceptic, though. A follower of the scientific method.

I don't know the die sizes off the top of my head, but my guess is a 45nm Denab isn't much bigger in size then two Penryns added togeter for the Intel quad.

But I do, that's why I mentioned it. 243mm² (263mm² including test logic, don't know if this makes it into the final product). Penryn 2*107mm².
I think that the Intel "glue approach" has some advantages and drawbacks when it comes to yields (one error does not kill your 214mm² chip, just a 107mm² one, but the glue is not free either).

Also, I think AMD has shown that they can have a pretty good product that isn't the absolute fastest but still fast enough so long as it's priced right. Take a look at the Radeon 4850/4870.

I'm not considering price for the end-user, but for the company. They could give chips away for free if they wanted to, still below certain margins they cannot survive long term, that's why I mention die size.

80% Try 85-90% at the same clock speed, with a lower price (per cpu and whole system). I just ran the numbers, 77% was the absolute lowest it did, and it quite a few cases it was 95% of the speed of a Q6600 at the same clock speed (the 9700 that is).

Yes its slower, however you are paying less for it and the entire system. Does it cost AMD more to produce a CPU, probably, But I wasn't speaking about their benefits as the producer.

I was talking about penryn, thank you for proving my point. There are hundreds of reviews out there, I think -20% for barcelona is even pretty generous. So much for beating a dead horse, I just don't like lies...
Actually I have been talking about the "benefits to the producer". If AMD is broke you won't get anymore chips from them, remember this very well.

Tough times are ahead, let's hope this is enough to keep them afloat.

Ok, so Intel does have a smallish advantage in die size, but those numbers look fairly comparable. The current 65nm Phenom is huge compared to 2 Penryn cores, this puts them in the same ball park. I think the Intel 'glue' approach has an advantage or two as well, I'm sure it's a lot easier for Intel to have made their quad core then AMD. Intel designed a dual core and was able to just put two on a single package for a quad, I would imagine that shaves off a lot of time in getting the part to market compared to the 'native' quad core approach AMD went with. Also, a bad core doesn't kill AMD's chip either, they sell it as an X3 part. On the X3 parts I don't know if AMD will make money, break even, or sell at a loss, but any of those options are better then just tossing a chip with a single bad core in the garbage.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: ZOXXO

Originally posted by: soonerproud


So what is mainstream about video editing and 3d cad work? Very few computer users ever touch that type of software. You have just proved my point for me that multithreaded software is something only the most hardcore of enthusiast will ever see.

Someone captures and encodes all those You Tube videos.

Judging by the image quality and content, they appear to come from the average Joe computer user.

Mainstream enough?

Exactly....

I forgot I was probably talking to someone who is in his early 20's who thinks life with a PC revolves around gaming and benchmarking..

Mainstream is video editing nowadays. Whether it be MACs, HP mulitmedia center PCs, etc. Go into the box stores and dual and quad cores are touted for their multimedia capabilities.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Duvie

INtel has gotten greedy again as the prices on some of the chips just dont seem to have moved in nearly a year....or not as much....with the economy the way it is, here is to hoping the chips come back to reasonable prices again. Along with the flipping motherboards that are getting astronomical again....Gotta love memory prices though!!!!

What planet do you shop for processors on? It is one of the best times EVER to build a system as far as price/performance. There have also been 25% + price drops just this year on many chips.

When you look at the Q6600 and compare to AMD line of cpus I dont see the same type of drop in cpu prices for INtel.

That is what I meant.

Near the begining of the year I could have picked up a Q6600 for like 220's...now it is 180's...OK that is near 18% but when you think it is 2 lines behind now that dont seem that great...and for 2.4ghz!!!!

I think I paid 180's for E8400 back in May and now it is still like 160's....doesn't seem so great....

Some of the prices of the E7xxx series in my opinion are waaaayyyy too high. Should all be sub 100 in my opinion

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Duvie

INtel has gotten greedy again as the prices on some of the chips just dont seem to have moved in nearly a year....or not as much....with the economy the way it is, here is to hoping the chips come back to reasonable prices again. Along with the flipping motherboards that are getting astronomical again....Gotta love memory prices though!!!!

What planet do you shop for processors on? It is one of the best times EVER to build a system as far as price/performance. There have also been 25% + price drops just this year on many chips.

When you look at the Q6600 and compare to AMD line of cpus I dont see the same type of drop in cpu prices for INtel.

That is what I meant.

Near the begining of the year I could have picked up a Q6600 for like 220's...now it is 180's...OK that is near 18% but when you think it is 2 lines behind now that dont seem that great...and for 2.4ghz!!!!

I think I paid 180's for E8400 back in May and now it is still like 160's....doesn't seem so great....

Some of the prices of the E7xxx series in my opinion are waaaayyyy too high. Should all be sub 100 in my opinion

Ummm.....a little reading, and 5 minutes in BIOS, and you can have a $100 CPU perform like a stock $1499 CPU in apps that use 2 cores.

I dont see your point. Compare what they could charge due to lack of competition, and what good CPUs have historically cost, we are doing alright.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Duvie

INtel has gotten greedy again as the prices on some of the chips just dont seem to have moved in nearly a year....or not as much....with the economy the way it is, here is to hoping the chips come back to reasonable prices again. Along with the flipping motherboards that are getting astronomical again....Gotta love memory prices though!!!!

What planet do you shop for processors on? It is one of the best times EVER to build a system as far as price/performance. There have also been 25% + price drops just this year on many chips.

When you look at the Q6600 and compare to AMD line of cpus I dont see the same type of drop in cpu prices for INtel.

That is what I meant.

Near the begining of the year I could have picked up a Q6600 for like 220's...now it is 180's...OK that is near 18% but when you think it is 2 lines behind now that dont seem that great...and for 2.4ghz!!!!

I think I paid 180's for E8400 back in May and now it is still like 160's....doesn't seem so great....

Some of the prices of the E7xxx series in my opinion are waaaayyyy too high. Should all be sub 100 in my opinion

Ummm.....a little reading, and 5 minutes in BIOS, and you can have a $100 CPU perform like a stock $1499 CPU in apps that use 2 cores.

I dont see your point. Compare what they could charge due to lack of competition, and what good CPUs have historically cost, we are doing alright.

Oh buddy...I was ocing on this board before you ever joined....like I dont know that...That is not the point...I have a quad core now that cannot even be used to its full potential...Ocing much more wont do anything more for me....

We are limited by other hardware and the faster cpus are exposing that...we are either gpu limited, IO limited, or just plain software limited.

use the word 'WE" in the end quote and I see I am dealing with a fan boy....I have 2 intel chips but I dont consider myself on their team. I am a free agent.

Bottomline whether you agree with me or not...I am not impressed with the price drops I have seen in cpus from Intel. I know it has to do with the fact INtel doesn't see enough competition from AMD to force it to lower prices to compete. So perhaps a stronger AMD product will do just that. That and a weak economy

 

[Snobok]

I am looking forward to these new parts; forcing myself not to upgrade in the mean time is the hard part. The idea that AMD might have something with great overclocking headroom is wonderful to me. I'll admit to being an AMD nut, so I really want to go back to running an AMD rig ASAP from my current Intel setup (modest E6300 rig currently). Even a low end Phenom II would be a good upgrade for me once they come out.

 

[thilanliyan]

I really hope this is all true. I'd be happy with around 3.6GHz but I can shoot for that 4GHz since I'm on water already . I've found that both 790GX motherboards I've tried (Asus M3a78-T and the Gigabyte 790GP DS4H they actually used in those LN2 runs) have had crappy BIOSes. Sometimes they won't even boot properly at stock settings.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Yeah, I'm looking forward to a potential AMD Phenom II build

 

[Kraeoss]

yea most likely that my new pc will be bulit with a phenom II chip in mind

 

[Murloc]

good for AMD, fans will buy a new amd rig only for this, and even if it won't beat intel the gap is narrowing.
Maybe in the future we'll see even better results.

 

[nerp]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: nerp
AMD kicks ass. WOOOHOOO!

Oh god look how fast they come out of the woodwork....

You fail to get the joke, apparently.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: Murloc
good for AMD, fans will buy a new amd rig only for this, and even if it won't beat intel the gap is narrowing.
Maybe in the future we'll see even better results.

It'll depend on the prices. Will it be cheaper to get a new mobo+one of these phenoms, than it will be to upgrade to quad core over my e2180?

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: Murloc
good for AMD, fans will buy a new amd rig only for this, and even if it won't beat intel the gap is narrowing.
Maybe in the future we'll see even better results.

It'll depend on the prices. Will it be cheaper to get a new mobo+one of these phenoms, than it will be to upgrade to quad core over my e2180?

It will depend on how well it does against the Q6600. Everyone uses this as a baseline for performance since it is the best bang/buck product.

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: nerp

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: nerp
AMD kicks ass. WOOOHOOO!

Oh god look how fast they come out of the woodwork....

You fail to get the joke, apparently.

It is just the pot calling the kettle black. It is best just to ignore him

 

[classy]

I would just like to see a game benchmark like Crysis or Unreal Tourney.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: classy
I would just like to see a game benchmark like Crysis or Unreal Tourney.

Cpu name: Phenom II 940 (core Deneb, AM2+) @ 3GHz
Motherboard: M3A79-T Deluxe (AMD 790FX+SB750 )
Memory: 4096 Mb CSX 1066MHz (DDR2)
Graphics: Gigabyte 4870X2 2048Mb
Os: Win Vista 64 Service Pack 1
Drivers: Motherboard bios: 0602, Catalyst 8.10, MB chipset 3.0.642.0

Crysis Warhead: DX10 high, shaders very high, 1920x1200x32, AA off

Results:

Average:47fps
Max: 84fps
Min: 36fps

bye: Dred

http://markbench.blogspot.com/...sis-warhead-deneb.html

 

[SickBeast]

These scores mean nothing to me without a comparison to something made by intel for a reference.

There seems to be too much buzz about these new Phenoms for there not to be something to them. Hopefully they will make AMD competitive again.

I agree with Duvie regarding the intel prices. A year or so ago was a great time to buy a CPU. Looking at what you can get today for the same price ($100 or so), you get pretty much the same thing. Anything new that they have come out with is expensive and not targeted toward the low-end.

We need AMD or else we will go back to $1000 high-end CPU prices.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
These scores mean nothing to me without a comparison to something made by intel for a reference.

There seems to be too much buzz about these new Phenoms for there not to be something to them. Hopefully they will make AMD competitive again.

I agree with Duvie regarding the intel prices. A year or so ago was a great time to buy a CPU. Looking at what you can get today for the same price ($100 or so), you get pretty much the same thing. Anything new that they have come out with is expensive and not targeted toward the low-end.

We need AMD or else we will go back to $1000 high-end CPU prices.

This would probably be ok with me. AMD will continue to exist for some time, and if this can do 3.5Ghz, then we'll all have enough processing power for quite some time. Won't need an upgrade for normal desktop use. Gaming industry will compensate to increase sales (to owners of less-powerful rigs).

 

[bageton]

I'm more excited about this: http://www.techradar.com/news/...er-cpu-for-2009-146488

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: piesquared
Why let the cat out of the bag, and lay all your cards on the table at once? Maybe they'll wait to see what kind of FUD the Intel marketing machine will respond with.

i dunno, intel never demo'ed any ridiculous suicide overclocks at an official gathering. that kind of garbage is definitive FUD.

this demo stinks of desperation IMO.

Bullshit. Intel had Fugger do some "world record overclocks" at the last official yearly intel gathering. I don't know what voltage, but I seem to recall it was on phase, and probably at 5Ghz.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: bageton
I'm more excited about this: http://www.techradar.com/news/...er-cpu-for-2009-146488

16 cores? What do you want to do with them?

My interest is still in the Fusion chips. Hopefully they are not vaporware.

Oh yeah, welcome to the AT forums.
:beer:

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: bageton
I'm more excited about this: http://www.techradar.com/news/...er-cpu-for-2009-146488

Bulldozer, which is now called Orochi won't be here until 2011.
http://www.firingsquad.com/har...u_roadmap_update_2008/

AMD is gonna stick with Phenom II until 2011...that's a gamble for sure.

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: piesquared
Why let the cat out of the bag, and lay all your cards on the table at once? Maybe they'll wait to see what kind of FUD the Intel marketing machine will respond with.

i dunno, intel never demo'ed any ridiculous suicide overclocks at an official gathering. that kind of garbage is definitive FUD.

this demo stinks of desperation IMO.

Bullshit. Intel had Fugger do some "world record overclocks" at the last official yearly intel gathering. I don't know what voltage, but I seem to recall it was on phase, and probably at 5Ghz.

that was on a penryn which has been around for a long time. big difference between doing this kind of stunt on a EOL product and something that isn't even out yet.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: dmens
that was on a penryn which has been around for a long time. big difference between doing this kind of stunt on a EOL product and something that isn't even out yet.

While it was true the OC event was all about Penryn I don't see the differentiation of pre-release vs. 9 month on market as making 100% of the difference between the event being puritan and holy vs. desperation and wickedness.

For both events the purposes are identical - give the media something write about (nearly free advertising) and let the reader make all the incorrect inferences and flawed logic regarding what a 6GHz OC demo means in terms of the enthusiast's chances of overclocking retail samples.

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: piesquared
Why let the cat out of the bag, and lay all your cards on the table at once? Maybe they'll wait to see what kind of FUD the Intel marketing machine will respond with.

i dunno, intel never demo'ed any ridiculous suicide overclocks at an official gathering. that kind of garbage is definitive FUD.

this demo stinks of desperation IMO.

Bullshit. Intel had Fugger do some "world record overclocks" at the last official yearly intel gathering. I don't know what voltage, but I seem to recall it was on phase, and probably at 5Ghz.

that was on a penryn which has been around for a long time. big difference between doing this kind of stunt on a EOL product and something that isn't even out yet.

Well, how about we go back to the 90's when Intel was publically showing PII's clocked to 450Mhz a year before they were available?