Torn between platforms

[ther00kie16]

Originally posted by: clairvoyant129

What?

"Clock for Clock, Still Slower than Core 2 & Core i7"

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3492&p=4

According to Anand, Yorkfield is about 14% faster clock for clock, that's not about the "same." I guess you've been checking reviews at AMDzone.com

Naw, I read reviews and benchmarks at usual review sites. Only one of those is above 14% and it's likely that the 12MB L2 cache of the q9650 could've contributed to some of the performance difference. And a 12MB quad is going to cost close to $300, about $100 more than a 920.
As for average overclocks, check out xtremesystems, though most of those guys know quite a bit about overclocking. But if you know the basics and have some time to tweak it, you can get about 3.5ghz on stock voltage and around 3.8+ghz for either processor on air.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Duvie
So guys what are PhII ocing to? If they exhibit prescott behavior past 3.5ghz then I dont see them getting much past 3.6ghz without tremendous heat gains...4ghz seems unlikely on air then....

http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...d.php?t=213248&page=13

Seems to indicate that 3.8GHz is roughly the limit of aircooling, Phenom II's power consumption becomes too high after that.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: ther00kie16

Originally posted by: clairvoyant129

What?

"Clock for Clock, Still Slower than Core 2 & Core i7"

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3492&p=4

According to Anand, Yorkfield is about 14% faster clock for clock, that's not about the "same." I guess you've been checking reviews at AMDzone.com

Naw, I read reviews and benchmarks at usual review sites. Only one of those is above 14% and it's likely that the 12MB L2 cache of the q9650 could've contributed to some of the performance difference. And a 12MB quad is going to cost close to $300, about $100 more than a 920.
As for average overclocks, check out xtremesystems, though most of those guys know quite a bit about overclocking. But if you know the basics and have some time to tweak it, you can get about 3.5ghz on stock voltage and around 3.8+ghz for either processor on air.

I dont know...I saw 3 alone in that Anandtech review that were higher then 14%

I saw this review....

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/...henom-2-x4-940-p2.html

not impressed with it winning by less then 8% on average over a Q9300 with a 20% lower clock speed.....I am definitely thinking it is worse clock to clock...


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl.../amd-phenom-ii-x4.html

in this one...get past the synthetic crap....It look like the Q9550 beats it in about evrything with the Q9400 competitive in about everything....

Definitely not clock for clock versus Yorkfields....

Looks as if the Q9400 if it can match 3.8ghz would be the winner....

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I dont know...I saw 3 alone in that Anandtech review that were higher then 14%

I saw this review....

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/...henom-2-x4-940-p2.html

not impressed with it winning by less then 8% on average over a Q9300 with a 20% lower clock speed.....I am definitely thinking it is worse clock to clock...


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl.../amd-phenom-ii-x4.html

in this one...get past the synthetic crap....It look like the Q9550 beats it in about evrything with the Q9400 competitive in about everything....

Definitely not clock for clock versus Yorkfields....

Looks as if the Q9400 if it can match 3.8ghz would be the winner....

I think you are missing the point entirely that the PhII 920 is a price/performance leader and does not need to match the C2Q's clock for clock. When you spec out a build of either a PHII 920 or the 940 and compare the cost to the equivalent performing C2Q, the AMD system wins and by a sometimes substantial margin.

I just speced both a PhII 920 system and a C2Q system with a almost equivalent performing Q8300. (The PhII 920 performs between the Q8300 and the Q9400 ) The Q8300 system was $25 more expensive and does not perform as well overall as the 920. So in essence you are paying more for less performance and both chips have similar overclocking capabilities. (There was a $25 difference between platforms with similar specs and support for 16GB of memory. The processors are essentially the same price on Newegg.)

I say take that extra $25 saved and throw it at a high quality fan and heatsink and have fun overclocking.

 

[demiurge3141]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I think you are holding yourself short on the G0 stepping Q6600's.......Look at MarkFW900's Q6600's (plus the one he sold me).....They all did a minimum of 3.4ghz on less then 10% vcore boost with air cooling alone.....I bet you get more....Heck my C stepping Qx6700 does 3.466ghz on air right now with 10% vcore boost....


My only compaint is why are we only looking at the Kentsfields? the lower L2 cache Yorkies actually do better clock to clock to PhII as oppposed to the Kentsfields.....As 45nm parts may be able to get a bit better OC out of them (perhaps 3.5-3.6ghz)...still with air....Almost makes them a wash when you figure in the coin saved....


Neither one has much of an upgrade path....be it PhIII or i7 core....so we can stop mentioning that...

Not to mention the Q6600 is an oven overclocked..... although this may be exactly
what OP is looking for in cold cold Canada.....

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: Duvie
I dont know...I saw 3 alone in that Anandtech review that were higher then 14%

I saw this review....

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/...henom-2-x4-940-p2.html

not impressed with it winning by less then 8% on average over a Q9300 with a 20% lower clock speed.....I am definitely thinking it is worse clock to clock...


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl.../amd-phenom-ii-x4.html

in this one...get past the synthetic crap....It look like the Q9550 beats it in about evrything with the Q9400 competitive in about everything....

Definitely not clock for clock versus Yorkfields....

Looks as if the Q9400 if it can match 3.8ghz would be the winner....

I think you are missing the point entirely that the PhII 920 is a price/performance leader and does not need to match the C2Q's clock for clock. When you spec out a build of either a PHII 920 or the 940 and compare the cost to the equivalent performing C2Q, the AMD system wins and by a sometimes substantial margin.

I just speced both a PhII 920 system and a C2Q system with a almost equivalent performing Q8300. (The PhII 920 performs between the Q8300 and the Q9400 ) The Q8300 system was $25 more expensive and does not perform as well overall as the 920. So in essence you are paying more for less performance and both chips have similar overclocking capabilities. (There was a $25 difference between platforms with similar specs and support for 16GB of memory. The processors are essentially the same price on Newegg.)

I say take that extra $25 saved and throw it at a high quality fan and heatsink and have fun overclocking.

I am not missing the point he is the one talking about the 940....No one esle has mentioned the cheaper lower speed model 920....It would be cheaper but ulitmately would still top out about the same or a hair less then the PhII 940 and the 9400 just has to match the clock to still win overall....I think 25 bucks is worth 10%....

 

[edplayer]

Why not wait some more time?

If you made it this long with a 2200+, whats a few more weeks? The industry is hurting a lot right now so I think you would be seeing lots of deals coming up. You seem like you know the pros and cons of each choice so why not wait some more time till an "excellent deal" comes up with whichever brand.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I am not missing the point he is the one talking about the 940....No one esle has mentioned the cheaper lower speed model 920....It would be cheaper but ulitmately would still top out about the same or a hair less then the PhII 940 and the 9400 just has to match the clock to still win overall....I think 25 bucks is worth 10%....

The problem is that the financial divide is even larger when comparing the 9400 to the 920. So now we are talking $75 more cost for a chip when you overclock will only net you 10% gain in performance. So now the price differential between the 920 platform and the Q9400 platform is not worth it in that context.

Remember, I compared the Q8300 to the 920 at a $25 difference. Your comparison is not even in that ball park.

 

[ajaidevsingh]

I would vote the PhII 940 now with the price cut the thing is the best thing to come along OC it to 3.5-3.6 can deal with most things you through at it. C2D on the other hand is also a good processor but its platform is being murdered by the Intel corp.

But if you can wait for another month or even less i would advice to go with the AMD Phenom II 945 or 950 because its the best thing at least that is my plan of action. I buy the PhII 945/ 950 use it with my DDR2 based 690 + Sb600 based MB till DDr3 prices come down and then buy a new MB and DDR3. This way i can even buy me a whole new platform be it Intel i5 or i7 instead of the MB+DDR3 if prices come down and i have the money to burn.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: Duvie
I am not missing the point he is the one talking about the 940....No one esle has mentioned the cheaper lower speed model 920....It would be cheaper but ulitmately would still top out about the same or a hair less then the PhII 940 and the 9400 just has to match the clock to still win overall....I think 25 bucks is worth 10%....

The problem is that the financial divide is even larger when comparing the 9400 to the 920. So now we are talking $75 more cost for a chip when you overclock will only net you 10% gain in performance. So now the price differential between the 920 platform and the Q9400 platform is not worth it in that context.

Remember, I compared the Q8300 to the 920 at a $25 difference. Your comparison is not even in that ball park.

List me your motherboards you chose? I spec'd one out and i didn't see it being 75 bucks for the whole platform....The Q9400 was about equal to the PhII 940...like 5 bucks more...the 920 was 40 bucks cheaper....

I basically got a wash with the motherboards....so sorry I dont see the 75 bucks....

and again that was with a Q9400...

A Q8300 is only 5 bucks more then the 920.....

It is sooo damn close it is just a matter of preference....is 25-75 worth 10% more if they clocked the same with their overclock? 15+% more if the quadcore INtel hits 4ghz on air....AMD or INtel...cannot go wrong either way....

I dont see going to AMD until they have the superior architecture or a screaming deal that I can OC the chip to outdo anything INtel has to offer....unfortunately that doesn't seem to be true on either fronts...If the AMD Oc'd routinely to 4ghz plus or about 10% higher then the Yorkfield with the savings I would do it....That doesn't seem to be the case either.

I went A64 when it was clear the A64 was superior to the prescott....I stayed X2 when it was clear intel's dual prescott core heaters were a dud....Before that I was Intel P4 northwood when it was clearly better then the XP Bartons....Now I am back with INtel and Core 2 architure.

Fanboys scream price when performance comparatively isn't there. I dont see the big price difference to go with the lower performer...

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
I would vote the PhII 940 now with the price cut the thing is the best thing to come along OC it to 3.5-3.6 can deal with most things you through at it. C2D on the other hand is also a good processor but its platform is being murdered by the Intel corp.

But if you can wait for another month or even less i would advice to go with the AMD Phenom II 945 or 950 because its the best thing at least that is my plan of action. I buy the PhII 945/ 950 use it with my DDR2 based 690 + Sb600 based MB till DDr3 prices come down and then buy a new MB and DDR3. This way i can even buy me a whole new platform be it Intel i5 or i7 instead of the MB+DDR3 if prices come down and i have the money to burn.

HUH?????????????? really?????????????

I dont see it....235 bucks for 500-600mhz OC? Performance clock for clock less then the Yorkfields let alone the i7 platform....

 

[heyheybooboo]

I think we skeered SChow.

Don't worry, dude, it's normally a lot worse

Here are some benchies for yah on quad stuff.

 

[Duvie]

Ha...My QX6700 many times was between the 920 and 940 and even beat the 940 a few time....Not bad for a chip that was giving up 333-166mhz..I looked at that page then the next since I dont game.....

the Divx test was surprisingly not optimized for quads or at least showed no benefit....

 

[clairvoyant129]

People are talking about how Intel quads are so much more expensive, but have we all forgotten how Intel just issued a deep price cut across its Core 2 line?

http://img502.imageshack.us/im...5232/img0025000nt7.gif

And Phenom IIs are not fast as Yorkfields clock for clock, in fact they are slower/around the same as Kentsfield clock for clock. Where are people getting their information from?

 

[Markfw]

I sure want to play with a 920 PH II on a cheap motherboard to give advice. Any advice on the motheroard ? I would prefer a 2 slot pcie one.

What about this one ??? 790x a good chipset ?

Or is a 780G good ?

 

[ajaidevsingh]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
I would vote the PhII 940 now with the price cut the thing is the best thing to come along OC it to 3.5-3.6 can deal with most things you through at it. C2D on the other hand is also a good processor but its platform is being murdered by the Intel corp.

But if you can wait for another month or even less i would advice to go with the AMD Phenom II 945 or 950 because its the best thing at least that is my plan of action. I buy the PhII 945/ 950 use it with my DDR2 based 690 + Sb600 based MB till DDr3 prices come down and then buy a new MB and DDR3. This way i can even buy me a whole new platform be it Intel i5 or i7 instead of the MB+DDR3 if prices come down and i have the money to burn.

HUH?????????????? really?????????????

I dont see it....235 bucks for 500-600mhz OC? Performance clock for clock less then the Yorkfields let alone the i7 platform....

Who in his right mind would compare a PhII to a i7 they are targeted at totally different people. In the price value range PII 940 is not bad at all the whole platform is around the cost of a C2Q platform "taking the recent intel price cuts into account".

But as i said i think the PhII 945/950 or even i5 is the best way forward for the value minded performance seeker the i7 is just performance with a high priced booty. The OP seems Mid-Range consumer for whom i7 is not a option in any anyway.

Also PhII's have very good memory management not as good as i7's but better than C2Q so you can unrar things faster and on top have similar gaming capabilities as a C2Q.

 

[ajaidevsingh]

Double post..pls del

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
I would vote the PhII 940 now with the price cut the thing is the best thing to come along OC it to 3.5-3.6 can deal with most things you through at it. C2D on the other hand is also a good processor but its platform is being murdered by the Intel corp.

But if you can wait for another month or even less i would advice to go with the AMD Phenom II 945 or 950 because its the best thing at least that is my plan of action. I buy the PhII 945/ 950 use it with my DDR2 based 690 + Sb600 based MB till DDr3 prices come down and then buy a new MB and DDR3. This way i can even buy me a whole new platform be it Intel i5 or i7 instead of the MB+DDR3 if prices come down and i have the money to burn.

HUH?????????????? really?????????????

I dont see it....235 bucks for 500-600mhz OC? Performance clock for clock less then the Yorkfields let alone the i7 platform....

Who in his right mind would compare a PhII to a i7 they are targeted at totally different people. In the price value range PII 940 is not bad at all the whole platform is around the cost of a C2Q platform "taking the recent intel price cuts into account".

But as i said i think the PhII 945/950 or even i5 is the best way forward for the value minded performance seeker the i7 is just performance with a high priced booty. The OP seems Mid-Range consumer for whom i7 is not a option in any anyway.

Also PhII's have very good memory management not as good as i7's but better than C2Q so you can unrar things faster and on top have similar gaming capabilities as a C2Q.

I am not really trying to compare to the i7 which I know is expensive right now...Bleeding edge buddy!!!

Mid range is Yorkfields and I think they show they are the leaders of the current mid range pack...

Well winrar doesn't do much for me....

I look at the CAD apps and video encoding and I am seeing Intels clock for clock better then their AMD counterpart....price to price doing similarly....

 

[ajaidevsingh]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
I would vote the PhII 940 now with the price cut the thing is the best thing to come along OC it to 3.5-3.6 can deal with most things you through at it. C2D on the other hand is also a good processor but its platform is being murdered by the Intel corp.

But if you can wait for another month or even less i would advice to go with the AMD Phenom II 945 or 950 because its the best thing at least that is my plan of action. I buy the PhII 945/ 950 use it with my DDR2 based 690 + Sb600 based MB till DDr3 prices come down and then buy a new MB and DDR3. This way i can even buy me a whole new platform be it Intel i5 or i7 instead of the MB+DDR3 if prices come down and i have the money to burn.

HUH?????????????? really?????????????

I dont see it....235 bucks for 500-600mhz OC? Performance clock for clock less then the Yorkfields let alone the i7 platform....

Who in his right mind would compare a PhII to a i7 they are targeted at totally different people. In the price value range PII 940 is not bad at all the whole platform is around the cost of a C2Q platform "taking the recent intel price cuts into account".

But as i said i think the PhII 945/950 or even i5 is the best way forward for the value minded performance seeker the i7 is just performance with a high priced booty. The OP seems Mid-Range consumer for whom i7 is not a option in any anyway.

Also PhII's have very good memory management not as good as i7's but better than C2Q so you can unrar things faster and on top have similar gaming capabilities as a C2Q.

I am not really trying to compare to the i7 which I know is expensive right now...Bleeding edge buddy!!!

Mid range is Yorkfields and I think they show they are the leaders of the current mid range pack...

Well winrar doesn't do much for me....

I look at the CAD apps and video encoding and I am seeing Intels clock for clock better then their AMD counterpart....price to price doing similarly....

Well for avg. joes CAD apps doesn't do much....

But video encoding does. So lets see what Anandtech has to write about PhII's video encoding capabilities:-

"Now this is a tremendous victory for AMD. The Phenom II X4 940 doesn't break any performance records, nor can it outshine the Core i7 920, but what it does do is offer the same DivX encoding performance as Intel's Core 2 Quad Q9400. The cache and clock speed advantages are just too much for Intel's parts."

http://images.anandtech.com/gr...010709132536/17968.png

"The first pass of the x264 test is a very unique win for AMD; clock for clock it's faster than Penryn here. The trick is that the first pass of the x264 test is mostly an analysis pass, which really benefits from Phenom's integrated memory controller. It's an advantage that no amount of cache can overcome."

http://images.anandtech.com/gr...010709132536/17969.png

"Windows Media Encoder has always been an AMD favorite and Phenom II does extremely well here. Again, clock for clock we're at the same performance levels of Penryn, thanks to Phenom's IMC. The Phenom II X4 940 and 920 both outperform their price competitors; in fact, they both perform outside of their price class."

http://images.anandtech.com/gr...010709132536/17971.png

 

[marmasatt]

This is crazy. I'm just reading Anand's comparisons and Toms Hardware and researching prices and now I'm in the same boat. I'm buying later this week (perfect timing after both platform's price drops) and I was all over a Q9550 but it looks like you are into a similar competitor, if not slightly lesser performing for $150 less. Phenom II was not even on my radar until today, lol.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

I recently built a machine for my best bud using the Q9400 and Biostar P45 and I have to say it is the most overclockable combo I've ever worked on. 3.6ghz was stupid easy, 3.8ghz took a few tweaks to get prime stable.

And I agree with Duvie the Q9$$ chips beat the PhII in most all the apps I use, not by a large margin buy they are faster clock for clock. And Intel is the more mature platform as P35/P45 has been out awhile now

 

[f111]

Intel it, and overclock it, no way the AMD can compete with a good Intel overclock!

 

[hans007]

Originally posted by: edplayer
Why not wait some more time?

If you made it this long with a 2200+, whats a few more weeks? The industry is hurting a lot right now so I think you would be seeing lots of deals coming up. You seem like you know the pros and cons of each choice so why not wait some more time till an "excellent deal" comes up with whichever brand.

am2+ and am3 will be compatible for the foreseeable future.

apparently the way jedec designed the ddr3 standard made it so it is not a lot of circuitry to implement a controller than can do ddr2 and ddr3


that said, you should wait till february. if your budget is around a q6600 , then you probably can also afford say a q8200 or q8300 which are about the same or a phenom 920 with the price cut.


but if you wait until february the phenom II am3 8xx and the 910 will be out which should be even cheaper and still overclock well. and you can buy a better motherboard with SLI and all that fancy stuff.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I sure want to play with a 920 PH II on a cheap motherboard to give advice. Any advice on the motheroard ? I would prefer a 2 slot pcie one.

What about this one ??? 790x a good chipset ?

Or is a 780G good ?

Phenom II 920 / Biostar 790gx $255 ($244 AR)

Has sb750 with the 'magic pins' - improves PLL timing when OC'ing with something called ACC

XS thread on the Biostar. It looks like this mosfet cooler for $20 is the way to go for serious bidness.

 

[SChow]

Just an update, went with the Ph II 920. Fairly happy with my purchase, confident there wasn't a better deal.

Thanks for all the advice.