View Full Version : Phenom X4 GP-7000 vs Athlon 64 X2 6400+ tests

11-02-07, 04:49 AM
Phenom X4 GP-7000(2.0GHz)
Athlon 64 X2 6400+(3.2GHz)
GeForce 8600 GTS
Corsair DDR2-1066 1GBx2




Phenom X4 is no better than Athlon 64 X2 in games and the memory controller is really suck. In recently 3GHz Phenom X4's Crysis CPU benchmark, the minimum fps was dismayal 8.28fps which was nearly 4 times slower than Intel's dual and quad core CPUs, 2GHz Phenom X4's minimum fps could be 5fps at the same resolution.

I wonder what the price of Phenom X4 GP-7000 will it be when it launch on 20 Nov? If it will be 2 times more expensive than Athlon 64 X2 6400+ then I think nobody bother to buy it that have slower games performance.

When people will found out what Phenom X4 is like compare to Athlon 64 X2, Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad and they will start to lose faith in AMD after so many broken promises.

It does not look like Triple core will save AMD. :(


11-02-07, 05:09 AM
Somebody wanna explain why AMD is going for triple core? How is that suppose to be better than a quad core? :confused:

11-02-07, 05:23 AM
Somebody wanna explain why AMD is going for triple core? How is that suppose to be better than a quad core? :confused:

AMD decided to go triple core by disable one of quad's core to save from bad yield waste. If both triple and quad core had same clock speed then the triple core wont be better than a quad core, I think AMD aiming to increase triple core clock speed higher than quad core clock speed to achieve near the performance of a quad core.

But Intel wont go triple core route, they very happy with quad core's 90% yield that AMD found it impossible to achieved.

11-02-07, 05:51 AM
It's not that bad considering the Phenom is 1.2GHz slower and hot on the heals of the Athlon 64 X2 6400+. Although the memory performance is very low would explain alot to the lower then expected performance. But they did say that the revisions under B2 suffered from poor memory performance. Might be that they have one of thoses, as for the motherboard might have some issue considering it's a beta bios. It has been officaly stated by AMD that the triple core will have higher clock speeds compaired to quad cores, As the disable the weakest core. It has been stated by Intel they are happy with their yield of dual cores which is why they are not going for native quad cores and sticking to two dual cores for a quad processor as they belive it to be a suaside run for native quad cores. But considering they are playing games on a GeForce 8600 GTS which is a pretty sh!t card, it's not stated if it was will gfx set to low or high as such i would take these with a grain of salt intill they are officallt unvailed and run something better then a budget graphics card.

11-03-07, 08:09 PM
Gotta love useless benchmarks. *waits for credible reviews

11-03-07, 09:36 PM
the memory controller is really suck.

You is really suck.