PDA

View Full Version : More Phenom Benchmarks


Zapablast05
11-19-07, 09:47 PM
http://blogs.pcmag.com/miller/2007/11/amds_new_phenom_chip_and_spide.php

"Intel has been selling quad-core CPUs for what seems like ages now, with current products ranging from the Core 2 Q6600 up to the new QX9650. The latter is based on Intel's new Yorkfield processor refresh at 45nm. AMD, then, is late to the quad-core party. Having just launched its new 4-core "Barcelona" Opteron processors for servers, AMD is now catching up on the desktop front with the same architecture for desktop chips."

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2218301,00.asp




"Processors and graphics chips are easily the rock stars of this industry, and for good reason. They're largely responsible for overall system performance, and that's even more appealing to enthusiasts than eyeliner and tight leather pants are to hair metal groupies. It's fitting, then, that the bulk of attention and excitement surrounding AMD's new Spider enthusiast platform will narrow on its new Phenom processor and Radeon HD 3800 series graphics cards. "

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/13628



"It's surreal isn't it? Is this how you pictured it? With forty-three days left in the year, AMD is finally letting us publish benchmarks of its long awaited Phenom microprocessor. The successor to K8, AMD's most successful micro-architecture to date, and the cornerstone of AMD's desktop microprocessor business for 2008: Phenom is here."

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3153

AthlonXP1800
11-19-07, 10:06 PM
Ohhh my GOD... 140W for 2.6GHz Phenom 9900!!!

2.4GHz Phenom 9700 use 125W, what if future 2.8GHz and 3GHz Phenom use insane 160W and 180W power?

Phenom is a joke, it remind of Pentium 4 Prescott. :thumbdwn:

hirantha
11-19-07, 10:13 PM
oh not so healthy for AMD, could their future be uncertain?

where did intel acquire this alien technology? oh wait, its from Israeli's.

Bearclaw
11-19-07, 11:21 PM
Overall, I am disappointed in clock speeds. Sure, speeds do not matter all that much anymore, but still. 2.4, etc. was on the low side for me to see.

jcrox
11-19-07, 11:30 PM
Ohhh my GOD... 140W for 2.6GHz Phenom 9900!!!

2.4GHz Phenom 9700 use 125W, what if future 2.8GHz and 3GHz Phenom use insane 160W and 180W power?

Phenom is a joke, it remind of Pentium 4 Prescott. :thumbdwn:

the 2.8 and 3.0 wont be out until the B3 revision which is supposedly supposed to bring the power down but really.... it seems they've been full of it on most aspects of these processors so I'm not sure if I believe it.

LORD-eX-Bu
11-19-07, 11:57 PM
damn motherboard support, what can you expect from 680i :rofl

mullet
11-20-07, 12:38 AM
Good grief thats just sad, I feel bad for AMD.

jAkUp
11-20-07, 01:25 AM
What I'm suprised at is how poor these CPU's seem to OC, 300MHz boost is nothing compared to how Intel OC's

Bearclaw
11-20-07, 01:39 AM
Good grief thats just sad, I feel bad for AMD.
Same here. They just seem to be just doing worse and worse. How much longer can they possibly go on?

nrdstrm
11-20-07, 01:55 AM
I've owned both companies processors, but I guess I'm a bit more of an Intel fan...That said, I was really hoping AMD would knock it out of the park with Phenom, so that Intel would be forced to move faster for big time improvements...Alas, it seems that is not going to happen... :(

Viral
11-20-07, 02:44 AM
I wouldn't say AMD has had a brilliant product launch since K7. K8 was quite slow off the bat, but this is a bit worse since Intel have finally picked up their game.

With future motherboards, and the B3 revision, things will likely improve, just like with K8. The problem is they need that performance and efficiency now. Lets just hope they finally have a bit of luck for 2008, phenom has potential, thats for sure.

hell_of_doom227
11-20-07, 12:34 PM
I guess AMD is going for low-edn and mid-end market. Now, i wonder with the prices they have for quad CPUs which are the higher then slowest Intel quad q6600, how are they going to compete?

If AMD drops the price for Phenom 9700 below $230, how are they going to make a profit out of it?

What's the deal with OEM?

hell_of_doom227
11-20-07, 12:35 PM
I've owned both companies processors, but I guess I'm a bit more of an Intel fan...That said, I was really hoping AMD would knock it out of the park with Phenom, so that Intel would be forced to move faster for big time improvements...Alas, it seems that is not going to happen... :(

Now, Intel will take easy and go to sleep mode. They don't need to rush for new products at all

hell_of_doom227
11-20-07, 12:38 PM
damn motherboard support, what can you expect from 680i :rofl

I tested many different 680i boards and i think i know what's the problem with them. Most of them don't have steady CPU voltage...it spikes a lot. Sometimes, it even goes down to 1.23 and default is 1.25 so when somebody attempts to do overclocking bum. PSU is not problem cause same behavior shows up for different PSUs. The solution is simply to manually set voltage for CPU to like 1.28, so when the quad core is pushed by app/game voltage will drop down to 1.25 enough for the system to be stable. I guess voltage regulators on motherboards are not right, kind of :thumbdwn:

DiscipleDOC
11-20-07, 01:07 PM
I tested many different 680i boards and i think i know what's the problem with them. Most of them don't have steady CPU voltage...it spikes a lot. Sometimes, it even goes down to 1.23 and default is 1.25 so when somebody attempts to do overclocking bum. PSU is not problem cause same behavior shows up for different PSUs. The solution is simply to manually set voltage for CPU to like 1.28, so when the quad core is pushed by app/game voltage will drop down to 1.25 enough for the system to be stable. I guess voltage regulators on motherboards are not right, kind of :thumbdwn:
So..are you saying that the vcore should be set to 1.28? I ask this because If I try to overclock my Extreme, it will lock up on me randomly....and I set my vcore to 1.4, and it did the same thing.

LORD-eX-Bu
11-20-07, 01:15 PM
no that doesn't apply to your CPU DD, DarthBeavis is having issues with his Yorkfield, yours is a Kentsfield, that is what hell_of_doom227 is talking about.

Zapablast05
11-23-07, 03:03 PM
Bump

Dazz
11-23-07, 03:47 PM
Ohhh my GOD... 140W for 2.6GHz Phenom 9900!!!

2.4GHz Phenom 9700 use 125W, what if future 2.8GHz and 3GHz Phenom use insane 160W and 180W power?

Phenom is a joke, it remind of Pentium 4 Prescott. :thumbdwn:
Intels rating is completly diffrent to AMD's TMD rating, Intel go by average consumption AMD goes by the max possible. So when Intel state 120 TMD it means under normal use 50% load, while AMD they mean 100% use. Confusing but thats the way they have done it for years.