PDA

View Full Version : First 2GHz Barcelona benchmarks


AthlonXP1800
08-30-07, 10:59 AM
2GHz Barcelona completely owned by Xeon and Core 2 Duo in every benchmarks.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=157136

In Super PI 1M test, K10 2GHz Barcelona is 5% faster than 100 K8 dual core Athlon 64 X2 6000+. :o

Now we know why AMD are very quiet about it.

a_big_burger
08-30-07, 12:15 PM
Can you post benchmark comparision summary. I don't want to go through the long email chain. Thanks!

DRen72
08-30-07, 01:50 PM
As expected.
I still need to see more benchmarks first though.

AthlonXP1800
08-31-07, 01:24 AM
Here the benchmarks summary:

64 Bit Cinebench R10

2GHz Opteron 2332: 1896 (1 core)
2GHz Opteron 2332: 13295 (8 cores)
2.4GHz Xeon E5320: 2844 (1 core)
2.4GHz Xeon E5320: 17295 (4 cores)

2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6800: 10408 (4 cores)
3.33GHz Penryn Duo: 7041 (2 cores)
3.33GHz Penryn Quad: 12881 (4 cores)
3GHz V8 Penryn: 22936 (8 cores)

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/521/1/

Fritz 9 Chess Benchmark

2GHz Opteron 2332: 8224 (8 cores)
3GHz Xeon X5365: 13147 (8 cores)
3GHz Xeon X5365: 7833 (4 cores)
2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6800: 8012 (4 cores)
3GHz Athlon 64 FX-74: 6547 (2 cores)

wPrime Benchmark v1.43

2GHz Opteron 2332: 32M Test 10,641s (8 cores)
2GHz Opteron 2332: 1024M Test 327,437s (8 cores)
2.66GHz Xeon X5355: 32M Test 8,203s (8 cores)
2.66GHz Xeon X5355: 1024M Test 243,812s (8 cores)

SuperPI / mod1.5XS

2GHz Opteron 2332: 1M - 39.657s (8 cores)
2GHz Athlon 64 X2 6000+: 1M - 41.406s (2 cores)
2.2GHz Athlon 64 X2 4400+: 1M - 41.884s (2 cores)
2GHz Core 2 Duo T7200: 1M - 27.959s (2 cores)

:eek: Oh my god, my new Dell Ispiron 9400's 2GHz T7200 owned 8 cores 2GHz Opteron 2332. :lol:

Mr_LoL
08-31-07, 03:05 AM
Ugh. Not looking good. I wonder if AMD have anything else up their sleeve.

Blacklash
08-31-07, 06:04 AM
Looks like I'll be sticking with this Q6600 for a while.

DRen72
08-31-07, 10:23 AM
I'm still thinking Quad Wolfdale 3.33GHz this fall.

AthlonXP1800
08-31-07, 10:35 AM
I'm still thinking Quad Wolfdale 3.33GHz this fall.

Wolfdale is dual core Penryn, I assume you are talking about Quad core Yorkfield. :)

hell_of_doom227
08-31-07, 11:56 AM
Those stupid benchmarks means nothing. Bring the games...they are the best benchmarks, and tells you exactly where you at with CPU.

DRen72
08-31-07, 12:15 PM
I'm still thinking Quad Wolfdale 3.33GHz this fall.Wolfdale is dual core Penryn, I assume you are talking about Quad core Yorkfield. :)Geez...I'm still getting that confused. I'll go sit in the corner with the cone cap. Yorkfield for me.

rhink
08-31-07, 05:48 PM
Barcelona is targeted at server apps. Games are an afterthought. That's why the opteron version is coming out first. We'll see what things look like in a few months.

AthlonXP1800
09-01-07, 12:14 AM
Actually Wolfdale is the desktop dual core, Penryn the mobile dual core :)

Yes the next mobile, desktop, workstation and server chips are from Penryn family. Penryn is the codename for 45nm shrink of Core 2 family. :)

Viral
09-01-07, 07:31 AM
Barcelona is targeted at server apps. Games are an afterthought. That's why the opteron version is coming out first. We'll see what things look like in a few months.

Just like the K8? Because the K8 was real bad for games, P4 was much better. AMD are focused on the server market, just as they were with the original Opteron where it released fist in that market also. However, this is also because the initial chips they actually have stockpiled make more sense in the server market with their lower clock speeds. No, they aren't completely ideal, but they are viable, where on the desktop sector people would just whine about them only being 2GHz and make it their mission to spoil the name of AMD to all they come into contact with.

a12ctic
09-01-07, 04:36 PM
Just like the K8? Because the K8 was real bad for games, P4 was much better. AMD are focused on the server market, just as they were with the original Opteron where it released fist in that market also. However, this is also because the initial chips they actually have stockpiled make more sense in the server market with their lower clock speeds. No, they aren't completely ideal, but they are viable, where on the desktop sector people would just whine about them only being 2GHz and make it their mission to spoil the name of AMD to all they come into contact with.

huh? the k8 destroyed the p4 in games? is this sarcasm? the only thing the p4 beat the k8 was in superpi, and thats only cause intel tacks on a ton of cache on their chips.

also, if you read on in the post, there are many things that challenge the integrity of that poster, even so, the benchmarks posted mean little towards real world performance. althon just loves spewing his bull crap =]

Viral
09-02-07, 06:16 AM
huh? the k8 destroyed the p4 in games? is this sarcasm? the only thing the p4 beat the k8 was in superpi, and thats only cause intel tacks on a ton of cache on their chips.

also, if you read on in the post, there are many things that challenge the integrity of that poster, even so, the benchmarks posted mean little towards real world performance. althon just loves spewing his bull crap =]

I thought it was common knowledge that K8 Opteron released before K8 Athlon 64's, just like this time around with K10. So him saying:
That's why the opteron version is coming out first.
...and concluding that it's not "designed" for games because of that just doesn't make sense given that the Athlon 64 was released under the exact same circumstances.

So yes, I thought the sarcasm was as obvious as K8's dominance over P4.. Guess I'll have to break out the tags next time.

jcrox
09-03-07, 03:15 PM
http://www.vnunet.com/tv/?channel=vnunet.com%20TV&clipid=1386_vnunet_0096

The above video shows FP performance of 2.0GHz amd vs 2.33GHz Intel

Average scores:

AMD: 78

Intel: 60

Wonder what another 330mhz would do for the AMD

nekrosoft13
09-03-07, 03:43 PM
http://www.vnunet.com/tv/?channel=vnunet.com%20TV&clipid=1386_vnunet_0096

The above video shows FP performance of 2.0GHz amd vs 2.33GHz Intel

Average scores:

AMD: 78

Intel: 60

Wonder what another 330mhz would do for the AMD

haha, i love how it says shipping August

jcrox
09-03-07, 04:08 PM
haha, i love how it says shipping August

I think they may have meant August 09 lol

rhink
09-04-07, 02:03 AM
Just like the K8? Because the K8 was real bad for games, P4 was much better. AMD are focused on the server market, just as they were with the original Opteron where it released fist in that market also. However, this is also because the initial chips they actually have stockpiled make more sense in the server market with their lower clock speeds. No, they aren't completely ideal, but they are viable, where on the desktop sector people would just whine about them only being 2GHz and make it their mission to spoil the name of AMD to all they come into contact with.

Yes, just like the K8. My point is more that AMD's doomsayers are missing the point if they focus on gaming performance. It could be a harbinger of things to come, but then again, it might not... why not just wait and see what happens?

Viral
09-04-07, 03:24 AM
haha, i love how it says shipping August

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070831115038.html

Advanced Micro Devices on Friday confirmed it had begun shipments of its highly-anticipated quad-core server microprocessors in August.