1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Pre-release Tests Conducted on AMD Denreb

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Jul 11, 2008.

  1. vojc New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Messages:
    85 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    u all forget something, we talk abaut 4 cores here, not 2 cores, tell me how many q6600 or q9*** can work on 4ghz at 1.25V? :) my q6600 need 1.475 for 3.2-3.4GHz
     
  2. DaedalusHelios

    DaedalusHelios

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,931 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    816
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC, USA
    Q6600 is 65nm. Not 45nm.
     
  3. Kei

    Kei

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    2,122 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    618
    A Phenom at the same clocks as the dual core AMD chips is significantly faster. I run my Phenom in X2 mode majority of the time as I don't need the power all day and I am VERY much faster than any of the Athlon 64 X2 chips at the same speed. As long as we can get the same clocks the Phenom is much faster...in order to equal the Phenom in speed the Athlons need to be clocked significantly higher, so in a round about way you just complimented the Phenom and we thank you haha.

    K
     
  4. DaedalusHelios

    DaedalusHelios

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,931 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    816
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC, USA
    They are behind in game benches..... thats not synthetic... thats real performance.:laugh:


    Pentium D was crap. Early Phenoms were crap. You win some, you lose some. I just find it funny when people dodge the facts.
     
  5. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,797 (3.61/day)
    Thanks Received:
    546
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    That was the biggest thing I noticed, the oc potential. Its a hell of a lot more than the current phenoms, even their black editions. I also like the 6mb of l3 cache, much needed for them. @45nm this engineering sample is a tad bit higher on volts than Id like, but most AMD chips have higher than normal voltages compared with Intel. This is the first step, I foresee alot more chips with better potential from AMD.

    Also, SuperPI was never AMDs strong point. the p4 vs a64 shows that.
     
    pentastar111 says thanks.
  6. DaedalusHelios

    DaedalusHelios

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,931 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    816
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC, USA
    So you would pay the price for a quad, and have to compare it to the same companies old tech, to make it look good, rather than compare it to the opposing companies product line?

    ~Largest run-on sentence in the world^^^^
     
  7. rhythmeister New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    987 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    32
    Location:
    Belfast...N. Ireland mate!
    Good god that thing is making me want to wait for a release date instead of going Phenom 8750 and ocing in a 780 based mATX board!

    Good old AMD, how much would the intel fanbois be paying for their "quad" cores without AMD nipping at their heals and giving us all superb value for money? :confused:

    I've got an old 2500 XP-M that takes more than 1.65V to touch 2.3GHz and these new beasts are hitting 3.4GHz with four cores? It's insane I tells ya! :respect:
     
    WarEagleAU says thanks.
  8. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    i have an early phenom i wouldn't call 2.8ghz crap ;)
     
    Kei says thanks.
  9. DaedalusHelios

    DaedalusHelios

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,931 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    816
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC, USA
    My main reasoning was the errata.:)

    PS You could make whatever processor you picked up clock well. You aren't scared of frying anything. You bought a Celeron just to murder it. That phenom better do what you want it to, or you will decide to murder it and grab another. Its a massacre!
     
  10. Paintface

    Paintface New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    389 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Ill be finally upgrading to quadcore when these 45nm phenoms come out.

    The performance is more than good :)

    Most important though remember the prices are of the CPUs you compare it to, along with the cost of the mainboard, both which AMD is usually cheaper then intel comparing the same performance.

    I think its wrong to compare the best intel has to the best AMD has but neglecting the price difference, but sadly many look at who has the best performing CPU and than go down the list of what CPU they can actually afford.

    Im not a die hard fanboy but i do prefer AMD, i had their CPUs since 1994, they made it even possible for me to afford a PC back then, they always had good price/performance even when they wrecked the competition with their athlon 64s, which cant be said of Intel.
    Also even if the fastest AMD is half the speed of the best intel, games dont require quadcores or that kind of performance, so its not an issue for me at all either.

    Glad to see they are back on track, ill get it along with a new mobo and a 4870 end of the year.
     
  11. johnnyfiive

    johnnyfiive

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,892 (1.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    876
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Phenoms are solid processors. They are not huge overclockers and we all know that. When they were first released they were the much cheaper quad core option. If your not an overclocker or your a content builder its a good choice. I'm pretty satisfied with mine. Crysis performs much better on it then people give it credit for. With my CrossFired 3870 setup I get 35fps in HIGH at 1680x1050, this is at 2.3GHz. Thats not bad at all. I've seen people with the same GPU setup with a Q6600 at 3.4-3.6GHz get the same fps. So that shows you that the Phenom is not bad in ALL AREA's.
     
    Kei says thanks.
  12. Darkrealms

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    851 (0.31/day)
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Location:
    USA
    I really hope AMD has a lot more work planned for these : ( They don't look BAD but they need something impressive at this point. Decent and price point will only take them so far . . .

    Common AMD give us something to look forward to!


    Fanboy note AMD/Nvidia, I want something good to come from AMD
     
  13. kid41212003

    kid41212003

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,584 (1.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Location:
    California
    It's not too bad, it's a reasonable release. It may not out-perform the Intel current 45nm Quad-core, but It'll probabaly have a really attractive prices. And all the current users who have AM2 motherboard still can use this CPU.
     
  14. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    meh TLB fix is off and i have yet to have an issue however no idea what you mean i have yet to kill a chip :rolleyes:

    i just have no problem cranking volts through things everyone i see is a pansy and gets scared with the smallest increase lol no problem with 2v through my 5000BE if it lets me hit the WR on it
     
  15. mamisano New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    Messages:
    43 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5
    This is quite good news, considering how much better the CPUs are supposed to overclock with AMD's upcoming SB750 southbridge.

    Deneb + 790GX + SB750 + HD4700x2 would be a sweet system!
     
  16. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,921 (6.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,021
    A processor doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg to crunch number or to outperform this processor. A Q6600 is sub-$200 and crunches numbers like crazy.

    Where you looking at the same benchmarkes I was? Most of them were not synthetic, or at least as non-synthetic as a benchark can get. They were testing real work applications. Just because they weren't games, doesn't mean they aren't real world. The world consists of a lot more than games.

    ProShow is a real world application, and the Q6600 destroys the 9850. Sony Vega is a real world application and the Q6600 beats the 9850 again. Excel is a real world application, and again the Q6600 hands the 9850 it's ass. Cinebench is a benchmark program based on a real world 3D Modeling app, essentially what a time demo would be to a game, and this is the only real world benchmark the 9850 managed to equal the Q6600 in one of the two tests. POV is another real world app, and the Q6600 beats even the 9950 in one of the tests, and just barely loses to the 9850 in the other.

    I agree, that measuring the two with SuperPi doesn't give the whole picture, but it does give part of the picture. SuperPi cores are no where near the end all and be all of tests, but to a lot of poeple they are important. Different processors are always going to be better at different things.

    Right now, all we have to go on is SuperPi times. As more details emerge, we will get a better idea of the performance of these processor. But for right now, all we have to go on are the SuperPi times, and they suck. Yes, they are better than the previous AMD processors, but saying they are better than the worst* isn't really saying much is it?

    *I'm not saying AMD processors are the worst, I'm just saying they have the worst SuperPi times.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  17. aGeoM New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    217 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    38
    Location:
    Algarve/Portugal
    Nice to see some earlier tests on Deneb, it will be my next CPU to replace the B2.

    Nice work AMD, now put them out.:nutkick:

    :p
     
  18. holy_

    holy_ New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    44 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Location:
    Virtual World
    I'm happy that AMD will release 45 nm Quad ;)
    Hope can get this when I have money
     
  19. robodude666 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    144 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Remember a couple of things. SuperPi is hungry for Cache which AMD processors lack in comparison to Intel. The Intel CPUs will always get better SuperPi results regardless of speed.

    To get these types of SuperPi results with an Athlon X2 or other processor you'd need to OC to some CRAZY high speeds with LN2. My X2 3800+ @ 3GHz w/ 1000MHz memory was only getting 30s from superpi. So 23s at 3GHz is a free 7s drop which will mean nicer gaming performance.

    The 3rd thing to remember is that SuperPi is not the only benchmark. There are other bunchmarks which are important to take into account. Maybe the new Phenoms are bad at SuperPi but they a ton faster at other important real world tests?

    So far I like what I am seeing. Might have to dust off my 790FX-DQ6 later and get one for a test bed.

    -robodude666
     
    WarEagleAU says thanks.
  20. Thefumigator

    Thefumigator

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    412 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Yes, still they could run 4 instances of superpi at the same time, each in their respective core.
     
  21. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,625 (5.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,480
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    I agree completely but if you look at it from a slightly different perspective then....well, I will leave you to decide, I had one peach of a single core Athlon 4000+ San Diego chip about 20 months ago and got it to about 3.2gig which at the time I think got me the top AMD superPI score in these forums, thing is, even today, a 2008 AMD chip running superPI at 3.2gig will not post a time greatly faster, why, because the basic architecture, instruction set and to some degree ...efficiency in AMD's chips has not moved forward at any real pace, now if you go back those same months, see what time in superPI a 3gig P4 chip was posting, compare that with a wolfdale at 3gig and their is a VAST difference because Intel has made HUGE leaps in technology, architecture and efficiency.

    Dont get me wrong, I am not a fan of artificial benchmarks and I am a fan of AMD and always will be, I was brought up on them, where superPI does work though.....is in identifying those performance hike's by making realistic comparisons between architectural changes.
     
    Kei, WarEagleAU and yogurt_21 say thanks.
  22. vojc New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Messages:
    85 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    hmmmm....well intel did two steps backwards on c2d CPUs (FSB )
    so that why pentium 3 was faster than P4 on same clock C2D is mor like P3 in general, ok they have sse3,4......
     
  23. yogurt_21

    yogurt_21

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    4,393 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    560
    Location:
    AZ
    wtf did I just get lumped in as an intel fanboy? wow, that's a stretch. just because my system has an intel cpu doens't mean i wouldn't jump back over to amd at the first sign of good performance. the problem is that no phenom out now or about ot be relerased can best my current cpu. so I keep the intel.

    it's funny that the term fanboy has been thrown about so easily because my last intel before this one (in my primary rig) was a pentium 2 since then it's been nothing but amd's till the q6700. I went from pentium 2 to a duron 600, to an athlon t-bird 950MHZ, to a 1.4GHZ athlon t-bird, to an athlon xp 2000, to an athlon xp 2500 barton, to an athlon xp 2600m, to an athlon 64 3500 newcastle, to a 4000 sandiego, to an fx-62. then finally the q6700.


    I've followed amd in both good times and bad and this has to be the longest period I've seen them not be competitive. the k-6's flopped but they resurrected themselves one year later with the Athlon, the most successful period in amd's history. (yes revenue and stocks were higher than the athlon 64 empire) the athlon 64x2's became dated and amd decided to launch the phenom, now more than 2 years later and still no competitve cpu.

    fanboyism is one thing, but seriously I need some proof that amd is doing more than just play around and highlight ati. I need the k7 day amd back. ability to offer a product cheap that beats intel in gaming but loses in multimedia. (as with modern gpu's, lack of multimedia performance can be offloaded by the gpu)

    I'm not saying I'm taking this as the definitive performance os the new phenoms, I'm just saying that I think amd needs to move on past the phenoms and make something better, the k6's were set for a 2 year run, amd cut that off and intro'd the k7 early to stay competitive. they need to do the same here.
     
  24. Thefumigator

    Thefumigator

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    412 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    58
    I agree. I'm an owner of both an Athlon 64 X2 and Phenom X4, both systems are 2.2Ghz.
    I work in video encoding and even in 2 cores, the Phenom is faster, so worth the upgrade on the cheap.

    TMPGEnc 5000 frames Xvid file (virtual dub as frameserver)
    Athlon X2 4200 2.2Ghz:

    1 threads...133s
    2 threads...71s

    Phenom X4 9550 2.2Ghz:

    1 threads...108s
    2 threads...55s
    3 threads...50s
    4 threads...50s

    Phenom X4 9550 2.2Ghz
    2 instances of TMPGEnc (+2 instances of Virtual dub server):

    1 threads...207s
    2 threads...106s
    3 threads...79s
    4 threads...59s
     
    Kei says thanks.
  25. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.39/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    Agreed the problem is very simple though if you compare overall designs you end up with something scary and it makes sense.

    The AThlon 64 is an Athlon K7 class chip at its heart, it has 64bit interngers and an IMC but at its roots its a K7, but thats not to bad honestly.

    Core2 Duo at its heart is actully a pentium Pro, its P6 based design tweaked.

    Now we all say the last major P6 design lost to AMD i correct you, AMD K7 lost to Coppermine in every gaming test or multimedia test, why did they well so well, well because the coppermine launched behind sechudle and topped out at 1ghz as the 1.13 was unstable and by the time the P3 was fixed the P4 was out and the AThlon XP was months away. But P6 was always stronger than K7 thats where Intel got them, AMD has to go back to thinking like they did then, how to undercut intel how to sell say a 3ghz chip for 50% less than intel ect
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page