REAL Phenom-II Benches!

[farlex85]

Sorry you got flustered but this was to the Reply of Kid, but got to admit i loved how you called me an asshole and then changed the wording so quick as so you wouldn't get in trouble with the mods.

Just because 1 company is doing better than the other doesn't mean it needs to push it on them that's like oppression. Also I'm looking at it from this standpoint, if Company B is doing better than Company A and Company A falls thru, Company B will most likely not release anything better aka like Microsoft, and then Jack up the Pricing and then they will most likely fall thru because they cant maintain their business. People are more educated about Computers now then they were In the early 2000s/ Late 90s, but they still have yet to learn business practices of Monopolizing Corps.Look at During the Early 90s Late 80s, IBM Released the "First" PC, well They were Over Freaking 5000 Dollars, Then Came along IBM Compatible Machines that Seriously forced them to lower Prices to a Decent level, Along with Apple.

I don't think anybody disagrees w/ the want for competition. Even the most diehard of intel fanboys (although I don't think there are that many) want competition. Which is why you see people scoffing sometimes at numbers when they don't seem like they will really do much for competition. The arguments here have arisen b/c many of us want to see AMD do better than it's seeming these might, we want them to beat i7 at a cheaper price and thus force intel to lower their prices, not simply release things in a way that doesn't really challenge newer procs, but instead challenges year old procs that would be lower by now anyway if there was competition.

 

[eidairaman1]

I called you an asshole, then realized that I don't really think you are one. It was just an asshole-ish comment, coming from someone I really don't have a problem with, so I reworded it. Trust me, if I really thought you were an asshole, I would've left it.

As far as the topic, I started off just pointing out flaws in the benches, and then making the obvious clock to clock comparisons between PII and Yorkfield. I still just think that AMD needs to do better. I really want them to release a product that's competitive in terms of performance per clock and OCability. Even if they adjust their prices to make a good price to performance comparison to Intel, Intel can just do the same, and if they are still behind on the performance per clock area, and can't OC far enough to compensate, the majority of the enthusiast community is going to continue to hammer them. That's bad publicity, and it's gonna hurt AMD even more.

They need something bigger than what these preliminary PII benches are showing us.

Well Wile-E im goin to say this about AMD, ya they may be down currently but they are not out, after 2 Gens of CPus that They Released, Aka Brisbane and Phenom 1, i say the Kuma, Next Athlon X2, Athlon X4, Phenom 2 are a step in the right direction.

 

[christof139]

Phenom II Series is not a single CPU, so what are you talking about. AMD is competing with Intel and many people are quite satisfied with AMD CPU's and the Opterons still outperform Xeons.

Phenom II's look like they will compete well with the lesser priced 17's and older Core 2 CPU's, at least that is what the tests are indicating. Plus, the Phenom II's will cost less. Hoepefully the days of $1,000 plus home sysytem CPU's will end, but Intel still seems to make those CPU's that actually aren't that much better performers than many less expensive Intel and AMD CPU's.

Yeah, good analogy to the HD 4000 series, and that is why Phenom 1 xx50 series CPU's are selling fairly well and why people are anxious to get the Phenom II Series CPU's since the benches on the Phenom II's show good and competive results.

Yeah, it's not your fault that AMD fell behind a bit just as Intel fell behind AMD a bit in the past. That's the way competition works.

Chris

 

[Wile E]

Well Wile-E im goin to say this about AMD, ya they may be down currently but they are not out, after 2 Gens of CPus that They Released, Aka Brisbane and Phenom 1, i say the Kuma, Next Athlon X2, Athlon X4, Phenom 2 are a step in the right direction.

Yes, a step in the right direction, I agree. But I fear it is not a step that is big enough. I really hope 09 is the year AMD turns it around. Their graphics division is finally on the ball, so I hope the cpu division follows suit. It can only help us.

I hope PII prove me wrong. I wouldn't mind switching to it.

 

[Damian^]

Hey, I am only speaking in fact. I have no preference to brand. I just want what performs the best.

Really? then why are you talking as if the Phenom II is already a fail if we have not even seen legit benchmarks?

 

[farlex85]

Phenom II Series is not a single CPU, so what are you talking about. AMD is competing with Intel and many people are quite satisfied with AMD CPU's and the Opterons still outperform Xeons.

Phenom II's look like they will compete well with the lesser priced 17's and older Core 2 CPU's, at least that is what the tests are indicating. Plus, the Phenom II's will cost less. Hoepefully the days of $1,000 plus home sysytem CPU's will end, but Intel still seems to make those CPU's that actually aren't that much better performers than many less expensive Intel and AMD CPU's.

Yeah, good analogy to the HD 4000 series, and that is why Phenom 1 xx50 series CPU's are selling fairly well and why people are anxious to get the Phenom II Series CPU's since the benches on the Phenom II's show good and competive results.

Yeah, it's not your fault that AMD fell behind a bit just as Intel fell behind AMD a bit in the past. That's the way competition works.

Chris

The ATI 4000 series is exactly what I'm talking about, they came in and beat or at least matched Nvidia's performance for far less price, which helped the market drastically. It's still too early to tell for sure, but it's looking like PII may just lower C2Q prices, which have been around for a bit now, and won't even go down that much. Of course, CPU "real-world" performance is subjective, and many users couldn't tell the difference b/t a low end x2 and a q9650 in every-day use, but the difference is there and depending on use there isn't enough competition.

 

[Wile E]

Phenom II Series is not a single CPU, so what are you talking about. AMD is competing with Intel and many people are quite satisfied with AMD CPU's and the Opterons still outperform Xeons.

Phenom II's look like they will compete well with the lesser priced 17's and older Core 2 CPU's, at least that is what the tests are indicating. Plus, the Phenom II's will cost less. Hoepefully the days of $1,000 plus home sysytem CPU's will end, but Intel still seems to make those CPU's that actually aren't that much better performers than many less expensive Intel and AMD CPU's.

Yeah, good analogy to the HD 4000 series, and that is why Phenom 1 xx50 series CPU's are selling fairly well and why people are anxious to get the Phenom II Series CPU's since the benches on the Phenom II's show good and competive results.

Yeah, it's not your fault that AMD fell behind a bit just as Intel fell behind AMD a bit in the past. That's the way competition works.

Chris

You are completely missing the point that AMD is not cheaper per performance anymore. And AMD's market share has been falling since Core 2. They ARE NOT doing well.

The reason the top Intel chips are so expensive is because AMD can't even make anything that competes with them. If they could, the prices wouldn't be this high. It's what happens when there is no competition. AMD has completely lost the high end. Which in turn hurts them even more because high end buyers are pretty vocal most of the time.

 

[eidairaman1]

Yes, a step in the right direction, I agree. But I fear it is not a step that is big enough. I really hope 09 is the year AMD turns it around. Their graphics division is finally on the ball, so I hope the cpu division follows suit. It can only help us.

I hope PII prove me wrong. I wouldn't mind switching to it.

I say this is the beginning because Despite the 3800 Being not up to Snuff it did pave the way for the 4800 series.

 

[a_ump]

DAM!!!! haha what an intense thread, hmmm well i definetly think the Phenom 2's are improved mhz to mhz compared to phenom 1's, but yea if they start to sell good, intel will lower price and the phenom sale will either slow down or do just as poor as phenom's did. Yea new architecture is needed for sure. Though the fact that they don't have the best finances may be hurting that, new architecture= big monies to get there. I hope Phenom II sells but i'm kinda dissapointed but i am sure intel will bring prices down if not then Phenom II's will for sure sell. i myself had planned on going Phenom II had they performed better than my q6600 enough to justify it but it's simply not there, poor AMD, how long will they have to live off their graphical department to survive?


Also that problem with MTW with the 8xxx series and above idk about that haha, but MTW II did have some issues when i had my 8800GT that you mentioned happened in MTW I, like troops walking the opposite direction though it only happened when i told them to attack an enemy and only sometimes.

 

[Wile E]

Really? then why are you talking as if the Phenom II is already a fail if we have not even seen legit benchmarks?

I said judging by preliminary benches. I said IF these are to be believed, PII is already a fail. AKA: educated guess based on preliminary numbers, and knowing that PII is still just K8 rehashed.

So you got me, it's not pure fact. It's facts used to form an opinion.

 

[kid41212003]

In that website, there is a 3dmark vantage cpu test for the Phenom II 3GHz, it scored ~10k, and Phenom 9950 at 3GHz scored the same.
There will be different, but I don't expect anything higher than 5%.

 

[Wile E]

I say this is the beginning because Despite the 3800 Being not up to Snuff it did pave the way for the 4800 series.

That is a very good point. Let us hope that's the case here. But even if that is the case, I don't think PII will be that impressive. Lets see what PIII brings. lol.

 

[a_ump]

That is a very good point. Let us hope that's the case here. But even if that is the case, I don't think PII will be that impressive. Lets see what PIII brings. lol.

haha, already looking to the next gen . makes sense though, that would be banging if AMD is working on a new architecture or has been and just release phenom II to put a lil more performance out there than phenom I and iron out the bugs. but we can only hope. And what about the fusion CPU/GPU or w/e when is that supposed to release?

 

[Wile E]

haha, already looking to the next gen . makes sense though, that would be banging if AMD is working on a new architecture or has been and just release phenom II to put a lil more performance out there than phenom I and iron out the bugs. but we can only hope. And what about the fusion CPU/GPU or w/e when is that supposed to release?

I thought that was slated for 2010 or 11. And it's only targeted at the integrated gfx/notebook market, iirc.

 

[christof139]

You are completely missing the point that AMD is not cheaper per performance anymore. And AMD's market share has been falling since Core 2. They ARE NOT doing well.

The reason the top Intel chips are so expensive is because AMD can't even make anything that competes with them. If they could, the prices wouldn't be this high. It's what happens when there is no competition. AMD has completely lost the high end. Which in turn hurts them even more because high end buyers are pretty vocal most of the time.

Almost every review I have read states and shows calculations that most AMD CPU's are a good bang for the buck and some are stated a giving the best bang for the buck.

Yeah, Intel is getting away with it, but I have seen benchmarks where the expensive top end Intels were nearly, matched, matched or even beaten at certain tasks by lower priced Intel and AMD dualies and what nots. None of these top end expensive Intels are giving a good bang for the buck as the less expensive Intels and AMD's are doing.

To be competitive AMD or any other corp. in any other industry does not have to be competive in the extreme high end and small market niche. AMD is aiming for the low and mid range market and are starting to make good headway.

Chris

 

[eidairaman1]

I think Fusion is the Cheap lowpower solution for the mobile market, instead of having 2 additional chips to power whynot have 1 is what they are goin for i think.

 

[farlex85]

Almost every review I have read states and shows calculations that most AMD CPU's are a good bang for the buck and some are stated a giving the best bang for the buck.

Yeah, Intel is getting away with it, but I have seen benchmarks where the expensive top end Intels were nearly, matched, matched or even beaten at certain tasks by lower priced Intel and AMD dualies and what nots. None of these top end expensive Intels are giving a good bang for the buck as the less expensive Intels and AMD's are doing.

To be competitive AMD or any other corp. in any other industry does not have to be competive in the extreme high end and small market niche. AMD is aiming for the low and mid range market and are starting to make good headway.

Chris

Top end products never offer good bang for your buck, that's not what top end is for. 4870x2, intel extreme's, they don't offer good per/dollar, they simply offer the best. If they are uncontested they will remain at ridiculous prices. Intel recently has consistently charged very high for their top end of each category too, be it the top dual (8600) or top quad (q9650 before i7) they aren't priced competitively, b/c well, they have no competition.

The only time you will see a lower end dual match up w/ a high end quad in a bench is where multi-thread doesn't come into play, such as games.

And there is certainly something to be said for mainstream, as I said the average person won't know the difference b/t x2 and a c2q. However, the average person isn't building a rig either. And as such, the enthusiast market is where individual sales comes in big. Then the average joe who doesn't know anything about it hears intel is better, and won't buy a laptop w/ amd. And the laptop costs the same either way, as the chips really cost the same. As wile e said, enthusiast is important.

 

[PaulieG]

I'm just waiting to see what happens on release, and I get my hands on PII. I've learned to never trust preliminary benchmarks. We all know that sometimes they are just complete BS, or they are based on one or two particularly good or bad chips.

I've decided to gamble on AMD for the first time in a couple of years. I'm really hoping the switch is worth it.

 

[cdawall]

would everyone calm down holy shit this thread is hostile

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

where?

 

[farlex85]

Whoa easy mr. capital letters. The hostility was in the previous page and is done with now, and was really quite brief and not a big deal to begin with. No reason to bring it back or make things worse..

 

[cdawall]

Whoa easy mr. capital letters. The hostility was in the previous page and is done with now. No reason to bring it back.

i had no caps at all?

 

[Wile E]

i had no caps at all?

OK, how about "mr. really big red letters"?

 

[farlex85]

i had no caps at all?

Indeed, you win this round.......

 

[cdawall]

OK, how about "mr. really big red letters"?

thats much better

can we get back on track though all i want to see is some real phenom numbers.

oh and i talked to an intel guy he sells the dual server i7 mobo's to oil/gas companies phenom II is in some deep shit if it doesn't get its ass released now


his current PC is dual i7 ES chips (8 cores 16 threads@3.2ghz) and a FX series card