Woooooahhh: new OFFICIAL PII speed record

[Bytor]

Damn it goat. You have me a bit worried. I've got a 940 on pre-order, after selling all of my Intel stuff.

Worried also... I don't have one on pre-order, but not sure I will play once it comes out...
May wait a little and see what others say about it...

 

[KBD]

Worried also... I don't have one on pre-order, but not sure I will play once it comes out...
May wait a little and see what others say about it...

i dont think its time to worry yet, wait for some reviews, non-ES chips, mature bioses, etc. I still think it should be a great chip and a more or less a match for C2Q.

 

[cdawall]

Damn it goat. You have me a bit worried. I've got a 940 on pre-order, after selling all of my Intel stuff.

you'll be fine trust me i have ummm seen some benchies that i cant post here.....if you catch my drift

 

[fullinfusion]

Take a look @ CPUID's hall of fame:

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=464429

5432.08 MHz ...

EDIT

Unlike that 6.0xx MHz record, this one has a CPU-Z validation and notice the RAM used: i wonder if the days of having highly OCable RAM in order to make a very high OC are over (for AMD, anyway) ...

Geil ram! you gota be joking!!!! know wonder .... DOMINATOR OR PATRIOT sticks are the key

 

[BenchZowner]

Geil ram! you gota be joking!!!! know wonder .... DOMINATOR OR PATRIOT sticks are the key

GeIL used to have some wonderful kits back in the DDR1 Socket939 era, the incredible 1.5-2-2-5 UTT-BH5 kits that used to hit DDR1-500+ ( 250MHz+ ) 1.5*-2-2-5, the GeIL One TCCD series, with some great batches ( DDR1-550+ (275MHz+) 2.5-3-3-5 and DDR1-600+ (300MHz+) 3-x-x-x ) and the "Emperor" the kits with the weird ICs that could do 2.5-3-3-7 at DDR1-540+ ( 270MHz+ ).
They also had some great DDR2 kits with Micron D9GMH & D9GKX chips doing DDR2-1100+ 4-4-4-12 and those amazing cherry-picked DDR2-1200 4-4-4-12 kits... I burnt mine at only 3.91V

It's all about the ICs ( chips ) used and the binning process, the rest is just marketing and a brand name

RAM ain't that much of a factor this time, as they're using the CPU Multiplier to overclock the processor instead of raising the HTT frequency.

 

[Raiderman]

lol - because I have one and I hate it ... I am no troll because I speak the truth just a performance whore,... oh and it still sucks yeah it clocks but w/o performance... no SS for you LOL

Edit - I have 2

Double Edit - The MSI 790GX Platinum board is epic fail ... wish AMD sent a DFI FX instead, oh well DFI is sending one anywho...

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=73124

You seem to be pretty good with that camera when you are selling off your hardware!

Why dont you put it to use and show us some pics of your Phenom II's???

Also, how does someone that is selling hardware two months ago, because he lost his job, all of a sudden have access to engineering samples of the new Phenom???

 

[BenchZowner]

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=73124

You seem to be pretty good with that camera when you are selling off your hardware!

Why dont you put it to use and show us some pics of your Phenom II's???

Also, how does someone that is selling hardware two months ago, because he lost his job, all of a sudden have access to engineering samples of the new Phenom???

You don't have to be a jerk mate.
I'm quite sure that you could ask him to show you a photo of the CPU in a kind way.
Offending the other party in such a way doesn't cut it most of the times, and why should he post a photo after all if you don't believe him and asked him to post some photos ( to prove that he has a CPU in his possession ) in such a way ?

Someone who "lost" his job two months ago, moved from Iowa to New York and is now working with another company in the IT business.
By the way those chips are the latest revision and the same with the ones in the channels now that are being moved to the shops already

 

[Raiderman]

It's how you look at it that makes the difference between saying that it sucks or that it's a good product.

They do overclock better than the first generation of Phenoms, the average 24/7 stable overclock on air with a Phenom II 920 / 940 will be at approx 3.75GHz, with some good chips reaching or even surpassing the 4GHz mark by a bit, and some "duds" stopping at 3.6GHz or so.
Unfortunately they're not on par with a Core i7 ( even with HyperThreading disabled ) on a clock per clock basis ( clock per clock = running both processors at the same operating frequency ).
They're also behind "Penryn" ( Q9450/Q9550/Q9650/QX9650/QX9770 ) on a clock per clock basis as well.






As for this statement, totally false from everything, I mean everything that has already been published on the web, including the OCW benches, which shows it is equal to the QX 9770, but behind the i7.
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/asro...verclocking/Phenom_II_X4-FEAR-benchmark-5.htm

For someone that is the IT field he sure has a way with the english language. I have seen way too many internet bone heads come in and act like they are all that, so until I see the proof on the table, I am always cautious.

 

[sno.lcn]

Well, there's only so much one can show you until NDA is over.

As for this statement, totally false from everything, I mean everything that has already been published on the web, including the OCW benches, which shows it is equal to the QX 9770, but behind the i7.
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/asro...verclocking/Phenom_II_X4-FEAR-benchmark-5.htm

For someone that is the IT field he sure has a way with the english language. I have seen way too many internet bone heads come in and act like they are all that, so until I see the proof on the table, I am always cautious.

I hope you don't base all of your performance expecatations on a single review, especially that one :shadedshu

 

[Raiderman]

Well, there's only so much one can show you until NDA is over.




I hope you don't base all of your performance expecatations on a single review, especially that one :shadedshu

Oh, i guess I can just take the word of benchzowner, thats what I should do.

 

[BenchZowner]

It's how you look at it that makes the difference between saying that it sucks or that it's a good product.

They do overclock better than the first generation of Phenoms, the average 24/7 stable overclock on air with a Phenom II 920 / 940 will be at approx 3.75GHz, with some good chips reaching or even surpassing the 4GHz mark by a bit, and some "duds" stopping at 3.6GHz or so.
Unfortunately they're not on par with a Core i7 ( even with HyperThreading disabled ) on a clock per clock basis ( clock per clock = running both processors at the same operating frequency ).
They're also behind "Penryn" ( Q9450/Q9550/Q9650/QX9650/QX9770 ) on a clock per clock basis as well.

As for this statement, totally false from everything, I mean everything that has already been published on the web, including the OCW benches, which shows it is equal to the QX 9770, but behind the i7.
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/asro...verclocking/Phenom_II_X4-FEAR-benchmark-5.htm

Sorry to say that, but the OCworkbench numbers are incorrect, and they also indicated ( on their forums if I recall correctly ) that there was something wrong with their rig and their BIOS.
Give it some time and we'll have some trustworthy and detailed reviews with newer motherboards and mature BIOSes.

I'm going to attend a private benchmarking session with a Phenom 920 & a 940 tomorrow, we'll run some benchmarks on air to see what these two CPUs are capable of on air and then toss in the CPU pot and use LN2 ( Liquid Nitrogen ) to cool them down and overclock the hell out of them.

I'll more than likely have some new benchmarks and numbers ( both normal benchmarks for a review and extreme overclocking numbers from 3D Mark06, 3D Mark Vantage, etc ) to share with you guys.

For someone that is the IT field he sure has a way with the english language. I have seen way too many internet bone heads come in and act like they are all that, so until I see the proof on the table, I am always cautious.

You are right about that, everybody can claim to know or have things on the net, surely there are lots of liers and pretenders, but there are also lots of reputable and trustworthy people from the industry, reviews sites and even some normal people with connections.

If you really need to know, I can vouch for TheGoat Eater, and his boss can do that as well

 

[PaulieG]

Sorry to say that, but the OCworkbench numbers are incorrect, and they also indicated ( on their forums if I recall correctly ) that there was something wrong with their rig and their BIOS.
Give it some time and we'll have some trustworthy and detailed reviews with newer motherboards and mature BIOSes.

I'm going to attend a private benchmarking session with a Phenom 920 & a 940 tomorrow, we'll run some benchmarks on air to see what these two CPUs are capable of on air and then toss in the CPU pot and use LN2 ( Liquid Nitrogen ) to cool them down and overclock the hell out of them.

I'll more than likely have some new benchmarks and numbers ( both normal benchmarks for a review and extreme overclocking numbers from 3D Mark06, 3D Mark Vantage, etc ) to share with you guys.



You are right about that, everybody can claim to know or have things on the net, surely there are lots of liers and pretenders, but there are also lots of reputable and trustworthy people from the industry, reviews sites and even some normal people with connections.

If you really need to know, I can vouch for TheGoat Eater, and his boss can do that as well

If you are able, please post some results from that benchmarking session.

 

[HTC]

If you are able, please post some results from that benchmarking session.

I doubt he can, due to the NDA.

Some screenies of CPU-Z, with covered voltage, he might be able to post but, as for benches, i have my doubts.

 

[Raiderman]

Im not trying to be jerk or anything, I think alot of us are hoping (wishing), AMD pulls there head out, and competes better, for the sake of competition (aka pricing). If you look at the sneak peak on XS, you will note that these results look very promising, so I will hold my judgment until after they are released. Alot of people here are getting excited to see the new Phenom compete, and to come in here and say what he said, is just plain trolling IMO.

 

[BenchZowner]

I doubt he can, due to the NDA.

Some screenies of CPU-Z, with covered voltage, he might be able to post but, as for benches, i have my doubts.

I'm not bound by any kind of NDA

Let's post something for a start, shall we ?

Note that the Core i7 score was taken with HTT ( HyperThreading Technology ) disabled.
The same test with HTT enabled gave us:
Overall Score: P17364
GPU Score: 16921
CPU Score: 18843

p.s. The board used for the AMD platform is a Foxconn Destroyer.

Edit:

Im not trying to be jerk or anything, I think alot of us are hoping (wishing), AMD pulls there head out, and competes better, for the sake of competition (aka pricing). If you look at the sneak peak on XS, you will note that these results look very promising, so I will hold my judgment until after they are released. Alot of people here are getting excited to see the new Phenom compete, and to come in here and say what he said, is just plain trolling IMO.

I understand that most normal people ( I'm separating the hardcore fanboys of each side from normal people ) hope for a strong comeback and a change of the performance crown holder, I wish AMD could deliver that with Phenom II, but they aren't going to, at least know they're going to be closer to Intel than before ( in my mind the first generation of Phenoms is a huge disappointment, close to the biggest disappointment of the last few years, the ATi R600 GPU ).
TheGoat Eater might have exaggerated a bit from his... enthusiasm, but his "point" stands true, the Core i7 will remain the fastest CPU series and the "fully-fledged" Penryns will be a bit faster than the Phenom II's.

Friendly,
Bill

 

[PaulieG]

I'm not bound by any kind of NDA

Let's post something for a start, shall we ?

Note that the Core i7 score was taken with HTT ( HyperThreading Technology ) disabled.
The same test with HTT enabled gave us:
Overall Score: P17364
GPU Score: 16921
CPU Score: 18843

p.s. The board used for the AMD platform is a Foxconn Destroyer.

Edit:


I understand that most normal people ( I'm separating the hardcore fanboys of each side from normal people ) hope for a strong comeback and a change of the performance crown holder, I wish AMD could deliver that with Phenom II, but they aren't going to, at least know they're going to be closer to Intel than before ( in my mind the first generation of Phenoms is a huge disappointment, close to the biggest disappointment of the last few years, the ATi R600 GPU ).
TheGoat Eater might have exaggerated a bit from his... enthusiasm, but his "point" stands true, the Core i7 will remain the fastest CPU series and the "fully-fledged" Penryns will be a bit faster than the Phenom II's.

Friendly,
Bill

Thanks man. What would you consider to be "fully-fledged" Penryns?

 

[Raiderman]

I have a question also? How are you able to get better scores on the i7 with HT enabled?
Every other bench I have seen shows a degradation in performance. That it is actually better to keep it disabled?

 

[BenchZowner]

Thanks man. What would you consider to be "fully-fledged" Penryns?

The processors based on the Yorkfield core with all the cache ( 12MB total, 6MB per die ).
The Q9450, Q9550, Q9650, QX9650, QX9770 that is.
The Q9450 at its default frequency will be struggling against the Phenom II 940, in a 40 tests review the Phenom II 940 will win in about 30 of the 40 tests.

 

[HTC]

I'm not bound by any kind of NDA

Let's post something for a start, shall we ?

http://i43.tinypic.com/ixauxd.jpg

Note that the Core i7 score was taken with HTT ( HyperThreading Technology ) disabled.
The same test with HTT enabled gave us:
Overall Score: P17364
GPU Score: 16921
CPU Score: 18843

p.s. The board used for the AMD platform is a Foxconn Destroyer.

Edit:


I understand that most normal people ( I'm separating the hardcore fanboys of each side from normal people ) hope for a strong comeback and a change of the performance crown holder, I wish AMD could deliver that with Phenom II, but they aren't going to, at least know they're going to be closer to Intel than before ( in my mind the first generation of Phenoms is a huge disappointment, close to the biggest disappointment of the last few years, the ATi R600 GPU ).
TheGoat Eater might have exaggerated a bit from his... enthusiasm, but his "point" stands true, the Core i7 will remain the fastest CPU series and the "fully-fledged" Penryns will be a bit faster than the Phenom II's.

Friendly,
Bill

That's quite the difference: ~3.4K in CPU score, and that's before HTT.

Still, i'm pretty sure they will be better then C2Q (not refering to the unlocked ones), which will drive their prices severely down.

 

[BenchZowner]

I have a question also? How are you able to get better scores on the i7 with HT enabled?
Every other bench I have seen shows a degradation in performance. That it is actually better to keep it disabled?

The HyperThreading Technology has its pros & cons.
If the application you're about to use is Multi-Threaded and has some efficient and well optimized code it can benefit from having HTT enabled.
Let me list some applications that show a increase in performance with HyperThreading on:
CineBench 9
CineBench 10
Soon to be released CineBench 11
Maxon Cinema4D
SPECviewPerf 10
FutureMark's 3D Mark06 and 3D Mark Vantage, PC Mark05 and PC Mark Vantage
wwwww's wPrime
Chessbase's Fritz Chess Benchmark
Pov-Ray v3.7 Beta
DVD Shrink
WinRAR

On the other side most of the single-threaded applications and some multi-threaded programs that can utilize only 2 or 3 cores show some loss in performance with HyperThreading enabled.

It's a tick tock game

 

[HTC]

Question: do these CPU eat a lot of power?

 

[PaulieG]

The processors based on the Yorkfield core with all the cache ( 12MB total, 6MB per die ).
The Q9450, Q9550, Q9650, QX9650, QX9770 that is.
The Q9450 at its default frequency will be struggling against the Phenom II 940, in a 40 tests review the Phenom II 940 will win in about 30 of the 40 tests.

OK. I was guessing they would fall b/t the Q9550 and Q9650 performance wise. That would make the 940 priced well at $275-$300.

 

[BenchZowner]

Question: do these CPU eat a lot of power?

Haven't checked that out yet.
We only had a wall-socket energy meter but I don't trust those, and even if they're very accurate it still doesn't show us the exact power consumption of a CPU to compare it with another.

I'll do some measurements when my new equipment arrives, that way we'll measure the power draw of the CPU only.

OK. I was guessing they would fall b/t the Q9550 and Q9650 performance wise. That would make the 940 priced well at $275-$300.

Forgot to mention that the Phenom II 920 will also be very competitive with the Q9450 as well.

I don't have a clear image on the pricing yet, but I'm hoping for something good

 

[PaulieG]

Haven't checked that out yet.
We only had a wall-socket energy meter but I don't trust those, and even if they're very accurate it still doesn't show us the exact power consumption of a CPU to compare it with another.

I'll do some measurements when my new equipment arrives, that way we'll measure the power draw of the CPU only.



Forgot to mention that the Phenom II 920 will also be very competitive with the Q9450 as well.

I don't have a clear image on the pricing yet, but I'm hoping for something good

I pre-ordered one at $293 shipped. I've heard prices as low as $275, but I believe this is based on volume pricing and not individual chips.

 

[Raiderman]

There are just way too many variables right now to make an accurate judgement. I will wait till NDA is lifted.