• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Phenom FX in the Works, AMD to take Another shot at...Kentsfield

QX9650 @ 3GHz, mem at 1113 5-5-6-15

Vantage CPU score = 12174

3GhzVantageCPU.jpg
 
physx
'nuff said
 
You got 9905 cpu, mine gets 12174 cpu. Unfortunately, the Phenom is much slower than an Intel quad clock for clock. I wish that wasn't the case, as it would drive stiffer competition in the market, but it is the case.
 
so what ya think Wile? am i blowing smoke out my azz or not?..... like i said im just telling what i see and no more....:toast:
 
Mmmmm i like this war goin on between these two^ hehe i like to see the end results , but i have to admit that the Wile E machine should have a advantage because of the amount of Cache the CPU has, 3 times as much right?

Thats the only reason intels are going so well, the amount of Cache they have on there chips, and its very expensive to do this process, but for intel its not, AMD it is.

Bit unfair?
 
well that may be the case so let me run 3.01 @ 892mhz on the memory 4.4.4.12.20
thats if i can after my trial run.... and where ya see the cpu mark?.... please point it out so i know.... thanx
 
Melvis said:
Mmmmm i like this war goin on between these two^ hehe i like to see the end results , but i have to admit that the Wile E machine should have a advantage because of the amount of Cache the CPU has, 3 times as much right?

Thats the only reason intels are going so well, the amount of Cache they have on there chips, and its very expensive to do this process, but for intel its not, AMD it is.

Bit unfair?
Click to expand...
na i just like to show what im running even though it may be a tad slower...... just posting to give all a heads up.... no comp here just showing... thats all my friend:toast:
 
fullinfusion said:
well that may be the case so let me run 3.01 @ 892mhz on the memory 4.4.4.12.20
thats if i can after my trial run.... and where ya see the cpu mark?.... please point it out so i know.... thanx
Click to expand...

aaa331275.jpg
 
Now let me add that, in gaming, there is no difference between a Phenom and an Intel Quad, all else being equal. Phenom is not a bad chip or anything. But there is a big difference in most cpu bound apps, and in Ocing between Phenom and Intel.
 
fullinfusion said:
na i just like to show what im running even though it may be a tad slower...... just posting to give all a heads up.... no comp here just showing... thats all my friend:toast:
Click to expand...

Yea fair enough, your machine does do very well, if you had the same amount of Cache as the intel did, you would win easy id say. For a CPU that is a bit deprived of the Cache sizes compared to a Intel they still do very well, and not a Huge amount of difference realy, just shows you how well a AMD realy does? get a intel with that much takin out of the CPU and then see how it runs? bet it looses? All you have to do is look back at the P4 days, end of story. Even tho the bench tests that 3dmark use i find them not very good testers, more so just a guide line. I like to see a CPU running wen its in a game or something, and its % then? thats more like a real test, or how long it takes to convert a AVi file to VOB or something? thats a real test. Try and do a Memory test see who wins then? or even bandwidth? , i think the AMD will win there easy ;)

Have fun you to
 
Wile E said:
Now let me add that, in gaming, there is no difference between a Phenom and an Intel Quad, all else being equal. Phenom is not a bad chip or anything. But there is a big difference in most cpu bound apps, and in Ocing between Phenom and Intel.
Click to expand...

yea to true there, i agree with that statement. both have there areas they are good and bad at.
 
Melvis said:
Yea fair enough, your machine does do very well, if you had the same amount of Cache as the intel did, you would win easy id say. For a CPU that is a bit deprived of the Cache sizes compared to a Intel they still do very well, and not a Huge amount of difference realy, just shows you how well a AMD realy does? get a intel with that much takin out of the CPU and then see how it runs? bet it looses? All you have to do is look back at the P4 days, end of story. Even tho the bench tests that 3dmark use i find them not very good testers, more so just a guide line. I like to see a CPU running wen its in a game or something, and its % then? thats more like a real test, or how long it takes to convert a AVi file to VOB or something? thats a real test. Try and do a Memory test see who wins then? or even bandwidth? , i think the AMD will win there easy ;)

Have fun you to
Click to expand...
But synthetic memory and bandwidth test do not translate into real world performance.

And given the vast architectural differences, it's gonna take a lot more than cache for Phenom to catch up.

Phenom does 3 instruction per cycle, whereas the intel does 4, amongst many other things like different branch prediction routines, different ways of handling cache misses, etc.. If AMD would update to a 4 per cycle design, I have a feeling they would be ahead of Intel again, even with all else being equal.
 
Wile E said:
Now let me add that, in gaming, there is no difference between a Phenom and an Intel Quad, all else being equal. Phenom is not a bad chip or anything. But there is a big difference in most cpu bound apps, and in Ocing between Phenom and Intel.
Click to expand...
i totally agree Wile
 
well i ran another vantage... but i cant post a result as i only had one shot.... the trial expired.... i however can up the l2 cashe to better my science mark or everest score.... i find playing with the memory timings yield better scores and also lowers the latencies mark...i however convert a full dvd unganged memory (Day's of Thunder) in just under 30min thou... i have no idea if thats good or bad as i have no reference by others to go by.... hope this shows what im running Wile?
 
fullinfusion said:
well i ran another vantage... but i cant post a result as i only had one shot.... the trial expired.... i however can up the l2 cashe to better my science mark or everest score.... i find playing with the memory timings yield better scores and also lowers the latencies mark...i however convert a full dvd unganged memory (Day's of Thunder) in just under 30min thou... i have no idea if thats good or bad as i have no reference by others to go by.... hope this shows what im running Wile?
Click to expand...

I never doubted that the Phenom was capable, you just made the claim it takes a 3.6Ghz intel to keep up. That was incorrect, if anything, it would take a 3.2 or 3.3 Ghz Phenom to keep up with a 3GHz intel.

And I can't help you with the encode time thing, I don't own Days of Thunder to test. lol.

You can try the bench in this thread tho. http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=39376&highlight=Encoding+benchmark

That's one that the Phenom may have an edge in.
 
Wile E said:
But synthetic memory and bandwidth test do not translate into real world performance.

And given the vast architectural differences, it's gonna take a lot more than cache for Phenom to catch up.

Phenom does 3 instruction per cycle, whereas the intel does 4, amongst many other things like different branch prediction routines, different ways of handling cache misses, etc.. If AMD would update to a 4 per cycle design, I have a feeling they would be ahead of Intel again, even with all else being equal.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you are doing realy? Some apps might need alot of bandwith or memory etc, some dont, all depends.

Idk about that, AMD architecture has always been infront of intels, even intel its self admitted this, why you think they are goin the same architecture to AMD's? I think once the Cache sizes are equal to a intel at this time, not including the new 32nm CPU's that intel will bring out, that you will see that the performance will be as good if not better, and yea maybe 4 cycles included, not sure tho.

All we both can say is, it might or might not, in the end we will just have to wait, all im goin on is past tests and how it used to be.
 
fullinfusion said:
well i ran another vantage... but i cant post a result as i only had one shot.... the trial expired.... i however can up the l2 cashe to better my science mark or everest score.... i find playing with the memory timings yield better scores and also lowers the latencies mark...i however convert a full dvd unganged memory (Day's of Thunder) in just under 30min thou... i have no idea if thats good or bad as i have no reference by others to go by.... hope this shows what im running Wile?
Click to expand...

30mins? :eek: dam thats very good, takes me a average 90min movie, from a AVI file to a VOB file around 1.5hrs, and burnt it as well, 30mins is good ;)
 
Wile E said:
I never doubted that the Phenom was capable, you just made the claim it takes a 3.6Ghz intel to keep up. That was incorrect, if anything, it would take a 3.2 or 3.3 Ghz Phenom to keep up with a 3GHz intel.

And I can't help you with the encode time thing, I don't own Days of Thunder to test. lol.

You can try the bench in this thread tho. http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=39376&highlight=Encoding+benchmark

That's one that the Phenom may have an edge in.
Click to expand...
na like i was saying whil running msn in video and audio a friend running 3.6 to my 3.01 was so close with the both of us running the same program at the same time.... he even said( you @ 3ghz to my 3.6 gives the intel a good run for it's money)..... im off to bed guy's.... i'll come back on with weird mem timings and fsb to up the points a bit.... lol.... it's all good.... but Wile...... I do have a 750sb mobo on the way..... the bottle neck is now looser.... lets play when it comes... ok.... lets just see what becomes of the Phenom then.... may not be as good but i bet ya it's real tight! :respect: night guys
 
Melvis said:
30mins? :eek: dam thats very good, takes me a average 90min movie, from a AVI file to a VOB file around 1.5hrs, and burnt it as well, 30mins is good ;)
Click to expand...
well only time after the movie is done burning.... after that i ungang the memory and she smokes rite along utilizing all four cores converting.... so all in all around the time i pop the dvd in to burn till the end to watch on the xbox 360 through the media extender it's 45min
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top