REAL Phenom-II Benches!

[wolf2009]

Beats both Corei7 940 and Qx9770 in Crysis. looks legit, and exciting time for AMD

http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/asro...overclocking/Phenom_II_crysis-benchmark-8.htm

I think you guys forgot to check other pages of this review. this is a complete review

http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/asro...I-X4-940-overclocking/Phenom_II_X4-info-1.htm

 

[Dark_Webster]

I don't say that the benchmarks are right or not, but this new Phenom has got some overclocking capabilities.

 

[r9]

I get this. AMD wants to prove the point that that you can`t see the difference in real life only on benching. But in the same context you can compare Q6600 and latest phenom II and the Q6600 would loose by 2 frames and the conclusion is that PII is not worthy of buying. The birds on the trees know that to bench a cpu in game you have to use lower res and faster GPU so you wont bottleneck the CPU so you can mesure how much fps can serve the CPU. And they use a 4850 they should get a x1300 pro and then they can compare athlon x 2 5200+ to i7 and they didn`t even need to invent Phenom and Phenom II.
I love AMD and I want AMD to survive but that is only duable by providing quality product and not by miss leading consumers.

 

[johnnyfiive]

I dont think they are misleading consumers at all with the Phenom II. It's not much slower than a i7 rig and its much faster than a Q6600 from what I can see. It will cost the same as the Quad Yorkfield's which is the area AMD is looking to compete in. It's not a i7 competitor, it is a Yorkfield competitor and it is an awesome one at that. All the AM2+ owners right now are stoked to see some numbers. A 3.8GHz Quad Core on air? 50-55C full load temps? What else do you want!? That is an awesome processor.

 

[r9]

And 4GHz it is not enough. At stock 3.0 GHz PII is matching 2.66 GHz LGA 775 QUAD but to match 4 GHz LGA 775 QUAD it Phenom II needs to hit 4.6 GHz because of efficiency compared MHz to MHz. And it is PHENOMENAL how little extra performance additional cache of PII gives.

 

[johnnyfiive]

It really depends what your using your computer for. If your a person who is serious about encoding and rendering stuff you would go all out with an Intel rig and slaughter the rendering jobs with ease. If your a enthusiast on a budget who games, AMD is looking really nice right now. Gaming benchmark wise, it looks to be very promising. I don't give a crap that a 2.66 Yorkfield is faster than a PII at 3.0 in certain areas. If it can overclock to 3.8-4.0GHz on air, that tickles my insides and I'm immediately interested. I will be getting a Phenom II. I'm not a fanboy of any brand, I'm all about performance per dollar. I'm a gamer/enthusiast, and this new product from AMD is tickling my insides so much I'm giddy all the time. I'm really excited to get this processor... good bye 9600BE.

 

[cdawall]

And 4GHz it is not enough. At stock 3.0 GHz PII is matching 2.66 GHz LGA 775 QUAD but to match 4 GHz LGA 775 QUAD it Phenom II needs to hit 4.6 GHz because of efficiency compared MHz to MHz. And it is PHENOMENAL how little extra performance additional cache of PII gives.

core i7 is @2.83ghz 133.33*21 and the phenom is @3ghz so its not this 4.6 to 4ghz shit not to mention that you have to bring in scaling its not a linear equation.

the reason the added cache isn't a huge difference is the significantly BETTER mem controller on the chips.

 

[r9]

It really depends what your using your computer for. If your a person who is serious about encoding and rendering stuff you would go all out with an Intel rig and slaughter the rendering jobs with ease. If your a enthusiast on a budget who games, AMD is looking really nice right now. Gaming benchmark wise, it looks to be very promising. I don't give a crap that a 2.66 Yorkfield is faster than a PII at 3.0 in certain areas. If it can overclock to 3.8-4.0GHz on air, that tickles my insides and I'm immediately interested. I will be getting a Phenom II. I'm not a fanboy of any brand, I'm all about performance per dollar. I'm a gamer/enthusiast, and this new product from AMD is tickling my insides so much I'm giddy all the time. I'm really excited to get this processor... good bye 9600BE.

From yours point of view all above Q6600 it is pointless.
Yes I agree that PII is step forward but in the same benchmark if they put E8400 a bet that it will closely match the other CPUs and what should we conclude that From yours point of view all above Q6600 it is pointless. . The point is that this benchmark is POINTLESS it shows nothing. The picture that substitutes 1 000 words that don`t mean a thing.

 

[r9]

core i7 is @2.83ghz 133.33*21 and the phenom is @3ghz so its not this 4.6 to 4ghz shit not to mention that you have to bring in scaling its not a linear equation.

the reason the added cache isn't a huge difference is the significantly BETTER mem controller on the chips.

This GHz to GHz is very simple shit you just should pay attention.
PII is way way of in efficency even AMD prove that with THEIR OWN SLIDES they PERSONALY proved that PII at 3GHz is at same level as Q9XXX at 2.6 so it is not my point. For person that uses CPU at stock clocks it is OK product but what about all people here that we use ours CPU 24/7 OCed for the same money you chose PII capable of 4GHz (yet to be proven that CPU was not selected not to mention that AMD were promising Phenoms I at 3 GHz at even they show benches of those real PHANTOMS) and Q9XXX capable of 4GHz and if we take in consideration lower efficency of PII 3GHz to match 2.66 I don`t see salvation for AMD.

 

[r9]

And yes if you have AM2+ board it makes sense to upgrade to PII but if AMD delivered first time what they promised you did not have to upgrade in the first place.

 

[suraswami]

finally!

 

[Melvis]

I think this just shows how crap the i7 is for gaming, you wouldn't buy that CPU if you wanted to game alot that's for sure. I also think even if the Phenom 2 was clocked at the same clock speed as the others the score would almost be the same anyway, we all know that higher clock speed will give you a little bit more performance in games, but not alot at all, ive tested alot of different clocked speed CPU's with the same GPU and most of the time the results come out near the same, if not a little in favour of the higher clocked CPU, but nothing that is like OMG, just a few frames.

Looks to me that its game on again for AMD, this means competition, which means the price of intel's Quads will drop

 

[johnnyfiive]

This GHz to GHz is very simple shit you just should pay attention.
PII is way way of in efficency even AMD prove that with THEIR OWN SLIDES they PERSONALY proved that PII at 3GHz is at same level as Q9XXX at 2.6 so it is not my point. For person that uses CPU at stock clocks it is OK product but what about all people here that we use ours CPU 24/7 OCed for the same money you chose PII capable of 4GHz (yet to be proven that CPU was not selected not to mention that AMD were promising Phenoms I at 3 GHz at even they show benches of those real PHANTOMS) and Q9XXX capable of 4GHz and if we take in consideration lower efficency of PII 3GHz to match 2.66 I don`t see salvation for AMD.

GHz to GHz is not simple shit, its all about the IPC's, not the GHz. I do agree with you about AMD not providing products they promised. I built a rig off the Spider platform and really do regret it at times. At the time however, it was cheaper to build an AMD rig so I went with it. I was hoping my 9600BE would overclock but it just doesn't. So you can understand why I'm so excited about the Phenom II. I think you'd have to be in my shoes to appreciate the Phenom II for what it is, and for what it has come from.

 

[r9]

GHz to GHz is not simple shit, its all about the IPC's, not the GHz. I do agree with you about AMD not providing products they promised. I built a rig off the Spider platform and really do regret it at times. At the time however, it was cheaper to build an AMD rig so I went with it. I was hoping my 9600BE would overclock but it just doesn't. So you can understand why I'm so excited about the Phenom II. I think you'd have to be in my shoes to appreciate the Phenom II for what it is, and for what it has come from.

Doesn`t piss you off that you have to upgrade because AMD failed to meet their promises and you have to pay AMD second time for the thing you should get the first time.

 

[Wile E]

And nobody else seems to want to mention how many variables are involved in these benches. Not only is the fps difference well within the margin of error, but how do we know the Intels systems are as clean as the AMD one.

I think people are throwing up skewed results to generate web traffic. I'll wait for the official stuff. My guess is that PII is ever so slightly behind Yorkfield, clock for clock.

Oh, and I also wanted to point out, that on apps that do most of their work on 2 cpu threads, Core i7's HT can actually cause the scores to be lower, because the app is only accessing one physical core, and one logical, not 2 true cores. Turn off HT and the results would be much different for 2 thread apps.

 

[johnnyfiive]

Doesn`t piss you off that you have to upgrade because AMD failed to meet their promises and you have to pay AMD second time for the thing you should get the first time.

It does to an extent. I can only blame myself for not going the Intel route. I saw the 9600BE benchmarks and knew what I was getting into. Its ultimately my mistake. I don't hate AMD.

 

[Polarman]

Can't wait for full sets of benchies.

 

[johnnyfiive]

Dang, check you out Polarman. You're all dragon'ed out, hah. I bet your REALLY excited to get a Phenom II.

 

[r9]

Don`t get me wrong I`m no Intel FAN I`m just trying to be objective i didn`t not buy Phenom I but I still fill disapointed form the last Phenom. Let me put it this way if AMD and INTEL CPU are even in price and performance I would go 10 out of 10 with AMD.

 

[Castiel]

That seems really sweet!

 

[3xploit]

wtf 18s pi 1m @ 3.8ghz? my 3.2ghz dual beats that lol

 

[kid41212003]

Phenom I, at 3GHz, can score 10k in 3DMark vantage CPU test, Phenom II score the same at 3GHz, which mean there is no different clock vs clock.

Unfortunately, these benchmarks, didn't make me regret buying Core i7.

Same cores architectures, more cache, 45nm. Just like the name, Phenom II.

I expected it to be more effective than Phenom I, at least 10%, clock vs clock.

 

[Wile E]

And nobody else seems to want to mention how many variables are involved in these benches. Not only is the fps difference well within the margin of error, but how do we know the Intels systems are as clean as the AMD one.

I think people are throwing up skewed results to generate web traffic. I'll wait for the official stuff. My guess is that PII is ever so slightly behind Yorkfield, clock for clock.

Oh, and I also wanted to point out, that on apps that do most of their work on 2 cpu threads, Core i7's HT can actually cause the scores to be lower, because the app is only accessing one physical core, and one logical, not 2 true cores. Turn off HT and the results would be much different for 2 thread apps.

And to put this in further perspective, on my rig in Vantage, at 3.6GHz vs the PII's 3792, I score 14731 in the cpu portion, vs the PII's 11471. Slower clocks but still a higher score from my Yorkfield.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=602299

 

[Darren]

they PERSONALY proved that PII at 3GHz is at same level as Q9XXX at 2.6 so it is not my point.

NO!

They proved that the Phenom II performs equivalently to a processor for about £900 cheaper


Phenom II 940: about £150-£200
Qx9770: £1,092.49

http://overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-217-IN

Q9XXX capable of 4GHz and if we take in consideration lower efficiency of PII 3GHz to match 2.66 I don`t see salvation for AMD.

Qx9000 series are expensive, you need to be able to afford them before you could OC them to 4 GHz whether they made efficiency versions or not!

 

[r9]

wtf 18s pi 1m @ 3.8ghz? my 3.2ghz dual beats that lol

That is my f***ing point.