Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some benches on the upcoming 45nm AMD

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MetalheadGautham
    replied
    Honestly, I think they suck. NO AM3, no HT 3.0 and NO DDR3.

    That I could forgive, but for the fact that clock-to-clock, they lag behind even the Q9x50 processors. Phenom II 940 just equals Core2Quad Q9450.

    And Core i7 is waaaay ahead of it. Multimedia performance is so low compared to Yorkfield and Bloomfield. And AMD has nothing to combat Intel's HT Technology.

    But I definitely think the Phenom II CPUs are a stepping stone for AMD. Reminds me of the time RV600 came out. Were no match for nVidia's higher end, but the lower end and midrange performed just fine. Then RV700 came and changed the whole situation. If things go well, AMD Bulldozer may overthrow Intel SandyBridge, but thats only IF AMD manages toreach 32nm before Intel does.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by psycho_driver View Post
    Well, the real benchmarks are hitting the web now, and congratulations are in order to AMD. While still a generation behind Intel, they do now have a serious competitive product for the entry level quad core market.

    Pricing trends over the next couple of months will now determine whether my next system build is on an AMD or Intel platform, whereas previously I assumed I would be choosing within the Intel product lineup exclusively.
    Ya they look promising. Personally I think I'll be holding off until the AM3 945's are out. Buying a processor such as the 940 that is limited to AM2+ boards doesn't leave a lot of flexibility in future MB upgrade options. Until then my 9850's will do just fine. It will also give a bit extra time for the refinement of the manufacturing process.

    Leave a comment:


  • psycho_driver
    replied
    Well, the real benchmarks are hitting the web now, and congratulations are in order to AMD. While still a generation behind Intel, they do now have a serious competitive product for the entry level quad core market.

    Pricing trends over the next couple of months will now determine whether my next system build is on an AMD or Intel platform, whereas previously I assumed I would be choosing within the Intel product lineup exclusively.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Another write up from the techreport today.

    AMD overclocks 45nm Phenoms to 4GHz and beyond
    by Cyril Kowaliski — 1:47 PM on November 20, 2008
    According to AMD's latest roadmaps, 45nm Phenom II processors are just a few weeks away from launch—they'll materialize at the Consumer Electronic Show in early January. Not a bad time to start gauging the overclocking potential of these chips, right?
    AMD took care of that itself at an event in Austin this morning, where it showcased four overclocked Phenom II systems. TR editor-in-chief Scott Wasson was on the scene, and while AMD didn't allow attendees to take pictures, he jotted down a few details.
    The slowest system—cooled with a heatsink and fan—managed to reach just under 4GHz with a 1.55V core voltage. With liquid cooling, AMD successfully pushed a 45nm Phenom II in another machine just over the 4GHz mark. That required kicking up the CPU voltage to 1.6V, however. For the other two systems, AMD took out the big guns. One was strapped to a phase-change cooler and reached the mid-4GHz range at 1.7V, while the fastest system managed to break the 6GHz barrier using liquid nitrogen (which kept the core temperature down to a chilly -185?C).
    Considering the latest leaked roadmaps suggest the fastest Phenom II launch CPU will run at 3GHz, those are pretty decent overclocks. We should note that AMD was using Crysis to test stability, however, and that only stresses a couple of cores at best.
    http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15927

    Leave a comment:


  • mattmatteh
    replied
    agreed. i look at all the components, not just the cpu. i find the reviews that show the power usage from the wall plug the best.

    matt

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by mattmatteh View Post
    its not so much as being green as the heat that is generated. its nice during the winter, but not the summer. i dont have any air conditioning here, and dont think that should be reqired to compute.

    matt
    OK I can appreciate that but keep in mind that there are probably more BTU's coming from the drives. video cards. chipset and power supply then just the cpu.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattmatteh
    replied
    its not so much as being green as the heat that is generated. its nice during the winter, but not the summer. i dont have any air conditioning here, and dont think that should be reqired to compute.

    matt

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by mattmatteh View Post
    i would be nice to include how many watts that using. i know some users dont mind power wasting cpus but i am interested in power saving cpus. or at the least proceesing power / watt. and idle power usage.
    While I can appreciate the "green" concern, truth is that you will probably save more per year changing 2 incandescent bulbs over to led or florescent in your house then picking a 65 watt over a 125 watt processor. Performance per watt is also very determinant on the software you are running and their optimization for a particular processor. There is also other factors to consider as well such as logic chipsets as well. While the savings can be huge in a server farm / data center scenario where systems operated under heavy load 24/7, chances are in 2-3 years you will be swapping out the system anyways and the savings to be had by a lower power consumption processor will be lost by the extra initial purchase price of the lower consumption processor.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattmatteh
    replied
    i would be nice to include how many watts that using. i know some users dont mind power wasting cpus but i am interested in power saving cpus. or at the least proceesing power / watt. and idle power usage.

    Leave a comment:


  • MetalheadGautham
    replied
    Any benchmarks on the compilation times in Gentoo ?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X