Actual deneb review/comparison to Intel

[boredatcanon]

Here's the translated version of the site
http://74.125.95.101/translate_c?hl=en&sl=el&u=http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3189&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhwbox.gr/%26hl%3Den&usg=ALkJrhgsCMqyAfX0xYknH-gYH_vwGzpt3Q

Greek version
http://www.hwbox.gr/

This is of the 920 and 940 coming out for am2+. They don't go over the overclocking ability but only stock speeds. This looks like the answer to Core2 as it's around the same performance as that but can't touch I7. Not sure how much of a boost the am3 will get from DDR3 and if there are any other changes done to them but it will end up alot cheaper.

 

[Kari]

looks like Phenom II is pretty even with the Q9000 series. i7 is faster in most cases but I wonder how PhII will compare against the more mainstream i5 when they come out in late 2009...

PhII is pretty much what the original phenom should have been...

 

[4745454b]

Interesting review. To many synthetic benchies and not enough real world CPU benchmarks for my tastes, but the synthetics paint an interesting picture. If true, then as Kari correctly pointed out, the PhII does seem like a good match against the Q9xxx series. If the clock speeds come out as claimed, then these should be good. I'd be slightly more interested in the 2.4ish if it to can overclock to nearly 4GHz. i7 does seem to be faster, wonder if AMD has anything planned for that.

 

[megamanx00]

Interesting. I guess we shall see what more reviews will tell us next month, but it looks like the phenom II will be positioned between the Intel Q9000 series and the i7s. I wouldn't say it's a game changer but at least it will inch AMD back towards being competitive again. Even though AMD needs to release faster parts to compete with the i7 I think that what they don't want right now is to pressure Intel into releasing faster parts or lowering their prices further which would cause AMD to lower theirs.

 

[blackpanther26]

Interesting review. To many synthetic benchies and not enough real world CPU benchmarks for my tastes, but the synthetics paint an interesting picture. If true, then as Kari correctly pointed out, the PhII does seem like a good match against the Q9xxx series. If the clock speeds come out as claimed, then these should be good. I'd be slightly more interested in the 2.4ish if it to can overclock to nearly 4GHz. i7 does seem to be faster, wonder if AMD has anything planned for that.

we'll probally see a Dual-Quad core setup like what was planed for last year. Like where you can run 2 Phenom II X4 on one mortherboard.

 

[rberry]

Im not an amd fanboy by any means, as a matter of fact my last 2 builds have been intel, but im building a new one soon and its going to be a phenom 2.

i know its only one build and all, but they are finally back to somewhat competitive and i like crossfire, so a little support their way wont hurt.

i dont want to see them bankrupt anytime soon, competition for intel is needed to keep things cheaper, and technology increasing as much as possible in the future.

Just think if Intel didnt have any competition. We'd prolly still be sitting on 65 nm quad cores right now.

Just a thought.

 

[spathotan]

Going by just these benchmarks, the obvious and logical path would be to buy a Q9550 if you already have the proper motherboard.

These combined with the benches in the other big thread have pretty much cast P2 out of the picture for my upgrade, espically with price cuts comming on the Q9xxx's.

 

[one-shot]

Looks good. Maybe I'll get an AM3 Phenom. I wonder what that will be called to differentiate the two? My last AMD board was AM2 when it first came out, now I have Intel, and AMD will have its turn again.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

My guestimate was 2-3% higher than Conroe clock per clock overall. Its looking like this may be true. If anyone downs this cpu, theyre also downing the Q6600s et al as well. We need more info still, and of course pricing and power usage numbers would help, as well as overall ocing abilities, which I see as 3.8 to 4.2, but again time will tell

 

[spathotan]

Thats true JDJ, with buts. As youve seen in other post Ive not put down Deneb, I hope and want it to topple the current C2's. But given the speculated $250+ price tag for the 940 combined with price cuts comming in a month or so on Q9xxx's, it seems like its going to fall short.

I was really looking for an excuse to drop this P45 and Q6600 for a AM3 setup with a P2 945, but taking these current benchmarks for what they are currently worth (all we have to go on so far, not to forget these are AM2 deneb numbers), it would be much cheaper and "logical", not to mention easier to just buy a Q9550 which will most definetly be cheaper after the price cuts than a AM2 940 or AM3 945 and be right there with it in the numbers.

But of course thats just the "from Intel" POV, if youve already got a compatable AMD motherboard then you are looking at fine dining.

 

[gallag]

but it looks like the phenom II will be positioned between the Intel Q9000 series and the i7s.

Are we looking at the same numbers? Looks like deneb will will have a hard time beating kentsfield never mind penryn or i7. Major disappointment caused by over hyping by AMD fanboys. Read the review again bearing in mind that the q6600 is 2.4ghz and two years old if you wonder why I am disappointed, the way I see it is that the performance gap is now wider, i7 has more of a lead over phenom2 than penryn had over phenom1.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Unfortunately for AMD, this may prove out to be true. Theres still hope yet, as we really dont know the full spectrum of performance yet, tho I somewhat respect these numbers, as a certain poster on XS has some cred in my eyes, and hes partially behind this. A lil faster clock for clock than Conroe, a lil higher oc as well, yea it may not be enough for people already sporting Intel rigs, that is of course, if they dont want something different. Newer buyers from older platforms will find this a suitable platform, so for future growth in marketshare, AMD needs to be price competitive now, as theyve inched the bar higher towards Intels overall height

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Id also remind people that i7 isnt for everyone, as it holds certain restrictions to its overall performance, and some of that performance is more important to average Joe than other parts. Also, with i7, theres the price gap. i5, if brought in at an overall price drop, and holds the average Joes usage as high as i7s currently do, will be the cpu to get over i7, as its niche for the rich heheh just had to say that

 

[spathotan]

Speaking of i5, it will probably crush Deneb. Well, im sure it will being that it will fit between Penryn and i7. But then again it depends on prices. Intel right now is on the path of having way to much stuff all within the same price range, its almost canibalistic.

Hopefully AMD already has something in the pipe.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Well, whatll be interesting is, the performance that matters to most people isnt really representative of i7, and if i5 is not at least as good in these areas, Penryn will still be a great option, as well as Deneb. If, on the other hand i5 brings a split of i7s performance between it and Penryn, and still doesnt come thru in gaming, again, Deneb has a chance, as enough is enough for most the things the "i" series brings as to improvements for average Joe, as well as Penryn and thus Deneb. Top spot isnt as important as it once was, just like in gaming, where weve seen inprovements of larger res usage, but not necessarily in game demands, and selling to average Joe has changed in that regard. It wont be the best, but its still closer to what most people seek from their cpus than they were in having a P1 IMHO, and thus, it comes down to price

 

[blackpanther26]

I'm starting to think about getting the Core i7 920 if AMD Phenom II can't beat the Q9xxx series. I'm looking to upgrade my motherboard as well becuase my foxconn dose not like to run in dual-channel.

 

[jed]

Take a look at the clock speed of the Q6600 400 to 600mhz decrease
compared to both phemon II's, and stays very close in benchmarks.

I feel if you run the Q6600 at the same clock speed as the phemon II's
it will equal or best both phenom chips, thats disappointing,
the phenom II are not better than the Q6600.


jdj

Look again, the Intel cpus were clocked higher, to their credit, but its not the same clocks

jdj

I know what youre saying, do you understand what Im saying? They arent at the same clocks, so we dont know what percentage Intel is faster than Phenom, and cant really make a true comparison. Its shows the only ocing on the link Ive provided, that page, and again, like I said, they werent at the same speeds.

But nothing said about decrease in clock speed for the intel chip, under this light the phenom II's is a little better but still not beating the 2yr old Q6600.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

First of all, this is an incomplete review. More real life benches need to be run, then we need 30 thatll both go to 4Ghz...oh thats right, may have trouble finding 30 6600s thatll do 4Ghz on air. Ummm, what was I referring to when I said clock for clock in another thread about totally differing things? So, in essence, its not so bad eh? Or is the 6600 now crap too? Whats it going to be? deneb is crap, which will clock higher , and performance is a lil better, but the 6600 is great? I dont care when 1 came out or whatever else people come in with. Its available, it performs as well as what is still considered Intels greatest cpu, but its crap? Fanboi

 

[someguy7]

That is utter crap jaydee.

 

[jj463rd]

Take a look at the clock speed of the Q6600 400 to 600mhz decrease
compared to both phemon II's, and stays very close in benchmarks.

I feel if you run the Q6600 at the same clock speed as the phenom II's
it will equal or best both phenom chips, thats disappointing,
the phenom II are not better than the Q6600.

I would tend to agree with you according to this review and their benchmarks.
It makes me wonder if this review is a fake because the results seem like those of just an overclocked 3.0 Ghz Phenom 9X50 (or Phenom 1 series).
I have however seen other reviews which show things in a different light and look much better.
I think that the best thing to do would not be for someone to just go out and buy a AM2+ based Phenom II when they are just available but rather wait until we see some more reviews from more legit sources (like Sim HQ or Tom's) and also that show that there are no major problems with the CPU.
I never buy a CPU when it's first available rather I prefer to let others be the guinea pig testers.
I would trust Sim HQ's results if they do a review of it which is a good possibility.

 

[one-shot]

LOL, stop speculating and nit picking the small details and just wait a few days. All CPU's suck, except mine...but it will suck eventually. Eventually as in when the NDA is lifted.

 

[jed]

First of all, this is an incomplete review. More real life benches need to be run, then we need 30 thatll both go to 4Ghz...oh thats right, may have trouble finding 30 6600s thatll do 4Ghz on air. Ummm, what was I referring to when I said clock for clock in another thread about totally differing things? So, in essence, its not so bad eh? Or is the 6600 now crap too? Whats it going to be? deneb is crap, which will clock higher , and performance is a lil better, but the 6600 is great? I dont care when 1 came out or whatever else people come in with. Its available, it performs as well as what is still considered Intels greatest cpu, but its crap? Fanboi

The point is everything about deneb wasn't a complete review of the chips,
but you would cherry pick the info twist and use it, when you made the statements about clock speeds it was about phenom 1 which didn't overclock
to 4Ghz at all, so you said they should be run at the same clock speeds as the
intel chips, now they overclock better that the first phenoms your tune has changed. Now take a look at the 9000 series intel chips still lower clock speed
and phenom II still get beat and these chips can over clock to 4Ghz on air.

here's the other thing phenom II is not better than a Q6600 clock for clock it's
equal if nothing else.

Now let talk about platforms the Q6600 will be put to rest by intel, the lower
Q9550 is going for 309.99 from new egg right now, which is less then the top
of the line deneb and beat it clock for clock, and the motherboards are just
as cheap as any board for AMD, so why would anyone buy the phenom II for
anything other than a upgrade.
People getting a new system can buy the 9000 series for less and get more.

 

[rangers]

well I have a sick feeling that the i5 wont overclock that much, i think intel will make i7 the one with all the oveclocking, leaving all us poor c*nts wishing we had the cash for an i7 motherboard, could be wrong, but there was some talk of it b4 the release of i7, intel denied it but i think they are keeping it for i5 to differentiate

 

[Dekasav]

The point is everything about deneb wasn't a complete review of the chips,
but you would cherry pick the info twist and use it, when you made the statements about clock speeds it was about phenom 1 which didn't overclock
to 4Ghz at all, so you said they should be run at the same clock speeds as the
intel chips, now they overclock better that the first phenoms your tune has changed. Now take a look at the 9000 series intel chips still lower clock speed
and phenom II still get beat and these chips can over clock to 4Ghz on air.

here's the other thing phenom II is not better than a Q6600 clock for clock it's
equal if nothing else.

Now let talk about platforms the Q6600 will be put to rest by intel, the lower
Q9550 is going for 309.99 from new egg right now, which is less then the top
of the line deneb and beat it clock for clock, and the motherboards are just
as cheap as any board for AMD, so why would anyone buy the phenom II for
anything other than a upgrade.
People getting a new system can buy the 9000 series for less and get more.

You need to stop assuming things.
1. Phenom 1 was shown at 3.0Ghz, which is 700Mhz above the speeds it had at stock at launch. Phenom II is being shown at 6Ghz, 3Ghz higher than Deneb's supposed launch (hasn't launched, there's always the possibility they won't come out at 3Ghz.). In and of itself, even if it's cherrypicked, you still are showing much MUCH better overclock headroom than Phenom 1 could have dreamed of.

2. You can't say "Phenom II is not better than a Q6600 clock for clock" because IT'S NOT OUT!! (And we don't have good, full reviews). When it is out, and you have numerous full reviews from respectable sites you *might* be able to say this.

3. We don't know initial pricing on Phenom II, so even if motherboards, ram, etc. are equal in price, you can't say people can spend "less and get more."

4. Also, AMD boards are often better than Intel ones. At least in my opinion, since lots of people use integrated graphics, AMD has Intel beat hard on those, therefore AMD boards are better. But either way it's pretty minor, both have/make excellent featured and stable boards.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just stop stating things as fact that aren't known by anyone who hasn't signed an NDA. You can't know, so stop acting like you do.

 

[jed]

Dekasav

You need to stop assuming things.
1. Phenom 1 was shown at 3.0Ghz, which is 700Mhz above the speeds it had at stock at launch. Phenom II is being shown at 6Ghz, 3Ghz higher than Deneb's supposed launch (hasn't launched, there's always the possibility they won't come out at 3Ghz.). In and of itself, even if it's cherrypicked, you still are showing much MUCH better overclock headroom than Phenom 1 could have dreamed of.

2. You can't say "Phenom II is not better than a Q6600 clock for clock" because IT'S NOT OUT!! (And we don't have good, full reviews). When it is out, and you have numerous full reviews from respectable sites you *might* be able to say this.

3. We don't know initial pricing on Phenom II, so even if motherboards, ram, etc. are equal in price, you can't say people can spend "less and get more."

4. Also, AMD boards are often better than Intel ones. At least in my opinion, since lots of people use integrated graphics, AMD has Intel beat hard on those, therefore AMD boards are better. But either way it's pretty minor, both have/make excellent featured and stable boards.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just stop stating things as fact that aren't known by anyone who hasn't signed an NDA. You can't know, so stop acting like you do.

You have a point, i shouldn't talk about how bad i think the phenom II
chips are compaired to anything because it's not out yet.
so everyone that's posting how great this chip perform shouldn't be
posting things like that, being the phenom II is not out yet, right.