Actual deneb review/comparison to Intel

[roofus]

pricing gets a lot more interesting once AM3 hits the street. a good AM3 DDR3 board will put costs similar to building an i7 920 system. that has to be in their cross hair for that release because the cost argument gets a lot tighter at that point. their obligation will be to compete at that level rather than the midrange yorkies. they need to really get a good head start with the AM2 p2's. hope it works out.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I agree, as usual. One thing about all these reviews, theyre using a mobo with a igp, and thats also included in total system power usage on every bench everyone has seen so far, so, overall, the system power usage could be better.
Now, if anyones surprised by my agreeing here, then you havnt been listeningto me. As for i5, it still sounds like a Caleyeforneeaye highway to me

 

[roofus]

jaydee, didnt you at one time find some prelims on the i5 that showed it games better than i7? i could just be going insane too

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

No, but theres been speculation it might, it all depends on Intel , and how they want to present it, as it may compete with i7 too much

 

[roofus]

very true. if it is too close or better, they may cripple it. that was the fate of some of the first Celerons. cheaper process and it would run with their premiere CPU's so they stripped the cache lol

 

[spathotan]

Could i5 possibly be lacking HT?

 

[spoonboy]

they could possibly cripple it a bit to differentiate it enough from i7, even if its something not too major like no hyperthreading or turbo boost. Only a 2 way memory controller too. But that last part is confirmed already? or am i going insane? hang on, am i even really here?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I think spoonboy is on something...ooops I mean onto something heheh

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Not sure if this has been posted http://www.techpowerup.com/81303/ASUS_Preparing_Eight_New_AMD_Motherboards_Under_the_M4A_M4N_Series.html

 

[WR]

I agree, as usual. One thing about all these reviews, theyre using a mobo with a igp

"AMD claims idle power consumption of the IGP is just 0.95W" (55nm 780g)
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_780g_overclocking/

Whether that is accurate, removing an idle IGP won't amount to much. The biggest factors in chipset power consumption seem to be (1) the # of PCI-e lanes supported and (2) the efficiency and maturity of the process node.

The X48s and X38s used in most the reviews are 90nm Northbridges with support for dual x16 PCI-e 2.0 (32 lanes @ northbridge, 6 @ southbridge).

The P45 is a 65nm Northbridge with support for single x16 PCI-e 2.0 (or dual x8).

The 790gx, with integrated graphics, is a 55nm Northbridge with support for single x16 PCI-e 2.0 (or dual x8).

The 790fx is a 65nm Northbridge with support for dual x16 PCI-e 2.0. The 790fx consumes way more power than the 790gx. Something like 20-25W more, at the wall.

The X58, the only chipset available for the i7, is a 130nm Northbridge with support for dual x16 PCI-e 2.0 (again, 32 lanes @ northbridge, 6 1.1's @ southbridge).

Nvidia's 780i SLI, a notoriously power hungry chipset, has 32 PCI-e 2.0 lanes off the nForce 200, 28 PCI-e 1.1 lanes off the southbridge, and 2 PCI-e 1.1 lanes directly off the northbridge. I never learned the process nodes for these 3 chips.

Hope that clarifies.

TG also alluded to this in their P2 review; they just didn't follow up with an efficient Intel chipset to compare progress.

 

[gpippas]

agreed it is only a die shrink and a bit more stuff added. The draws of it now are that power consumption has gone from horrible to pretty good, its faster too and it will oc well. Also compatible with am2+ and soon to be am3 compatible aswell, all with the same cpu. Give it a month or two to let retail samples and not engineering ones to emerge into the wild and the bioses to improve and your at 3.8-4.0ghz on air for an oc.

Blah blah blah competes with the intel 3+3mb L2 cache quads, holds its own very well against E8x00 duals in gaming. End of story. Consumers win, fanboys lose, and i might still be in with a chance now of slapping a q9650 in my crusty old rig this summer without having to slap down 350 uk pounds for the privelege.

Peace

I also agree with yipsl. Its a fantastic upgrade option for a lot ppl. But here the UK it just isn't justifyable. Not only is a p2 940 about £50 ($76) to expensive to the point that a Q9550 is £20 ($30) cheaper but the mobos for AM2+ are more expensive the most high end P45 boards. In fact checking today the prices for 790fx boards have suddenly dropped. Still not cheaper though.

If the price was roght I would build one tomorrow but currently its not so I have to play the wait and see till the end of the month.

 

[gpippas]

Is it just me or is there something odd going on with all the current P2 940's. I have never seen such odd performance scaling with resolution. As the res goes up or detail levels are increased performance should go down not up. At like 1600x1200 performance just seems to increase on a lot of occasions. Check Guru 3d review and Brothers in Arms it overtakes everything.

Just wondering if anybody has any ideas.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Is it just me or is there something odd going on with all the current P2 940's. I have never seen such odd performance scaling with resolution. As the res goes up or detail levels are increased performance should go down not up. At like 1600x1200 performance just seems to increase on a lot of occasions. Check Guru 3d review and Brothers in Arms it overtakes everything.

Just wondering if anybody has any ideas.

That could be a driver thing. On the THG review of Core i7 with multi GPUs a CFX quad HD4870 setup was getting crappy performance without AA. But they turned AA on and next thing you know its performance increased a lot.

There are many factors that can cause it. Its just like Core i7 with more than one GPU shows great gains for gaming on a clock per clock basis vs anything else.

 

[Malovane]

Is it just me or is there something odd going on with all the current P2 940's. I have never seen such odd performance scaling with resolution. As the res goes up or detail levels are increased performance should go down not up. At like 1600x1200 performance just seems to increase on a lot of occasions. Check Guru 3d review and Brothers in Arms it overtakes everything.

Just wondering if anybody has any ideas.

Well, performance really doesn't go up... but it doesn't drop as much as Intel's offerings in quite a few titles. I've seen similar behavior with Phenom I as well. I had thought it was a bandwidth issue, but that may not tell the whole story, as i7's bandwidth is a fair margin better than Phenom 1 and 2.

I'm getting in a Phenom II 940 soon, and will run some thorough tests on it in conjunction with my 4870/512 and 4870x2, and compare it against my 9850 BE. It doesn't seem like we're getting the whole picture on Phenom II, as the results from review sites are all over the map.

 

[rangers]

it may have something to do with there being no front side bus, so it could have something to do with bandwidth

 

[gpippas]

Well, performance really doesn't go up... but it doesn't drop as much as Intel's offerings in quite a few titles. I've seen similar behavior with Phenom I as well. I had thought it was a bandwidth issue, but that may not tell the whole story, as i7's bandwidth is a fair margin better than Phenom 1 and 2.

I'm getting in a Phenom II 940 soon, and will run some thorough tests on it in conjunction with my 4870/512 and 4870x2, and compare it against my 9850 BE. It doesn't seem like we're getting the whole picture on Phenom II, as the results from review sites are all over the map.

I will be very interested to see those results because all the reviews have such a wide range of results. Ranging from power consumption figures being good or bad, game benchmarks are all over the place. From a technical point of veiw I can't understand why there is such a variation in performance.

Something that I am beginning to suspect is that AMD didn't provide cpu' s early enough for them to do comprehensive tests on everything. With CES coming up most sites are interested in preperaring for that rather than messing about with P2. Xbitlabs review for instance was incredably short. Anand sort of hinted that there will be a follow article with his comments about it being an ES cpu not retail. Nobody seemed to mention any bios or compatability problems or anything like that like they did Core i7. Most websites didn't bother overclocking and whenthey did they didn't they all only changed the multiplier. It almost feels like theres something we are not being told.

 

[werxen]

So would I. But ill be a idiot to pay $275 for it.

Q6600:$189.99 @ 2.4 gighz
P2 Black Edition: $275.00 @ 3.0 gighz

Please tell me, how the hell are you comparing the two prices?

Maybe you should look at the logical choice between the two instead of trolling:

Q6600:$189.99 @ 2.4 gighz
P2 920:$235.00 @ 2.8 gighz

i usually respect your posts but lately, especially in this thread, you have been fanboying for intel A LOT. cut it out. the price might seem a LITTLE high but thats because AMD has been throwing out their garbage cpus for cheap as of late. this p2 is actually a DECENT cpu.

 

[spathotan]

werxen, stop trying to spotlight yourself. Nobody is trolling. Fanboying intel alot? In all these P2 threads I have been hoping (and was planning to upgrade to this chip) barring it had a realistic and sane price tag,which it dosent. Fanboying intel..sure, ive been wanting to find a reason to get rid of this Q6600 for months, so shoot me?

You and only you will be the one to deny the P2 940 is being constantly compared and put next to the Q6600, because thats the chip it has to beat.

The prices are the thing that is bonkers, not the performance. The P2 940 needs to be at $210 due to its performance.

 

[werxen]

werxen, stop trying to spotlight yourself. Nobody is trolling. Fanboying intel alot? In all these P2 threads I have been hoping (and was planning to upgrade to this chip) barring it had a realistic and sane price tag,which it dosent. Fanboying intel..sure, ive been wanting to find a reason to get rid of this Q6600 for months, so shoot me?

You and only you will be the one to deny the P2 940 is being constantly compared and put next to the Q6600, because thats the chip it has to beat.

The prices are the thing that is bonkers, not the performance. The P2 940 needs to be at $210 due to its performance.

im not trying to 'spotlight' anything. just get your prices in check.

 

[spathotan]

Correction, its actually AMD that should get their prices in check.

I wont get into this. Its tiring and there are already 6 pages here and 16 pages in the other thread.

As much as I hate to say it, roadrunner comes to mind. He called everybody's bluff, and turns out he was right. Cherry picked chips for OCing demos (unless some really really really good BIOS updates for boards are on the way), and questionable performance. Eventhough he was still blowing steam and patting himself on the back constantly, not to mention talking crap.

 

[werxen]

Correction, its actually AMD that should get their prices in check.

I wont get into this. Its tiring and there are already 6 pages here and 16 pages in the other thread.

As much as I hate to say it, roadrunner comes to mind. He called everybody's bluff, and turns out he was right. Cherry picked chips for OCing demos (unless some really really really good BIOS updates for boards are on the way), and questionable performance. Eventhough he was still blowing steam and patting himself on the back constantly, not to mention talking crap.

lol please dont EVER say RR was right about ANYTHING... i hate that guy with a passion.

and as far as the overclocking goes: im still waiting to see peoples results. im not going to base anything off these quick benchmarks just yet. and yes, amd will obviously cherry pick their CPUS but whoever thought a quad core processor can run 4.0+ gighz on AIR and remain within operable limits was a retard to begin with so i feel no sympathy for amd fanboys.

 

[spathotan]

4.0ghz on air with 1.4+ volts was madness, I agree there. I mean it was being done, but on cherry picked chips obviously. Its a pipe dream scenario.

I can also agree on some more time, Like I mentioned above it could be a BIOS update that does the trick, but a BIOS update that lowers voltage requiements down by 0.15v is pretty wild, espically at the age of these FX/GX motherboards, all of their fine tuning/refinement has been done more than likely.

 

[werxen]

why cant there be more processor designers other than Intel and AMD... im getting kind of sick of hearing these two guys battle it out. its like republicans and democrats. why cant we have more than these 2 guys battle it out every year? why aren't there any other processor designers making cpus for whole sale? IBM cmon!

 

[spathotan]

Dosent IBM have one planned? Its that chip with the intergrated water channels, they demonstrated it a few months ago.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

4.0ghz on air with 1.4+ volts was madness, I agree there. I mean it was being done, but on cherry picked chips obviously. Its a pipe dream scenario.

I can also agree on some more time, Like I mentioned above it could be a BIOS update that does the trick, but a BIOS update that lowers voltage requiements down by 0.15v is pretty wild, espically at the age of these FX/GX motherboards, all of their fine tuning/refinement has been done more than likely.

I normally agree with you, but Im thinking abandoning the idea of 4Ghz at 1.4 isnt good at this point, as I still think thats what we will see