Actual deneb review/comparison to Intel

[fazers_on_stun]

I here that, go Sooners!!!!

HAH!!!

Being from Texas, I was overjoyed when Joke-lahoma lost. Obviously both the Heisman and the champ bowl appearance should have gone to Texas - The University .

 

[werxen]

HAH!!!

Being from Texas, I was overjoyed when Joke-lahoma lost. Obviously both the Heisman and the champ bowl appearance should have gone to Texas - The University .

thanks for the spoiler 🙁

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Yea, I usually root for the team thats beat my team, but I dont know in this case, hope the Horns get a decent final rating in the BCS
PS I bleed RED Go SKERS!!!

 

[fazers_on_stun]

That hardocp test is of debateable value lol. WTF has tri-sli got to do with the segment the p2 is in? Its like 1 bizarre gaming test where the original phenom got 54fps at 2560x1600. Does that really proove anything or is useful to anyone? no really i asked myself the same thing this morning along the lines of "wtf was that all about". Their gpu reviews are sweet but their cpu tests are like a trip back to 2005 or something.

Ooohh just 2 measly tests for the gaming section on hardwarezone.com! they could do better than that!

Fair enough on the farcry 2 result. Although 60fps for the 940 is not to be sniffed at, and 65fps for the top scoring socket 775 cpu is not exactly leaps and bounds away.

Well now you want to debate the quality of the review sites?? I could point to a few you listed - techspot for one - that seem a bit on the bogus side, as in using Superpi for a bench. At least [H] gives you sufficient details on the test setup

It sounds to me like you just want to limit the gaming reviews to those that "prove" your point. Lessee - low res with max eye candy, but no SLI or tri-SLI because that makes P2 look bad.

Even the AMD-favoring Inquirer says

The good: Faster than low end Penryn chips in CPU-specific tasks

The bad: Intel chips remain best for gaming. Phenom II has slightly higher power draw than Penryn chips.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Time for some VoR?

As much as some (you know who you are) would like to disagree, PhII is NOT faster clock for clock. It isn't, get over it. This isn't a bad thing per se, as all you need to do is clock faster then the competition. If their chips are coming out at 2.8 and 3.0GHz, then AMD is almost doing that. Looking at newegg right now, Q9xxx clock in at 2.33 to 3.2GHz. Most are clocked at 2-33-2.8GHz, only the 9650 and the extreme editions are 3.0 or higher. As soon as 45nm gets any bugs worked out and things get better, expect 3.2 and 3.4GHz chips.

Second, looking at the benchies, I notice what many have already said. For the most part, this puts AMD in line with what you could get from Intel already. PhII ~ Q9xxx. How true this is depends on the test you run, and the Q9xxx you pick. For the most part, this is mostly true.

Third, the prices for these are much to high. If the Q6600 is $190, and can come overall within 10% of the performance of the PhII, why should I pay $275? $275 - 10% = ~$250, Intel offers a better bang for buck. However seeing as the Q6600 is EOL and isn't being made anymore, you should compare it to the new Q9xxx. The Q8300 is $230, while the better Q9400 is $270. Unless Intel is going to keep the Q6600 around longer, AMD won't even have to drop the prices that much.

Fourth, whether its because of the CPU or the chipset, total system power is lower with these chips. A "ultra low" 4x multiplier is nice as well. If AMD ever gets their overclocking software working well, you could overclock nicely while gaming, then turn everything down low while watching something on the TV. Intel I don't think has even started work on this.

Last, AMD made a lot of improvements overall compared to the PhI. This isn't enough to get most to move off of their S775 platform (I won't.) but for users looking for better performance from their AM2/AM2+ computers, this is great. They can finally get Q9xxx performance, and they don't have to start over from scratch.

My question now is, how long can AMD compete with this? i7 won't make it into most users computers. If Intel expects main stream to work with i5, how much slower will i5 be compared to i7? Will PhII come close to i5? Let the waiting begin. (due to fanbois running all over this thread, don't be surprised if I don't reply. If you'd like my opinion on something, PM me.)

VoR out.

I agree with everything you said, but (and you knew there would be a "but" ) - i7 is Intel's future, not present. I doubt that it'll be more than 5% of this quarter's CPUs shipped from Intel. By this time next year, DDR3 and X58 mobos will be cheaper, Intel will have dropped the price since Westmere will be the latest & greatest, and I suspect i7 will show some significant boosts in gaming as we will have at least one if not two GPU generations in play by then. So I think yes - i7 will make it into a lot of user's computers, just not in the next 10 minutes .

Realistically, Bulldozer is AMD's i7 competitor, and unless AMD is sandbagging all of us with their roadmaps, it won't be out until 2011.

 

[spathotan]

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

Im not abandoning it, I just think its a pipe dream with decent temps. I mean my Q6600 is operatable at 4.0ghz at 1.53v on air, but it idles at 50c and hits 80c under load, I tried it once, it scared the **** out of me.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

That using bulk/HKMG, totally different process/materials tho. Give it time, they run cool

 

[fazers_on_stun]

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!

Probably because it's too expensive and complex a game for 99.999% of companies to even want to get into. IBM wants to make a profit too (which is why they got out of the PC and hard drive businesses). Farting around with a billion transistors is not a trivial task (despite the "Can I make a CPU with a blowtorch, hammer & metal" joke thread elsewhere).

And where I think Intel has really shined these last 3 years, is in tuning their designs to the present and near-future environment - recognizing much software was still mainly integer code and thus using 3 simple and 1 complex decoder, vs. AMD's 'smarter choice' of 3 complex decoders which may handle FP faster but obviously not tuned for most integer code as they take significantly longer. After losing to AMD when trying to move the market to non-X86-native code with the Itanium on 64-bit, Intel decided that if they still had to play in that arena, then they would beat AMD there. So, better out-of-order execution/prediction, faster L1 & L2 cache (before i7 anyway), better SSE implementation, etc. etc.

And as for process, Intel executed pretty well on 90nm on down, after Prescott, plus the MCM for quadcore was really the right choice (just look at the number of AMD 65nm tri-cores they sell - you don't really think AMD wants to disable a lot of working quadcores just so they can sell into a tri-core price point, do you?) From what I've read, the learning curve for HKMG is higher than for immersion, so it'll be AMD (or IBM) struggling with that, either early next year on 45nm or in 2011 on 32nm, whereas Intel should be demoing 32nm Westmere next fall.

Intel provides both Turbo-mode for lightly-threaded apps and hyperthreading for the heavily-threaded ones, so they recognize we are beginning to move from the old, single-threaded integer apps to the new, multithreaded apps that can take advantage of SSE. Yes it's a small step compared to what Fusion will supposedly do. But i7 is out and on sale right now, and Fusion remains on the drawing boards. Better several small steps than one giant thud as your arse hits the pavement!

OK, I'm done with my "props to Intel" spew, now back to your regularly scheduled P2 postings 😀

 

[spud]

That using bulk/HKMG, totally different process/materials tho. Give it time, they run cool

So whats the OC potential of these chips vs. what you claimed?

Word, Playa.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

thanks for the spoiler 🙁

Sorry - I forgot about the Tivo (or Freevo) audience . Anyway, forget the 1st half and just skip to the 2nd .

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

So, what did I claim? It can reach 4Ghz? The so called cherry picked cpus are the ones people will be getting, not the reviewers got. They got an older rev, which contains a partial coldbug and lower clock potential, as witnessed here:
"AMD has proven in early demonstrations that the Phenom II x4 will offer overclocking headroom similar to the Penryn series. Early production sample processors have clocked anywhere from 3.9GHz on air to 4.4GHz on water and all the way up to 6.3GHz on LN2. We have matched their results on air-cooling and been impressed with the potential headroom offered by the new 45nm manufacturing process on extreme cooling setups. In fact, the latest retail steppings that AMD displayed this past week showed significant improvements in overclocking headroom compared to the press samples we utilized. Our 940 topped out at 3.9GHz, which is not bad, but after reviewing AMD’s results and seeing some early retail numbers on the forums, the expectation level for air-cooling is now set to the 4.1GHz range with the 920 hitting 3.8~3.9GHz on the right motherboard"

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3492&p=10

Now, as with any HW ever made, for any usage, YMMV, but, it seems 4GHZ is being seen and used by these chips

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Also, Id add this. Whats AMDs usual approach, its history for releasing cpus? Was the skt 939 ended with the 3800? Was skt AM2 ended with the 5600? So, to expect the 940 as the end of the P2 doesnt fit with history, and only shows theres more potential than what we see so far

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Id also point out that part of AMDs thing here is ocing for the masses if you will. Supplying a cheap unlocked at somewhat affordable prices to average Joe only means more people will be ocing than ever before. Having ACC and if anyones gone to AMDs site lately, all the gaming and ocing apps and push, well to me is good. I know its not automatic like in i7, but again, Intel is also leaning in this direction, so, cant be all bad right? Face it, P2 and i7 just makes things better, and thats what newer products are supposed to do, as in regards to ocing at the very least

 

[spud]

Id also point out that part of AMDs thing here is ocing for the masses if you will. Supplying a cheap unlocked at somewhat affordable prices to average Joe only means more people will be ocing than ever before. Having ACC and if anyones gone to AMDs site lately, all the gaming and ocing apps and push, well to me is good. I know its not automatic like in i7, but again, Intel is also leaning in this direction, so, cant be all bad right? Face it, P2 and i7 just makes things better, and thats what newer products are supposed to do, as in regards to ocing at the very least

But you said the i7 was too expensive and disappointing overall how can it then with the P2 make things better? Oh well you are one damage control at this point which is fine, less the words you left on the forum before the launch says otherwise. Sucks when all your fairly tale predictions are off and in some cases extremely off.

Word, Playa.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I made 1 prediction, and 1 only. That was 2-3 % better than Kentsfield. The clocks and the links provided spoke for themselves.
Ill ad this tho, as Ive also said many a time before, that i7 may look promising on future gpu usage, as gpus get better, and from doing alot of reading on the P2 links and reviews, Im more impressed with i7s potential there, but its still a very costly solution, where i5 may change all that.
Seems to me, you want to read more into what me and my links bring than what it and they do. I like how you try and pidgeon hole me too by saying I have to do damage control as well, as if Ive said anything that is outlandish, and yes, Ive said alot, so, good luck finding it for one, and hearing and speaking about a cpo from AMD that can ge 4Ghz and has a better IPC than Barcy, which was unthinkable a short few months ago, well, its here, and if you or others dont like it, then dont buy it

 

[werxen]

blah blah BLAHHHHHHHHH. i want a p2 to play with!

 

[jed]

I made 1 prediction, and 1 only. That was 2-3 % better than Kentsfield. The clocks and the links provided spoke for themselves.
Ill ad this tho, as Ive also said many a time before, that i7 may look promising on future gpu usage, as gpus get better, and from doing alot of reading on the P2 links and reviews, Im more impressed with i7s potential there, but its still a very costly solution, where i5 may change all that.
Seems to me, you want to read more into what me and my links bring than what it and they do. I like how you try and pidgeon hole me too by saying I have to do damage control as well, as if Ive said anything that is outlandish, and yes, Ive said alot, so, good luck finding it for one, and hearing and speaking about a cpo from AMD that can ge 4Ghz and has a better IPC than Barcy, which was unthinkable a short few months ago, well, its here, and if you or others dont like it, then dont buy it

Take a look at tom's review on phenom II's out of 38 benchmarks
the kentfield wins 25 of them, and thats in what you do JDJ games,
theirs a kentfield on top beating both phenom II chips in all games.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Then buy it. Dont want P2? then dont buy it. You want a much much better chance at hitting 4Ghz? With equal perf? Up to you. If you think a brand name should make all your decisions, then go whatever color you like. If you like the idea of a unlocked multi, with available high ocing potential, but its not your color, then dont buy it

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

My posts, my links werent done to persuade anyone here. It was simply done for the excitement about a decent product . Theres been more negative, refuting, obstinate bellyacheing going on here, for what? Is Kentsfield now crap? If Penryn is so great, why arent Kent owners flocking to it? If i7s perf is so great over anything else, then why worry about its price? Is it only Kent owners who are being obstinate here by not going to Penryn or i7? Is it only AMD fanboys saying i7 costs too much?
This is simply another option we see in P2, and all the negativity we see about it not being so is rubbish. When youre color blind, it puts everything in a smaller world. Its been fun seeing what P2 is capable of doing, and to some, I guess its been a nightmare Im glad AMD has a reputable cpu out now, and hope its enough for them. Its done what early posts said it can do, regardless the naysayers.

 

[jed]

Then buy it. Dont want P2? then dont buy it. You want a much much better chance at hitting 4Ghz? With equal perf? Up to you. If you think a brand name should make all your decisions, then go whatever color you like. If you like the idea of a unlocked multi, with available high ocing potential, but its not your color, then dont buy it

That's the point you would have to get the 4Ghz out of
the phenoms to compete with a 3.6 or 3.7 kentfield.
From everything i seen in the all the different reviews
the phenom II's are getting 3.5 to 3.8 which is not
enouph to beat the kentfields,
The bottom line is your 2-3% is wrong the phonom II
is not better then the kentfield clock for clock period.

 

[gpippas]

Its only another option if the price is right for the whole package. In the UK it really isn't. A system from scratch with a Q9550 is about £30 ($50) less than a P2 system. I've heard a few moans from you guys in the US about the price but it seems you guys have the better deal.

Like Anand said its competition is the Q9400 not the Q9550. So for a new build its hard to recommend it as an option. The other problem is AM2+ for a new build is a dead end same as skt 775.

 

[jed]

My posts, my links werent done to persuade anyone here. It was simply done for the excitement about a decent product . Theres been more negative, refuting, obstinate bellyacheing going on here, for what? Is Kentsfield now crap? If Penryn is so great, why arent Kent owners flocking to it? If i7s perf is so great over anything else, then why worry about its price? Is it only Kent owners who are being obstinate here by not going to Penryn or i7? Is it only AMD fanboys saying i7 costs too much?
This is simply another option we see in P2, and all the negativity we see about it not being so is rubbish. When youre color blind, it puts everything in a smaller world. Its been fun seeing what P2 is capable of doing, and to some, I guess its been a nightmare Im glad AMD has a reputable cpu out now, and hope its enough for them. Its done what early posts said it can do, regardless the naysayers.

thats what most are saying about you and love for AMD
singing how great their Phenom I and II is even when
you are proved wrong.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

O'Really? So, being disappointed in i7s initial perf in gaming, which may change as the gpus change, wheres theres still hope for it, tho its an expensive option, is definately making me a AMD fanboy. Oh yes, and seeing a cpu thats lasted for a long time in cpu age, so to speak as a good buy is also making me a AMD fanboy? Or, will I be proven wrong on my thoughts of the Q6600 as well? And any sites and references I bring along with it too? Oh wait, this isnt AMDZ here. I dont really care whether P2 kills or slightly loses or whatever. I do like competition however. I do like seeing people whove been waiting for something better finally getting it. Too bad you cant share this, cause its nice to see. If AMD or someone someday comes along and puts a 3 year smackdown on Intel, and youre still holding out, waiting, then Ill even feel happy for you when Intel comes in with something that will at the least be interesting, and somewhat competitive, and youre able to finally get it . Now this may never happen, but its just an exanple of where Im going with all this, and an example of how wrong you are

 

[uguv]

Id also point out that part of AMDs thing here is ocing for the masses if you will. Supplying a cheap unlocked at somewhat affordable prices to average Joe only means more people will be ocing than ever before. Having ACC and if anyones gone to AMDs site lately, all the gaming and ocing apps and push, well to me is good. I know its not automatic like in i7, but again, Intel is also leaning in this direction, so, cant be all bad right? Face it, P2 and i7 just makes things better, and thats what newer products are supposed to do, as in regards to ocing at the very least

Sorry, but "the masses" buy PCs from places like Dell which have generally use a locked bios and don't allow overclocking, even with unlocked chips. Maybe the software-based overclocking utilities work on them, but I haven't found those to be great long-term overclocking solutions.

My posts, my links werent done to persuade anyone here. It was simply done for the excitement about a decent product . Theres been more negative, refuting, obstinate bellyacheing going on here, for what? Is Kentsfield now crap? If Penryn is so great, why arent Kent owners flocking to it? If i7s perf is so great over anything else, then why worry about its price? Is it only Kent owners who are being obstinate here by not going to Penryn or i7? Is it only AMD fanboys saying i7 costs too much?

While I don't really fault you for being excited about the launch you did link to a whole lot of questionable web sites that showed some unrealistic results.

By the way, "Is Kentfield now crap?" reminds me a lot of the "it's fast enough for me" quotes back when Phenom was originally released. No Kentsfield isn't crap; it's a decent product but it's a lot cheaper than the Phenom II 920 and two generations out of date.

Its done what early posts said it can do, regardless the naysayers.

This is simply not true. Several of your links in the other posts indicated that the Phenom II 940 could beat out the i7 920 and in some cases even keep up with the i7 965. From what I've seen it can't even come close to the i7 920 in most benchmarks.

Now, the thing is... I do think the Phenom II is a decent chip. It performs well when compared to its closest competitors. I wasn't expecting a whole lot from Deneb considering it's pretty much just a die shrink with additional cache, but it does perform as well as I could have hoped. I don't see it living up to the crazy hype that some of the early "previews" had suggested but it does give AMD a decent competitor to intel in its price range.

 

[uguv]

I do like seeing people whove been waiting for something better finally getting it. Too bad you cant share this, cause its nice to see. If AMD or someone someday comes along and puts a 3 year smackdown on Intel, and youre still holding out, waiting, then Ill even feel happy for you when Intel comes in with something that will at the least be interesting, and somewhat competitive, and youre able to finally get it . Now this may never happen, but its just an exanple of where Im going with all this, and an example of how wrong you are

I know some people feel that way but I just can't understand why people get so worked up about one company over another. If Phenom II had come out and crushed i7 yesterday I would have put in an order the moment they went on sale. I have no loyalty to either company and I can't really understand why someone would wait around for 3 years (or any length of time for that matter) hoping that one company can best another.