AMD Phenom II 940 "Xtremely" Benchmarked

[dragonsprayer]

air cooled - 2.5 years ago:

(before you laugh a the camera photos we used it document bios settings - yes i can print a sceen)

you had to mod the thermal right 120 bracket back then - add alot more paste then anyone thought you would - we bent the backets for more pressure to 4.6ghz shipped

 

[dragonsprayer]

what i am getting banned again? lol!

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

600+ posts on this thread!? Jesus Christ give this thread a rest lol.

 

[dattimr]

It has been a very informative and honorable thread so far. Very few 'flaming posts'.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I will at least give dragon major points for style. His PCs always look cool. Plus that one up above with the 4.5GHz OC running at 52c under a heavy load isn't that bad.

Wish I had the money to build that.

 

[jcknouse]

AMD - Does NOT have a full lineup of desktop processors. Top binning processors are sold in mainstream market. Low binning processors are basically given away in cereal boxes as prizes.

Could you please tell me this cereal? I am hungry and want some processors :lol:

 

[dattimr]

UPDATE: Just a summary from this thread:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=212641

... and...

 

[dattimr]

Oddly enough, it's interesting to note that, according to the first chart above, the 940 improves no less than 13% vs the Q9550 while going 64-bit in Cinebench.

 

[Dekasav]

I like how the i7 920 gets a 77% higher CPU score in Vantage, and loses at 1680x1050 in Warhead and FC2.

I can't get the link to work, so I don't know the system setups, anyway. Most importantly, how much RAM do they both have? If you want to do it on a price/performance, you better have 4 or even 8gb of RAM for the Phenom 920 compared to 3gb for the i7. But, that might be just me.

It does seem odd that i7's Crysis Warhead score went down so drastically from 1280x1024 to 1680x1050. That's more than an 80% decrease.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I think it was 2 gigs for AMD and C2Q, and 3 gigs for i7

 

[Dekasav]

2 gigs? Why would you run a Phenom II with only 2 gigs. I run an Athlon X2 4000 (Brisbane) with 2 gigs. Crazy people....

 

[hathost82]

the dude stating his 9950 BE is a better performer than his q6600 sitting on a p35 board is pure crap. he either cant set up a system or is dropping fantard lies.

"You are also missing part of his point, actually something that many people seem to miss. I am not the first person who finds their AMD platform running a bit "cleaner" than their previous Q6600 rig. As I stated before I still have my Q6600/P35 combo sitting in the closet and would surely be running that instead if I liked it better. I am going to turn it into a crunching rig when I get around to it but I am sticking with my current rig for gaming for the moment."

I'd believe it.
I've been reading with the new stepping that the 9950be are getting up into the 3.6 range though 3.4 was much more stable atm. I havn't seen anyone do a direct comparison between a 9950be and q6600 yet either usually the reviews are slanted one way or the other. So unless you have something set up to prove one way or another and not gimmicked fanboy tests it's hard to say that a 9950be doesn't run similarly to a q6600.

 

[Malcolmk]

Im not a fanboy, Im happy you AMD fanboys can finally have something similar to what everyone has had for quite sometime.

If the price is right, I will probably build quite a few AMD rigs.

I hope AMD can compete with i7 real soon. I love price wars.

Deneb is still slightly behind q6600 so they got a little more work to do.

I have a feeling AMD will price Denebs closer to i7 920 prices rather than as low as q6600. If they do it will be an epic fail. The only edge they will have vs i7 is you wont need a new mobo and ram to get a Deneb, so it will be a good upgrade path: however, if your building a rig from scratch it Deneb wont be the wisest choice performance wise.

If anyone has bothered to run a Phenom next to a q6600 or E6850 in COD4 on a 24" screen you would find the AMD craps on the intels. I am running the 9350e and it is heaps better in games than my E6850. The benchmarks are meaningless because they only count total frames and not the average minimum frames. The Phenom tends to run very smoothly at a consistant framerate whereas the intel has a huge variation between minimum and maximum frames. The intel is %25 higher in max frames but the AMD has a higher minimum framerate and is a lot smoother. My 3gig intel isn't playable above 1680x1050 on medium settings but the AMD 9350e runs at 1920x1600 with everything maxed out and is still smoother than the intel. And this is with identical setups. Here is a website that demonstrates this very fact. Take a look at the difference in framerate as the screen res increases.

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_phenom_x3_8750/11.htm

 

[blackpanther26]

it depends though on what you game at. If don't game at those resilutions then it is not worth the AMD system. And who has a monitor that supports 1920x1600? And this is not comparing it against Intel i7

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Here http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=212641&page=11 Oceed, Intel no longer dominates except win rar and such, and only with i7, a much more costly solution

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Heres a WR using this mobo http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=474771

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Power and temps here "Ive has this chip up to 1.55 so far under load was about 44....Room temp right now is 22"
From here http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=212641&page=12#post3546477

 

[spathotan]

Those temps are nice but hes on water, so it dosent matter. Thats 27c on water, which will probably be 40c on air....at stock.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

True, but on water at 1.5, still nice to see. Id guess maybe higher at stock tho

 

[spathotan]

If we assume its 40c on air at stock 3.0ghz @ 1.32v, I dont see how 4.0ghz is possible on air at [strike]1.5v[/strike]. I just dont. Deneb dosent change the basic laws that apply.

I still cant believe it takes 0.2v to go up 1ghz, my Q6600 can go from stock 2.4ghz to 3.2ghz at the stock 1.3v, infact I have it running 0.06v below that. I know thats comparing two different brands, but im not familiar with overclocking on AMD's, ive only owned two AMD chips, a single core Athlon 3200+, and a Brisbane 3600 X2.

**EDIT** Nvm, hes got it at 1.43v @ 4.2ghz.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Think the highest Ive seen was 3.4 at stock v's, might have been higher. We'll know today

 

[rangers]

+1, now I need to find a forum user like me...

Maybe I'll look at the SPCR forums...

think your going to have a hard time with that one

 

[roofus]

Those temps are nice but hes on water, so it dosent matter. Thats 27c on water, which will probably be 40c on air....at stock.

not necessarily. maybe with a questionable heatsink but i would imagine some of the better ones would come very close. the i7's are warm running CPU's but their load temps arent out of control unless you cheap out from what i have seen. all preliminary indicators are that the p2 isnt a heat monster so i would take a wild guess and say it hovers mid 30's on air @ 1.5(providing a sufficient heatsink).

 

[jimmysmitty]

If anyone has bothered to run a Phenom next to a q6600 or E6850 in COD4 on a 24" screen you would find the AMD craps on the intels. I am running the 9350e and it is heaps better in games than my E6850. The benchmarks are meaningless because they only count total frames and not the average minimum frames. The Phenom tends to run very smoothly at a consistant framerate whereas the intel has a huge variation between minimum and maximum frames. The intel is %25 higher in max frames but the AMD has a higher minimum framerate and is a lot smoother. My 3gig intel isn't playable above 1680x1050 on medium settings but the AMD 9350e runs at 1920x1600 with everything maxed out and is still smoother than the intel. And this is with identical setups. Here is a website that demonstrates this very fact. Take a look at the difference in framerate as the screen res increases.

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_phenom_x3_8750/11.htm

This alone makes me want to clall BS on you. Mainly because the max res for most every 24" currently buyable is 1920x1200.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2000190020%201309821328%201109909240&name=1920%20x%201200

Second, you must have something wrong with your system. A higher clocked dual core tends to run a game like COD4 better at anything than a lower clocked quad.

And second, you want us to trust you and your beliefs and one other sites beliefs when every site looks at the average, not average minimum or average high but rather what you would experience?

Nah. I will take the average of both together and see where it will normally stay.

 

[BadTrip]

^+1