AMD Phenom II 940 "Xtremely" Benchmarked

[dattimr]

You probably would if you had that much in your allowance, since you are a idiot.

I'm happy with the i7 920 http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=463843

Wow if my i7 920 @ 4.0 is low end that junk your on is a big pile of **** then. You better upgrade lol.

My SSD drives are worth about as much as your entire rig. It must suck to have to use such a slow piece of crap. I wouldnt know. Even my 8yr old sons PC with a 8400@4.0 blows your crap away.

You can't render the Blue Screen of Death faster than him, Roadrunner .

/jenhsunlolmode

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Ive seen this phenominom (...ok pun intended) in several threads, on several sites. I think alot of people dont understand the mindset of gamers. If thats their primary usage, its usually greater than almost any other pc usage being done , simply because its hands on, in the now, so to speak, experience. Using winrar, or encoding etc, its set it and for get it, and isnt the same experience.

Now, having said this, how does this effect peoples, particularly gamers views of i7? Does it absolutely own? No. The multi card setups look good, but again, thats only new, no one knows how AMD will do, and ATI for that matter, so its a small, and possibly significant matter of importance, but again, maybe not. Whats is is bang for buck. More 4870s were sold than almost any other card for serious gamers since its inception. Why? Its not the best, nor the fastest, in its class, let alone, the x2 solutions available, and even previously available, as in the x2GTX. It was price with perf that mattered. Not the top, but great returns for the money spent. Thats where i7 fails to impress gamers

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

MODERATOR EDIT:

Sorry couldn't resist :lol:

 

[dattimr]

Best post I've seen from you, J.

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

Ive seen this phenominom (...ok pun intended) in several threads, on several sites. I think alot of people dont understand the mindset of gamers. If thats their primary usage, its usually greater than almost any other pc usage being done , simply because its hands on, in the now, so to speak, experience. Using winrar, or encoding etc, its set it and for get it, and isnt the same experience.

Now, having said this, how does this effect peoples, particularly gamers views of i7? Does it absolutely own? No. The multi card setups look good, but again, thats only new, no one knows how AMD will do, and ATI for that matter, so its a small, and possibly significant matter of importance, but again, maybe not. Whats is is bang for buck. More 4870s were sold than almost any other card for serious gamers since its inception. Why? Its not the best, nor the fastest, in its class, let alone, the x2 solutions available, and even previously available, as in the x2GTX. It was price with perf that mattered. Not the top, but great returns for the money spent. Thats where i7 fails to impress gamers

I definitely agree with you, but I think even hardcore gamers encode HD videos and convert other videos from time to time, atleast I do.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

True, as almost all of us do. So, then it comes down to, will the extra monies being spent on a i7 setup vs any other , and the advantages of encoding etc be worth it? Or, will a bigger lcd, or better gpu be more worth it. Thats the gamers mindset. Cpus fit in there somewheres, but it isnt always the top of the list, especially when costs are concerned vs other components, or bottom line expenditures.

After all, we are in the cpu section here, and alot of people who frequent this section arent gamers, and truly dont understand how gamers look at, or consider their cpus in importance. Ive always recommended to people that dont game to get a i7, did so just the other day. But, if youre a gamer, theres much more to consider than just the cpu, as in cost etc

 

[dattimr]

Gotta sleep, guys. See the other flames tomorrow. ;D

 

[caamsa]

Dang, I am feeling so inadequate.....can I at least brag about my Fios download and upload speeds..........? or maybe that new shiney nickel I found......

 

[roofus]

the only thing missing now is a snooty Apple fanboi to come along and tell us how stupid we are for not buying a Mac instead of building "PC's"

 

[spathotan]

MACs cant browse forums.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Ya know macGF is gonna pick up on that heheh

 

[jj463rd]

Get an iMac and then you can run garageband and iLife.

 

[roofus]

garageband and iLife? i didnt notice them on the Mac end cap.

 

[The_Blood_Raven]

Dang, I am feeling so inadequate.....can I at least brag about my Fios download and upload speeds..........? or maybe that new shiney nickel I found......

Maybe this will make you feel better:

my internet:

Download: 752 kb/s

upload: max 100 kb/s

Enjoy FIOS! on top of my mountain in the middle of no where I'm doing the best I can sadly...

 

[roofus]

i have comsuck so of course it has multiple personalities. one day im 12Mbps down/2Mbps up, next day it is on par with Blood Raven's posted speeds.

 

[rambo117]

lol, i love these topics. people fighting over stupid things such as: well i dont invest all my money on CPUs, i put it toward vehicals, boats, ect.(lame excuse for have a sucky computer) IMO.
cant any of you people see what ur arguing about?! something thats not even out yet! how bout all you AMD fanboys and INTEL fanboys WAIT till we get some legitimate benchies, THEN we can decide who the winner will be...

please carry on fighting over stupid things though, its rather entertaining 😛

 

[EXT64]

Yep roofus, I'm with you there. It was the only choice for my apartment. Some days it's great but whenever I really need it, it gets slower than dial up (literally, I'm talking like 50K).

 

[EAZY-E]

it doesnt suck!

 

[rambo117]

yes, it does lol. i have comsuck as well and hate it. sometimes it works, some times it doesnt... >: (

 

[WR]

I think alot of people dont understand the mindset of gamers. If thats their primary usage, its usually greater than almost any other pc usage being done , simply because its hands on, in the now, so to speak, experience. Using winrar, or encoding etc, its set it and for get it, and isnt the same experience.

What's not to understand? It's totally logical and practical. A gamer doesn't spend nearly as much time RAR'ing or encoding as staring at the raw FPS of some game. They don't even spend that much on the GPU - after all, have to spend time at work and away from games to buy expensive GPUs when turning down the eye candy usually works.

Take a look at the Steam monthly survey - http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?localizedcurrency=1 (Nov. 2008)

Notice 90% of gamers there use just 1 or 2 cores, over 50% have 2 GB or more RAM, and over two-thirds are using XP 32-bit? That looks like a business installation with preference for price/performance/compatibility. That semblance stops at the GPUs, but extravagance isn't popular there, either - half of 1% have Radeon 2900s, and GTX 260 and 280 each account for 1-2%. The 4800s (think 4850) are making inroads at 6.5%, but the largest installed base is still the 8800 series, at 27% (I bet mostly 8800GT's).

More 4870s were sold than almost any other card for serious gamers since its inception.

You mean 4850. 4850~8800gt > 4870 > other GPUs (excluding lower-end discrete cards). The 4870 performs noticeably better but falls behind in price/performance due to the substantial premium. And as we just saw, gamers apparently chase price/gaming performance, not gaming performance or eye candy at all cost.

There's no comprehensive sales tracking, but individual retailers often report such results. E.g., http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39938/118/

I realize this is the CPU section, and every day we talk about i7's, Phenom II's, original Phenoms, even GTX200s vs 4870x2's. But volume for these products is relatively very miniscule not just for ordinary Joe but for gamers as well. We're enthusiasts; not gamers. The desktop volume is in Wolfdales and 4850/8800-level GPUs. It's the enthusiast in us that goes for Q6600s/9500s and 4870s, or i7's and SLI GTX200s. Half the i7 owners aren't even serious about gaming. Someone's 920 in this thread is paired with a 4670; my 965 recycles an x800...

 

[spathotan]

That's not saying much considering the 8800GT has been out for over a year.

Either way, alot of people use Steam (not me though), so those hardware numbers are probably pretty accurate.

 

[rambo117]

I think alot of people dont understand the mindset of gamers. If thats their primary usage, its usually greater than almost any other pc usage being done , simply because its hands on, in the now, so to speak, experience. Using winrar, or encoding etc, its set it and for get it, and isnt the same experience.

What's not to understand? It's totally logical and practical. A gamer doesn't spend nearly as much time RAR'ing or encoding as staring at the raw FPS of some game. They don't even spend that much on the GPU - after all, have to spend time at work and away from games to buy expensive GPUs when turning down the eye candy usually works.

Take a look at the Steam monthly survey - http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?localizedcurrency=1 (Nov. 2008)

Notice 90% of gamers there use just 1 or 2 cores, over 50% have 2 GB or more RAM, and over two-thirds are using XP 32-bit? That looks like a business installation with preference for price/performance/compatibility. That semblance stops at the GPUs, but extravagance isn't popular there, either - half of 1% have Radeon 2900s, and GTX 260 and 280 each account for 1-2%. The 4800s (think 4850) are making inroads at 6.5%, but the largest installed base is still the 8800 series, at 27% (I bet mostly 8800GT's).

More 4870s were sold than almost any other card for serious gamers since its inception.

You mean 4850. 4850~8800gt > 4870 > other GPUs (excluding lower-end discrete cards). The 4870 performs noticeably better but falls behind in price/performance due to the substantial premium. And as we just saw, gamers apparently chase price/gaming performance, not gaming performance or eye candy at all cost.

There's no comprehensive sales tracking, but individual retailers often report such results. E.g., http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39938/118/

I realize this is the CPU section, and every day we talk about i7's, Phenom II's, original Phenoms, even GTX200s vs 4870x2's. But volume for these products is relatively very miniscule not just for ordinary Joe but for gamers as well. We're enthusiasts; not gamers. The desktop volume is in Wolfdales and 4850/8800-level GPUs. It's the enthusiast in us that goes for Q6600s/9500s and 4870s, or i7's and SLI GTX200s. Half the i7 owners aren't even serious about gaming. Someone's 920 in this thread is paired with a 4670; my 965 recycles an x800...

well that was quite a mouthful

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

"You mean 4850. 4850~8800gt > 4870 > other GPUs (excluding lower-end discrete cards). The 4870 performs noticeably better but falls behind in price/performance due to the substantial premium. And as we just saw, gamers apparently chase price/gaming performance, not gaming performance or eye candy at all cost. "

Ummm no, you can include the 4850 as well, but youre forgetting the main point to which Ive been pointing to all along. Pricing, bang for buck. Oh I know nVidia has finally caught ATI in pricing, but that was too little too late, as I recall the 260 which is basically 6% slower than the 4870 was priced much higher and thus the G216 etc etc.

Enthusiasts include gamers, but theres more gamers than any other group within "enthusiasts, especially when you drag in those numbers you did. Maybe like 100 to 1, or even greater. So, when you say were a small number, and dont count as much, thats simply as defined by you, but even using your numbers, those definitions dont apply, nor are true. Over 50% of people game today, and thats only adults, and yes, thats including consoles, but most console owners have a gaming pc in their house, which is where alot of those single and dual cores, with IGPs etc come from in your numbers.

My reference to gaming was exactly to point out the differences as you did, and some people just dont get it, thats all. The smaller non gaming enthusiast community, some are even upset mentioning gaming at all, but its just the numbers AND the experience is different, which again I pointed out

 

[jimmysmitty]

What I meant was, yes, the 2900 was a bomb too, and the 3870 was meh, but they turned that into a 4xxx series also. Starting with Barcy, and ending with P2, we have something similar happening. Its not how theyre performing now, its what they have to work with, and how theyre going about it, which is pretty decent actually. Unfortunately, theyve had to live with both Barcy and the 2900, and evolve from there

Hey I have a 2900 and I can tell you it was not bomb. They just had a failed execution of it.

After driver updates the 2900 has easily become equal to the 8800 series. In fact I have gotten better scores with my 2900 Pro 1GB than some ppl with the same CPU and RAM have with a 8800 GTX and can run a lot of games decently that most say the 2900 cannot.

Optimized drivers make up for a lot with GPUs when they first hit. Thats the biggest down side is the drivers are immature upon the cards release.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Thats true, but that again is my point. The HW was somewhat a bomb, and they had to use drivers for each game to compensate, to their credit, which again is also my point. Its just better tostart out good and then get better, instead of so so, and then so