AMD Phenom II 940 "Xtremely" Benchmarked

Page 18 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar


I wonder why sites like Anandtech don't use their Opterons for normal benchies? Just because it's got an opteron sticker doesn't mean it can't plat games?
 
Doing two benches takes time, and costs more money. Sites tend to use the fastest cpu in their benches, and thats why youre seeing i7 now, tho for gaming, its not significantly faster, and maybe theyll start using P2 in some benches now. It used to be the FX60 youd see all the time, with an occasional Intel cpu
 


Then it needs to be priced accordingly, aka $180 - $200, maybe $220 for the AM3 model 945. Intel will be cutting the price of the Q9550 here in a month or so more than likely to counter Deneb, if AMD prices this at the rumored $275 then Intel will underhand them and beat then once again. I really dont see Intel putting the Q9550 under $240.
 
Whatll be really interesting is, what kind of bump will AM3s have? 3% is almost neglegable, a small bump from AM3 could mean very close indeed.. So, in the end, price perf would be equal, and Intel can set their prices as they will, and AMD will match them. This is interesting, Intel would have to drop 100$ off their Q9550s to make the 945 a 200$ cpu
 


No, I meant Deneb Opterons!
 


I hope those numbers dont prove to be accurate. The 2.89 % slower is at stock speed....2.83GHz 9550 vs 3.0GHz 940. In the last column, clock for clock the difference is 7.15% between the 2.83GHz 9550 vs the 2.8GHz 920. Thats not bad, but based on all the fantard hyping, I was hoping for a 1 to 1 ratio at least. Still, considering these particular results (if they are accurate) of PII vs C2Q and balancing against i7 vs C2Q, the Uarch similarities between i7 and PII should work in AMDs favor. Hopefully a later stepping will pop up that might close the gap, and if PII is priced to competed against C2Q, it should be a threat to i7.
 
You get what you pay for. Clock for clock, if P2 ocees better, will it matter? Gone are the days when Intel ocees better. I know clock for clock its not the same, but price perf, thats a whole new thing. And , like I said, you can now take ocing out of the picture. We also really dont know enough about the scaling yet, tho, it looks good in some apps, and so so in others, going by these benches
 


I suspect that once the DDR3 equipped Phenom II's come along in another months it will be a bit closer still (the 9550 and 9400 were using DDR3 in these tests). I'll be interested to see how they stack up when power consumption and overclocking are included in the discussion. Looks to be a pretty promising chip to me at least from the bang for the buck perspective.

 


I didnt know that. What were the freqs?

Which brings up another point Ive been pondering. We all know how much more 'sensitive' X2 was to ram frequency...suposedly due to the IMC. If thats true, both i7 and PII should also be similarly affected. I havent seen any tests of i7 specifically looking at impact of ram frequency effects yet, as Anand did with AMD, but am interested to see such. If true, it further levels the playing field and impacts system price/perfromance dynamic.
 


Not really true. If a PII clocks better, say 4.5 on air vs 4.3 for an intel...at 7% difference IPC, the 2% you noted earlier still favors intel.

Cmon jay, price/perfromance "a whole new thing"????? Sorry, but Im afraid I must disagree and point out that price/performance aka "value" was AMDs greatest selling point during the AthlonXP/A64/P4 era...it was faster and cheaper...a better value. Price/perfromance is an old thing, and where it will fall remains to be seen. We dont know, and everything else right now is just so much speculation. AMD may lead, they may not. And regardless of who leads in 2 weeks, in 4 weeks that may change. From July 06 through jan07, the value crown (price/perfromance ratio) changed hands at least 3 times that I can remember off the top of my head (bin prices)...and that doesnt even recall retail prices, with ZZZ, Mwave and newegg changing prices so fast during that period that it was like watching the dow. I kid you not, on any given day a post made regarding X vs Z value could be completely invalidated within 24 hrs.

Scaling is precisely why I look more to i7 than C2Q. It should, to my thinking, be much closer to i7 than C2Q. The same with synthetic benchmarks and memory performance. I am far more interested in PII vs i7 due to the similarity in their Uarch...If PII is close to i7 in performance, but priced to compete against C2Q....as I said..a threat to i7

You'll forgive me if I dont jump up and down just yet....AMD and their......'unsual' locations. Press junkets in tunisia, first releases in greece, tests in serbia????....."highly suspect" as Chef Skinner would say....I'll just keep waiting for stuff a lttile closer to home......or coolaler......who has a long history with both AMD and Intel prerelease products, although he seems to get very early steppings. He and the CPUZ validations.....screen shots can be faked. Actuall CPUZ validations can not, to my knowledge, be hacked or falsified (at least not yet)...maybe they can.

http://forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=191848



 


According to the test setup page in the review the Yorkfield chips used DDR3-1866. The Phenom II's used DDR2 1250.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom