Not a flame starter, Phenom, good for?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Interesting read. If this turns out to be a malicious truth, then the Phenom will be good for a few billion dollars and a smackdown on Intel. I love conspiracies heheh
 

enewmen

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2005
2,247
3
19,815

Please tell me a little about the "optimizer". I think I'm missing something.
Thanks!
 

Mathos

Distinguished
Jun 17, 2007
584
0
18,980
"AMD Dual-Core Optimizer - The AMD Dual-Core Optimizer can help improve some PC gaming video performance by compensating for those applications that bypass the Windows API for timing by directly using the RDTSC (Read Time Stamp Counter) instruction. Applications that rely on RDTSC do not benefit from the logic in the operating system to properly account for the affect of power management mechanisms on the rate at which a processor core's Time Stamp Counter (TSC) is incremented. The AMD Dual-Core Optimizer helps to correct the resulting video performance effects or other incorrect timing effects that these applications may experience on dual-core processor systems, by periodically adjusting the core time-stamp-counters, so that they are synchronized."

Thats off AMD's website in the X2 drivers and utilities section. I kinda wonder if it works for their quads as well, but haven't tried it.
 

rodney_ws

Splendid
Dec 29, 2005
3,819
0
22,810
I suppose if you had a modern (but low-end Sempron/X2) on an AM2 board that supported a Phenom it would make a really nice drop-in upgrade. If I were in that boat, I'd at least consider going the Phenom route. I'm thinking clock-for-clock they're about the same as Intel's current architecture so if they could sort out the problems that's limiting their clock speed, they could turn out ok.
 



Great post.
 

jprevost

Distinguished
Nov 17, 2007
60
0
18,630
Thanks for all the replies.
TC, I have a strong feeling I know why the K8's are better overclockers than the K10. It has everything to do with surface area. The whole idea of cramming 4 cores into the smallest space possible doesn't work well. You need to have surface area, and Intel has done that by spacing out the 2 cores on the quad chips. They overclock ONLY because of this spacing. If Intel packed the Q6600 like any of the Phenom's they wouldn't overclock.
For having so many claimed smart people over at AMD, I'm suprised they let the bean counters market that a native quad was somehow good for everybody. It's turned out to be one of the biggest flops ever. Just so they could save money on the manufacturing... but loose all of their overclocking fans! Tisk tisk.