Q6600 isn't real quad?

[kassler]

I'm asking what applications do you use to test your experience on an intel vs amd CPU?

I am not a good user to take as "normal"
Applications that I use are SQL Server, vmware, visual studio (with some demanding addins), excel but I run it from applications, python that is also embedded.
Some other applications also, for me there isn't any alternative

 

[Grimmy]

Heh.. and what makes you think xX12amanXx is going to use, when you say use demanding apps?

 

[wh3resmycar]

Guess what? INTEL HAS BETTER DESKTOP PROCESSORS! Except for the chips that are sold in the same price range as the AMD quad chips. They are NOT "better" except in your opinion.

i hate to break it to you but a 100$ intel will outperform a 100$ AMD @ stock clock... then if you aint happy, do some OC and you know what i mean... intel will give you the better bang for the buck because they will OC higher (screw VM, screw running 10 hard apps @ once, MAINSTREAM desktops dont do that).

its not only "his" opinion really, you failed to account the dozens and dozens of reviews, and users who experience why INTEL is "better" right now.

 

[kassler]

Heh.. and what makes you think xX12amanXx is going to use, when you say use demanding apps?

encoding or rendering,

 

[yomamafor1]

I wouldn't care about a change of 0.02V. But what about going from 1.55V to 1.40V... that might be a bit more significant.

Can you irrefutably present data that this can not be done? Since many people are getting 3.0-3.1Ghz on 1.25V it seems very likely that 3.4Ghz will not require 1.55V.

Here is the same person you quoted from XS, that tried 3.5Ghz with the same Vcore.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3068008&postcount=17

by the way, I tried the same vcore for 3.5GHz.
not stable anymore.

Want to explain that?

Although I know you won't want to concede that since it will put your calculations into question. No it would better to use data that we KNOW is not correct in calculations to create an answer that WE KNOW is not correct. And then parade that around as something that is "true". (And attempt to discredit anyone that doesn't agree with your opinion.)

um.... speak for yourself?

EDIT: By the way, please show me where someone achieved 3.1Ghz on stock voltage on Phenom BE?

Directly from XS.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Heh.. and what makes you think xX12amanXx is going to use, when you say use demanding apps?

Grimmy, he doesn't understand that not everyone uses memory intensive server type apps like he does. He thinks that you got a Q6600 and you only do one thing at a time because it can't do more than one thing at a time.

He has no real proof to back this up and does not own a Q6600 but owns a Phenom (or at least he says he does) and thinks that enough proof. I mean he has not truly experienced a Q6600 like you and me but still thinks what he thinks is fact.

I suggest you give up on him. He is a lost cause and a fanboy of AMD.

Oh and BTW rendering and encoding go great on my Q660 while I am playing TF2.

 

[keithlm]

Here is the same person you quoted from XS, that tried 3.5Ghz with the same Vcore.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3068008&postcount=17

by the way, I tried the same vcore for 3.5GHz.
not stable anymore.

Want to explain that?

I guess you haven't learned that some chips overclock less if they are provided too much voltage.

It can take hours to find the sweet spot. I guess you missed the people telling him he needs to back the voltage down before he can go higher? I guess with Intel chips you just keep adding voltage and removing heat and go up as high as you can go. That doesn't work on these chips. (Maybe it might with the new more stable southbridge? We can only hope.)

As for the chart: I was wrong about 2 things. It looks like 1.3V is the "stock" for most motherboards using their newest bios. Stock on my motherboard is 1.275V for the newest bios.

It also looks like it is 3.0Ghz that people are getting on stock voltages of 1.3. And very few people use 1.4V or above; even the ones on water.

Actually I hadn't looked at that chart in a long time. THANKS... it makes me much more optimistic.

BUT Regardless... this doesn't make your guess any more accurate. Garbage in. Garbage out.

 

[thunderman]

Lets talk about Honesty here…which manufacturer has been honest about their Quad products. Lets take the average newbie who does not understand technology and sees the word ‘Quad core’ on the box and looks at the marketing by both Chip companies, even with simple understanding acknowledges that it’s probably better than Dual Core because that would be two Cores. On the AMD box and on their website …AMD are up front about their product offering…. True Native Quad Core and Hyper transport technology. Intel keeps quiet about what their offering actually is and that’s namely an ancient FSB system which can become bottlenecked easily under heavy use and the fact that it’s two Dual cores stuck together further bottlenecking overall system performance. Intel should state this and is misleading people who thought they were buying a REAL quad.

Intel have woken up and have followed AMD…an Inferior Clone called Nehalem. It’s not unusual to find clones throughout various technologies…there just never up to their originals. Nehalem is a step up for Intel though (at last) and even if it is a clone, at least Intel can compete…Intel don’t want to be left behind. I prefer AMD of course,….. I just don’t want to see Intel go bankrupt for competition sake even though I think Intel are evil!

AMD4Life!

Nvidia are semi evil (not quite up to Intel)

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

^
Don't respond to it, quote it, etc... Just THUMB IT DOWN!

 

[jimmysmitty]

I love it. Like a parallel universe. That or they have been passing around some random unknown drug.

 

[bobwya]

Guys & Fangirl,

I've been reading through this thread and I think I've worked it out... I should of spotted it sooner...

The lack of hard, technical empirical evidence...
The pigeon english and poor grammar...
The frequent references to sliced bread (and baking)...

"kassler" is really just an anagram of "Hector Ruiz"!! (OK one must make allowances for spelling)

Bob

 

[keithlm]

Intel have woken up and have followed AMD…an Inferior Clone called Nehalem.

HEY! There is nothing to say it will be inferior.

At this time we don't know how it will perform because the only things we've seen are the biased Anand article that only included cherry picked benchmarks... and another leak that showed the 2.93Gzh Nehalem performing about the same as a 3.4Ghz C2Q. (Didn't the marketing people say it would be better by more than 15%?)

If a reviewer created a benchmark review using only cherry picked benchmarks to showcase the Phenom... there would be no end to the screaming on this forum. Yet somehow it's okay to do that for the Nehalem.

 

[xx12amanxx]

Try it before you buy it, numbers is one thing, using the computer is another.
Remeber to try demanding applications.

Well when my 3dmark06 score jump's 300 point with a fsb increas of one i know that i might be cpu limited right now. The moniter that i use is an Acer x193x+ @1680x1050.

My baby run's hot even with an arctic cooler64 it idles at 40 celius and hover's around 55 when under load this is at 3.3 it gets unstable sometimes at 3.4.

Im constantly raring and unraring files ripping DVD's and playing games with Crysis in window mode while sufring the web!

I love my 6000+

But im not sure honestly if i would see a big difference in day to day activities? I wish i knew becuase if it was like when i went from my old 3000+ socket-A to my 6000+ i would buy the E8400 and a mobo today!

 

[kassler]

Im constantly raring and unraring files ripping DVD's and playing games with Crysis in window mode while sufring the web!

If you are using a fast video card you should select a phenom with fast memory if you want high performance on crysis. The hypertransport 3.0 can handle much more data. Lower resolutions/settings intel will win but on higher amd is better. The FSB is hurting intel performance

 

[Zoron]

Just give it up (k)assler. You haven't convinced anyone except yourself and Kieth.

 

[amdfangirl]

Lets talk about Honesty here…which manufacturer has been honest about their Quad products. Lets take the average newbie who does not understand technology and sees the word ‘Quad core’ on the box

Quad refers to 4 and the last time I checked 2x2 equalled 4.

Well when my 3dmark06 score jump's 300 point with a fsb increas of one i know that i might be cpu limited right now. The moniter that i use is an Acer x193x+ @1680x1050.

My baby run's hot even with an arctic cooler64 it idles at 40 celius and hover's around 55 when under load this is at 3.3 it gets unstable sometimes at 3.4.

Im constantly raring and unraring files ripping DVD's and playing games with Crysis in window mode while sufring the web!

I love my 6000+

But im not sure honestly if i would see a big difference in day to day activities? I wish i knew becuase if it was like when i went from my old 3000+ socket-A to my 6000+ i would buy the E8400 and a mobo today!

Were almost at the stage were things stop improving that much.

If you are using a fast video card you should select a phenom with fast memory if you want high performance on crysis. The hypertransport 3.0 can handle much more data. Lower resolutions/settings intel will win but on higher amd is better. The FSB is hurting intel performance

This makes me wanna buy a Q6600 and a Phenom system and to do hardcore multi-tasking, just to prove he's wrong ;(

Hypertransport is merely a huge pipe going to and from a water purification plant. FSB is one also, only smaller. Now lets say that the Hypertransport pipe is capable of 100L/H and the FSB pipe is only capable of 60L/H and the plant can process 55L/H but the purification plant on the Hypertransport lane only purifies at a rate of 10L/H. Which is purifying more water?

 

[kassler]

This makes me wanna buy a Q6600 and a Phenom system and to do hardcore multi-tasking, just to prove he's wrong ;(

Hypertransport is merely a huge pipe going to and from a water purification plant. FSB is one also, only smaller. Now lets say that the Hypertransport pipe is capable of 100L/H and the FSB pipe is only capable of 60L/H and the plant can process 55L/H but the purification plant on the Hypertransport lane only purifies at a rate of 10L/H. Which is purifying more water?

Check this: http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_q9450/8.htm
As you can see AMD Phenom 9600 has no chance at all on 1280x1024. But it is has passed Intel on 1680x1050. There is also some posts on the crysis game forum that describe the performance gain going from AM2 to AM2+ or X2 to Phenom. The reason is the higher hypertransport speed.
The FSB on intel is not that effective. When different data is going crossfire in the FSB it is losing efficiency.

 

[yomamafor1]

....and ironically, at 1680x 1050, bottleneck is shifted onto the GPU rather than CPU. Therefore, this benchmark further proved that Intel processor is faster than Phenom.

 

[someguy7]

In the gaming benchmarks, the Q9450 performed worse than the Q6600 only twice. Increasing the CPU speed had little effect on the numbers generated in this test.

 

[MU_Engineer]

Man this is gotta be MadModMike we are dealing with, if any of you besides TC and yomamfor1 have been here long enough to remember. Arguing personal opinions against well accepted facts

I don't think it's MMM, 9-inch, Sexbomb, Sharikou(insert random string of characters) or any of those guys from a couple of years ago. They didn't write as much. This actually looks much more like BM's work.

 

[amdfangirl]

^ a Sock Puppet?

 

[yomamafor1]

I would say his post level is on par with MMM (when he did write a lot), and a little shy of BM. But his inability to recognize reality, definitely BM style.

 

[yomamafor1]

I guess you haven't learned that some chips overclock less if they are provided too much voltage.

It can take hours to find the sweet spot. I guess you missed the people telling him he needs to back the voltage down before he can go higher? I guess with Intel chips you just keep adding voltage and removing heat and go up as high as you can go. That doesn't work on these chips. (Maybe it might with the new more stable southbridge? We can only hope.)

I guess you also haven't learned that if voltage required is out of the range of voltage supplied, CPU will become unstable.

I agree that it usually takes hours to find a sweet spot. However it doesn't mean by tweaking and adjusting, you can lower a Vcore down by 0.15V. Not happening. Especially on Phenom, where tweaking IMC speed is as important as CPU speed, and also as a major heat generating source, I really don't think you can simply "tweak and reduce".

As for the chart: I was wrong about 2 things. It looks like 1.3V is the "stock" for most motherboards using their newest bios. Stock on my motherboard is 1.275V for the newest bios.

It also looks like it is 3.0Ghz that people are getting on stock voltages of 1.3. And very few people use 1.4V or above; even the ones on water.

Actually I hadn't looked at that chart in a long time. THANKS... it makes me much more optimistic.

So let's see, a 0.1V increase to achieve a 400Mhz overclock. So if your theory, which is similar to linear projection, applies (which it does not), how much voltage increase is needed to achieve 3.4Ghz? If voltage vs. clockspeed relationship is more like a exponential graph (which is more true), how much voltage will it likely need to achieve 3.4Ghz?

BUT Regardless... this doesn't make your guess any more accurate. Garbage in. Garbage out.

I guess it depends on if the person is clueless enough to recognize them as garbage in the first place.

 

[amdfangirl]

Hey does anyone type/act like me?

 

[xx12amanxx]

Hey does anyone type/act like me?

Lol...

Your avatar's definatly set you apart young lady.