Some Preliminary Results of AMD Thuban @ 2.8GHz (OC'd too)

[warmon6]

LOL - I was expecting everyone to break out in e-kissing, or some such!

At least hold virtual hands and sing a couple stanzas of Kumbaya:

Kum bay ya, my Lord, kum bay ya;
Kum bay ya, the Lord, kum bay ya;
Kum bay ya, my Lord, kum bay ya,
O Lord, kum bay ya.

Of course, we'll have to keep a close eye on Rick & Jenny - I detect some hotness between those two! 😀

You can always find something to joke about. dont you? :lol:

 

[jennyh]

Fazers that's interesting stuff (and surprising) about your life but it just makes me wonder more.

You can't support intel and use the rest of your life as an excuse. This is all or nothing. In for a penny, in for a pound....cent and dollar? 😀

Do you understand that everything - everything - I do is designed around what is *right* for the normal person. I don't differentiate when it comes to morality. I don't say 'ah only 1 kid was forced into child labour to bring me this gucci bag, but my vegetarianism makes that ok overall.'

There is right and wrong, and for me that truly is EOD.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Ah the inbuilt paradox. It does amuse me this one.

You are backing intel all the way, yet saying intel is deliberately holding back progress because of AMD's relative ineptitude.

So lets say intel perfects this, and keeps AMD at a constant state of being just behind - never enough to seriously threaten intel, but just enough to never go under.

That sounds like a ripe situation for abuse to me, and it seems like you are supportive of that jimmy. So intel can hold back AMD through a lack of funds, while holding back progress because AMD can't compete due to the same lack of funds? What better way to keep chalking up $billions more?

Yep Jimmy, I always knew you were the most dangerous of them all, because you support this gladly.

Um I never said I supported this. I just stated that AMD needs to step it up because they are holding the CPU market back. Thats a fact.

Its also a fact that Intel purposly delayed its 32nm considering that the CEO just stated that their 32nm ramp up was the fastest ever and is now sampling Sandy Bridge that can easily be put out in Q4. But if Intel kept its stride, by the time AMD caught up they would be hurting. Not because Intel was holding back, but because Intel was steamrolling them.

Intel is not purposly doing it. Phenom II barley passed Core 2 Quad. Thuban is barley going to pass a quad core Core i7 and probably wont beat a 6 core Core i7.

So would you rather Intel just kept going faster and harder? That way you could cry foul over Intel pounding AMD in every market possible?

Seriously, don't put words in my mouth. I just said I don't want AMD to go down but they need to step up their game and fast.

 

[Chad Boga]

Thuban is barley going to pass a quad core Core i7 and probably wont beat a 6 core Core i7.

You are in doubt about this?

 

[jennyh]

You don't want AMD to go down Jimmy? Start buying AMD cpu's at 50% less cost and 5% less performance.

Not only will you be doing the sensible thing for yourself, you'll be doing the sensible thing for everybody.

If you truly don't want AMD to go down, you'd buy AMD and that is a very simple fact.

 

[jimmysmitty]

^not based on current benches Chad, no I don't think it will. But without a nice list from more than just some guy I cannot say for certain.

 

[jennyh]

You are in doubt about this?

Thuban will probably beat the 980X in a couple of synthetics (Sandra multimedia etc)...and I'm betting in a few games too.

Gaming is interesting actually. If the i7 bug is holding back gulftown...

 

[Chad Boga]

Start buying AMD cpu's at 50% less cost and 5% less performance.

That ratio is often not there.

It certainly isn't for the i5-750 and the i7-860

 

[jimmysmitty]

You don't want AMD to go down Jimmy? Start buying AMD cpu's at 50% less cost and 5% less performance.

Not only will you be doing the sensible thing for yourself, you'll be doing the sensible thing for everybody.

If you truly don't want AMD to go down, you'd buy AMD and that is a very simple fact.

So should I buy Chrysler over Ford even though Ford has some of the best cars right now but Chrysler is in the hole big time? No.

If a company is managed bad I will not buy a product out of sheer pity. What AMD needs to do for me to buy them is to provide the best performance at my normal CPU price range ($200-$250). They do that and I buy it.

The sensible thing to do is not to buy for pity but for what you need. If I did only gaming at the time, I would have gone with a Core 2 Duo (I am sorry but Core 2 was just way better than Athlon X2) but I do more than that.

If you want to do the sensible thing, stop looking at the world with one set of glasses and actually buy something with the betetr performance. If I presented 2 PCs to you that had Intel in one, AMD in the other and had no way of identifying the CPU until after you bought it (same price), would you buy the better performing PC or just say screw it because you don't know if its AMD?

 

[Chad Boga]

Thuban will probably beat the 980X in a couple of synthetics (Sandra multimedia etc)

Does the PhII 965 beat the i7-975 in any synthetics?

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Fazers that's interesting stuff (and surprising) about your life but it just makes me wonder more.

You can't support intel and use the rest of your life as an excuse. This is all or nothing. In for a penny, in for a pound....cent and dollar? 😀

Do you understand that everything - everything - I do is designed around what is *right* for the normal person. I don't differentiate when it comes to morality. I don't say 'ah only 1 kid was forced into child labour to bring me this gucci bag, but my vegetarianism makes that ok overall.'

There is right and wrong, and for me that truly is EOD.

And for me Intel's "high crimes & misdemeanors" are just a silly thing to zero in on. As I said before, Intel invented the microprocessor, and AMD and VIA would still be selling ASICs and PGAs instead of cpus if not for Intel leading the way. Note that I consider this a far more valuable contribution to the present quality-of-life standard that we in the first-world countries enjoy, than x86. Guess that explains why I'm an EE instead of software engineer 😛

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

Thuban will probably beat the 980X in a couple of synthetics (Sandra multimedia etc)...and I'm betting in a few games too.

Gaming is interesting actually. If the i7 bug is holding back gulftown...

I think that Thuban ought to do well in Cryptography and other FPU intensive synthetic benchmarks.

When it comes to Sandra... well Sandra has a long history of favoring Intel (not purposely... simply due to the full implementation, nearly across the board, of SSE/2/3/4 optimizations).

However, Sandra is an unrealistic test in my opinion. I say this because the vast majority of applications out there are not that heavily optimized for SSE/2/3/4 (Most are optimized for SSE/2/3/4 but nowhere near as heavy as Sandra).

 

[jennyh]

Does the PhII 965 beat the i7-975 in any synthetics?

I'm not actually sure, but check out the encryption benchmark here anyway.

Similar results on multimedia benchmark, at equal clocks.

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

I'm not actually sure, but check out the encryption benchmark here anyway.

http://www.cbbimg.com/out.php/i36734_20100413b60528675f94cdf40573KXW8qbicbn5d.jpg

Similar results on multimedia benchmark, at equal clocks.

Ahh I beat you to it (mentioning Cryptography a.k.a encryption)..lol

By 4 seconds..lol

 

[jennyh]

Lol by 4 seconds 😀

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

Lol by 4 seconds 😀

HAHAHA.. I beat by 10 seconds mentioning the 4 seconds..😛

 

[warmon6]

Would be more funny if they were posted at the same time. :lol:

 

[jennyh]

Gaming is interesting btw. If Thuban has raised the bar on Deneb gaming-wise, it could be something.

Deneb is already much stronger in gaming that it should be (even at low rez - it's not just all about it performing better at high rez). If Thuban can put those 2 real cores to real use in some games, we could see some amazing results in a very small number of games.

Anyway, it's well past my bedtime, and I enjoyed this a lot more than usual.

 

[amdfangirl]

Does the PhII 965 beat the i7-975 in any synthetics?

Power consumption while running 3d mark?

 

[FALC0N]

And for me Intel's "high crimes & misdemeanors" are just a silly thing to zero in on. As I said before, Intel invented the microprocessor, and AMD and VIA would still be selling ASICs and PGAs instead of cpus if not for Intel leading the way.

Actually, when the idea for CPU's was developed, nobody wanted it, including intel. It was more luck than anything that they ended up sending it to market. They thought it was a dead duck. But sales went wild.

Better to be lucky than good I suppose.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Actually, when the idea for CPU's was developed, nobody wanted it, including intel.

I'm guessing because it couldn't play Crysis??

Actually my understanding is that somebody asked Intel to make a dedicated calculator chip, and Intel thought 'what if we made it general-purpose programmable so that a software update could change the embedded functions'. So they did and voila - the microprocessor.

 

[noob2222]

The 1055T was around $300 USD (when you convert from Yen to USD but not an indication of final release price though).

That pretty much invalidates the "price/performance" argument if you're an existing AMD user (such as myself). That having been said... I'm looking forward to replacing the X3 720 with a 1055T myself (if the pricing is around or lower than $300 USD).

Interesting... very interesting.

First US sighting 1055T - 242, 1090T - 350
http://www.howardcomputers.com/accessories/selection.cfm?CatID=0212&atr1=1EZ00102&atr2=2EK279482&atrOrder=1=11=11=1,1EZ00102,2EK279482

Not available yet, but the prices are there.

 

[sirheck]

See this is what I mean. 😉

It doesn't matter how civil the conversation can get - there will always be one complete and utter moron who is out to ruin it.

That would be you.
Plus you are the only one name calling.

 

[yannifb]

Yet you felt compelled to add your $.02 to this thread, I guess..

I haven't noticed you posting anything useful, ever - just a bunch of 'rah-rah AMD' & 'Gee - I didn't even know MC was out yet!' So basically you're in the peanut gallery, showering the rest of us with your "valuable" opinions on stuff that you apparently don't really understand.

Oh sorry for not following every little detail of AMD's releases and staying home all day with nothing better to do. And Fazers, frankly i have no respect for you what so ever because it honestly seems you really genuinely don't know what your talking about. One little post mentioning you and you become whiney.

Elmo on the other hand has a legitimate reply.

 

[FALC0N]

I'm guessing because it couldn't play Crysis??

Actually my understanding is that somebody asked Intel to make a dedicated calculator chip, and Intel thought 'what if we made it general-purpose programmable so that a software update could change the embedded functions'. So they did and voila - the microprocessor.

Assuming were both talking about the 8008, thats part of it.

The chip was originally commissioned by CTC (computer terminal corporation) for a universal terminal they were developing.

They didn't finish the project before CTC killed the development funding. Intel finished the chip on their own, but didn't think it was going to be successful. But surprise, surprise.

But it goes further back then that. The idea was originally pitched to CTC by a couple of professors at case western reserve university who were turned down by every integrated circuit manufacture of the time, including Intel. They went to CTC as an end run around the IC manufacturers who didn't want to invest in the project on their own.

I think CTC was funding a similar project with TI but TI shelved the project when CTC dropped the funding because, like intel, they thought it was a dead duck.

And after all that, it ended up in a calculator and you know the rest.