A deeper look at the results of X2's Multimedia new found prowess

[Duvie]

I looked at 2 sites both known to be the best review sites in my opinion. Intel Fan boys may want to look at Tomshardware for gaming but trust me the results are similar in the other areas...Tom likes to NOT isolate gaming results by running high res instead of low res, but that is fine however he likes to skew the data.

This is a look at CPUs not a system as a whole....I look at X2 4800+ (2.4ghz 1mb) versus the 840 D and the 840 XE...I also at the same site looked for reviews using the 640 (3.2ghz) versus the 4000+ clawhammer with 1mb cache.

Now some of the results could be attributed to core enhancements of the San Diego but reviews of those show it couldn't be but maybe 2-5% at the most, and the deltas you will see show much more. The fact is the results have to be telling us this is more about the lack of the INtel design and less about the enhancement of the AMD design, IMO....I think it could be a penalty of shared cache, it could be the current bottleneck of conventional FSB, etc.....


TechReport.com

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q2/athlon64-x2/index.x?pg=1
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/pentium4-600/index.x?pg=1

------------------------640 vs 4000+-------840 D vs X2 4800+------840 XE vs X2 4800+----% change

XMpeg/Divx------------INT 11%---------------AMD 6%-----------------AMD 6%----------AMD +17.0%

WMV HD----------------INT 1.3%--------------AMD 21.5%-------------AMD 12.4%-------AMD +23%-+14%

Anandtech.com

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2353

------------------------640 vs 4000+-------840 D vs X2 4800+------840 XE vs X2 4800+----% change

Divx 5.2.1---------------TIE----------------------AMD 14%-------------AMD 18%---------AMD +14%-+18%

XVID-------------------AMD 9%------------------AMD 21%-------------AMD 23%---------AMD +12%-+14%

WME 9.0---------------AMD 6%------------------AMD 20%-------------AMD 25%---------AMD +14%-19%

WMV 9 HD-------------INT 2.2%----------------AMD 23%--------------AMD 26%---------AMD +21%-24%



Now before the Intel crew gets excited about comparing a 2.4ghz AMD versus a 3.2ghz 640...the point ppl are these are the single core speed equivalents of each companies dual core offering. I know a 640 isn't trying to compete with a 4000+...Probably more like a 650-660 but take into account what I was trying to show...Scaling of each architecture and then in relation to one another.


Now lets discuss why we think this happened to apparently a very large degree....Deltas of 15-24% is extreme....Also I wonder why the XE has been shown in more then one article to actually lag behind the 840 D version. I guess that sure seems to help making the case for the worth of a $1000 XE chip....


Edit: excuse me for my brainfart on the deltas for two of the items in the AT review....The other 2 were right...not a math error just looked at the wrong number on my papers...

 

[Markfw]

Great work Duvie !

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Great work Duvie !

AS always.. Keep it up D

 

[jpeyton]

Just wish AMD's launch price was lower. You'll be able to buy a Pentium D 820 for under $300, and you can probably overclock that to 3.6GHz (likely higher) on air. Even Dell's XPS5 with a Pentium 840 let's you overclock it up to 3.6GHz in the BIOS; that much of an overclock is almost a given with the 90nm process Intel is using.

AMD's cheapest will be ~$550 at launch.

A deciding factor maybe the motherboard support. If the motherboard maker's don't offer BIOS support for the Pentium D on their current 925X boards, that's a big strike against Intel. I would rather just pick up a X2 4200+ and a Ultra-D at that point.

 

[Duvie]

Plus the fact the 820 is nowhere to be seen and the fact may be that the X2's will be available before even then 840 D (non XE) are even widely available....

I think the 820 is a phantom right now and until it shows up as well as a host of board options for the dual core under 250 bucks this is not seen as a cheaper option even when looking at AMDs prices.....

Basic percentages tell me even if you get to 3.6ghz you likely would not be better then the 4200+ option from AMD...then ofcourse if we are comparing OC'd chips then we can go under reports that 4800's hitting 2.7-2.8ghz without any vcore options on the Asus mobos right now....If you could get 2.6ghz out of the 4200+ you will need 4ghz + to equal it in some areas...


Amds chepaest is 531 according to all price list I have seen.....


I also would like to point to At article...Notice the price on the 840 D??? It is 660 or over a 100 more then what the list price was in the reviews not to mention the comment these are preorders...Where the fvck are these chips...talk about a paper laucnh!!!

 

[Capt Caveman]

There are a number of legitimate online retailers that have Pentium D's for preorders. Are there any for the X2? From all of the articles I've read, it still appears that the X2 won't be available to retailers til Q3-Q4 b/c everything is going to OEM's first. Hopefully, they'll be out sooner.

 

[AnandThenMan]

It has been confirmed by Intel that the Pentium D is not compatible with the 925 boards. It really doesn't make any sense to me though, we are talking about exactly the same socket here. Perhaps the currect boards are unable to deal with the very high current requirements, I don't know. I'm sure someone out there will try the P-D in a 925 board anyway to see what happens!

Great work Duvie as usual. I am itching to drop an X2 into my baby, can't wait.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
There are a number of legitimate online retailers that have Pentium D's for preorders. Are there any for the X2? From all of the articles I've read, it still appears that the X2 won't be available to retailers til Q3-Q4 b/c everything is going to OEM's first. Hopefully, they'll be out sooner.

Yeah preorder!!! LOL!! How long since their "official launch"???

I have been told from a person that one of the big retailers we are used to is expecting them mid june and they don really make a whole lot of prebuilt systems....so they will be selling chips!!!

The other site we all are familar with from threads last week said they had a distributor (vendor) was telling them they would have them by the end of this week for a May 30th date. I imagine since AMD is launching 31st the retailer wont be shipping any to arrival until after that date anyways....if it comes true....

I will be verifying this in a few days....We should know whether or not that date is going to hold......

 

[Capt Caveman]

Do you not think that Intel will be coming out with Pentium D's? Why would AMD be more reliable, since everything is heresay? And I don't understand the animosity that everyone seems to have in both camps. Can you provide the link to the discussion that a vendor is going to have the X2's by the end of this week? No need to flame or LOL. Thx

 

[Duvie]

No I belive they are but I am laughing at what has amounted to a paper launch cause INtel who has had its can kicked of recent wanted to get their name and dual core out first. they even managed to get it out prior to the Opteron launch. then nothing!!! AMD had opteronss available for purchase in a week after their launch. If the 840 doesn't pop up until June it will be pushing 45+ days......

AMDs official launch has been ramped up...Originally May 31st was not the date this was going t happen....

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1591507&enterthread=y


I talked to their sales reps on the phone and asked the tougher questions...They appear to know what they are talking about the only question is will that vendor deliver what they are listing. They said they even called and verified it over the phone with the vendor so there was no mistake on the vendors end.....

The rumored retailer may deny it to most calling them on the phone to avoid the hassles that insued around the time of the venice launch....So you will just have to take my word from what I was told by a rep......



The flame is that Intel rushed once again like a a brown nosing kid raising his hand with the answer but here we are near 2 months and they haven't delivered and board options to buy are limited and flippin expensive.....That speaks volumes for itself!!!

 

[Capt Caveman]

Thanks. I'll try and find the link to the article but I read that Intel is ready to ship the cpu's but waiting for the motherboard makers to get the boards available. Have the mobo makers provided bios updates for the X2?

Damn, if the X2 is going to be out this early, I may have to sell my stuff!

 

[Zebo]

and you can probably overclock that to 3.6GHz (likely higher) on air.

good luck with that bro.. exponential heat will overwhelm any air cooler above 3.4 IMO. We've seen this already from phase units which can't cool PD's compared to single core...


Even so you need one at 4000Mhz to match the X2. Overclcoked X2? forgetaboutit ...

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Thanks. I'll try and find the link to the article but I read that Intel is ready to ship the cpu's but waiting for the motherboard makers to get the boards available. Have the mobo makers provided bios updates for the X2?

I am not sure....I am not sure if the bios updates recently released as betas and mods for MSI may be in fact future bioses....




Damn, if the X2 is going to be out this early, I may have to sell my stuff!

Tha fact is some early reports are coming in that many have had no problem running them on existing bioses now....This may merely be a formality and may not be any factor that keeps you from booting up altogether....NF4's have mainly been the ones that have been used so far.....

Also above I agree....With limited board options I can see how the launch could be minimized.....I wonder when the others are coming since have seen very few announced!!!

 

[Zebo]

I understand what you were tying to do... keep intel and AMD processor speeds the same with move from single to double. Perfectly legit..


But the whole thing, the huge deltas, is unexplainabe to me..especially in EE's case.

 

[Duvie]

Yeah I am not sure why in a few articles the XE did worse...Was it software or what???

How are the deltas unexplainable to you???

Basically I am telling you the increase or "swing"....

If intel led by 5% but is now losing by 15% then the swing would be 20% in favor in AMD...That fact is if they much scaled similar in the same apps the percentages should have held the same. It is clear the 2nd core meant less for the INtel cpu and that allowed the AMD 2nd cores efficiency to surpass Intel overall.....

 

[Zebo]

What I mean is it does'nt makes sense to me how AMD got dominate. The EE has HT too. So if it's single core version was 10% faster than a A64 in XYZ app then it should be 20% faster in that same App in dual core instead of reveresd. It's lead should compound instead of evaporate and go backwards

 

[thanatos355]

i'm just really pissed that i'll have to wait till next febuary to get my grubby lil hands on an x2! maybe i'll win the lotto.....which i dont play......which isnt legal in this state.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: thanatos355
i'm just really pissed that i'll have to wait till next febuary to get my grubby lil hands on an x2! maybe i'll win the lotto.....which i dont play......which isnt legal in this state.

Just get a San Diego to tide you over in the meantime :thumbsup:

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Zebo
What I mean is it does'nt makes sense to me how AMD got dominate. The EE has HT too. So if it's single core version was 10% faster than a A64 in XYZ app then it should be 20% faster in that same App in dual core instead of reveresd. It's lead should compound instead of evaporate and go backwards

Talking about it with Mark it appears it may all have to do with main things...

1) AMDs independent cache layout with the system request que...as outlined in the AT multicore Part 3 article...

2) Ondie memory controller...

3) Intel has bottlenecked the design by not expaning the FSB...basically double the cars on the same 6 lane highway that was already congested.....

 

[Zebo]

Very true interesting possibilites then for next chips...

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: thanatos355
i'm just really pissed that i'll have to wait till next febuary to get my grubby lil hands on an x2! maybe i'll win the lotto.....which i dont play......which isnt legal in this state.

Then I suppose selling your body is illegal too... That's what i'd do... walk around with a coffee can and mattress tied on my back to get one of these babies.

 

[MegaWorks]

KICK A$$ work Duvie! :thumbsup:

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Zebo
What I mean is it does'nt makes sense to me how AMD got dominate. The EE has HT too. So if it's single core version was 10% faster than a A64 in XYZ app then it should be 20% faster in that same App in dual core instead of reveresd. It's lead should compound instead of evaporate and go backwards

Doe's the HT advantage completely go away with dual core? Maybe 2x physical cores x HT = 4x virtual cores? Doesn't windows only support 2x?

 

[thanatos355]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: thanatos355
i'm just really pissed that i'll have to wait till next febuary to get my grubby lil hands on an x2! maybe i'll win the lotto.....which i dont play......which isnt legal in this state.

Then I suppose selling your body is illegal too... That's what i'd do... walk around with a coffee can and mattress tied on my back to get one of these babies.

are you propositioning me.......sailor?

seriously, i wonder if i could sell my body to science.

or maybe my wife's body anyway. i'll need mine to play with my new toy!

of course there is a good thing about having to wait, maybe by the time feb comes around, the prices will have come down a bit. maybe dfi will release a new rev of the lanparty for the 939 that's even better then the ultra-d that i have now. i will probably get some vx or some mushin redline when i get the x2 too.


i think i'm about to wet myself just thinking about all that.

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Doe's the HT advantage completely go away with dual core? Maybe 2x physical cores x HT = 4x virtual cores? Doesn't windows only support 2x?

depends on the version of windows.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy

Originally posted by: Zebo
What I mean is it does'nt makes sense to me how AMD got dominate. The EE has HT too. So if it's single core version was 10% faster than a A64 in XYZ app then it should be 20% faster in that same App in dual core instead of reveresd. It's lead should compound instead of evaporate and go backwards

Doe's the HT advantage completely go away with dual core? Maybe 2x physical cores x HT = 4x virtual cores? Doesn't windows only support 2x?

I say its the integrated memory controller. I've been saying for years that it was the superior deging, and that between that and the HTT bus, that the more processors AMD put on a "bus" the better they did, 2-way Opterons~best Xeon. 4-way kick a$$, 8-way left them in the dust....

Now that they are in dual-core, its obvious to be.... cpu to cpu- cache controller-cache controller, etc....