AMD Phenom II 720 BE hits 4.2+ Ghz on air

[fusion238]

These current and future flexible Phenom IIs are starting to encroach and
overpower Intel's high priced i7 series in terms performance per dollar.


http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...howthread.php?t=217679

 

[996GT2]

fanboy much?

 

[OCGuy]

.........

Nice thought, but no.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: fusion238


These current and future flexible Phenom IIs are starting to encroach and
overpower Intel's high priced i7 series in terms performance per dollar.


http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...howthread.php?t=217679

What's your point?

Lower-cost CPU's almost always outperform their higher-end brethren on a "performance per dollar" basis.

Why do these "comparisons" always feature the "David" CPU overclocked and the "Goliath" CPU at stock speeds?

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: fusion238


These current and future flexible Phenom IIs are starting to encroach and
overpower Intel's high priced i7 series in terms performance per dollar.


http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...howthread.php?t=217679

AMDZone is three doors down on the right.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: fusion238


These current and future flexible Phenom IIs are starting to encroach and
overpower Intel's high priced i7 series in terms performance per dollar.


http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...howthread.php?t=217679

I have a 940@3.6 My poor old Q6600@3.3 beats it by 20% in F@H, and they are less exspensive. You can read all you want, but they sure aren;t that great to me. I can run@4.0, and windows is stable (never tried higher), but @ 100% load, its unstable in F@H.

So my Q6600 overpowers the I7 performance per dollar, and the 940 BE. Your point is ????

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
So my Q6600 overpowers the I7 performance per dollar, and the 940 BE. Your point is ????

I had similar thoughts when I saw that comment. I'm pretty sure there's some dam near free computers on EBAY from circa 2002 that will give i7 a run for performance/dollar.

When you are dividing by a really small number (cost) the performance doesn't really have to amount to much and you still get a huge number when the division is complete.

Heck I bet even the lower-priced Atoms pit i7 price/performance to shame.

Now OP, let me just say that I was going to give you some new-poster benefit of the doubt and get a little preachie on the other posters here about giving you such a hard time and maybe giving you some benefit of the doubt, etc...but I did read your link and there ain't jack squat in there for benches.

You gonna create a thread, or post in a thread, and make some bold claims regarding the performance/price of a newly released processor then you'd be MUCH better received by linking to some benches that actually support the price/performance claims you are making.

Not too many folks around here run CPU-Z Validator 3.0 as a desktop application for which they are interested in maximizing the performance/price :roll:

 

[fusion238]

Yes David and Goliath is a good analogy, since Intel is a much larger company
with at least 10 times the resources. They also have been proven to be guilty
of trying to eliminate your choice as a consumer of AMD products.

So without AMD, Intel would still be pushing Pentium 100BSX+++ or P IV Dpump
Nutburst or whatever their marketing guys thought up. When a small company
like AMD brings out a hot product for a good price, then WE ALL WIN.

 

[fusion238]

If anyone yearns to run specific apps that run optimally on a specific processor then
that is great. Competition is fantastic!

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: fusion238

Yes David and Goliath is a good analogy, since Intel is a much larger company
with at least 10 times the resources. They also have been proven to be guilty
of trying to eliminate your choice as a consumer of AMD products.

So without AMD, Intel would still be pushing Pentium 100BSX+++ or P IV Dpump
Nutburst or whatever their marketing guys thought up. When a small company
like AMD brings out a hot product for a good price, then WE ALL WIN.

Now that I can support !. And the Phenom II is a great leap forward. But you have to be careful of being a fanboy, and being Overzealous. They still have a ways to go.

Note to new member: 2 years ago, I had 12 AMD boxes. one month ago I had 10 Intel boxes, last week, I added an AMD box, and its OK for the $$, but still looses to Intel by a shade. Now, outside of F@H, I have read that it is in fact VERY competitive, but your link just isn't a good example.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

You should have looked at F@H benchmarks before you made your purchase, Mark This is just one application, out of many, for a processor, so I wouldn't hold this loss for AMD against them because they make up for it in other applications. I just notice you like to post this tidbit of yours at about every chance you get.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
You should have looked at F@H benchmarks before you made your purchase, Mark This is just one application, out of many, for a processor, so I wouldn't hold this loss for AMD against them because they make up for it in other applications. I just notice you like to post this tidbit of yours at about every chance you get.

I did research, but there are no benchmarks for F@H. Also, it looked promising, and being a prior AMD supporter, I wanted to see for myself if they finally came back.

As for posting in many places, I like to make sure I share what knowledge I have first-hand, not just some review site that I read.

 

[Andrew1990]

hmm, I kind of remember seeing how all Phenom II X4s were supposed to easily overclock past 4.2GHz+ on air. We all know how that turned out.

Even so, I am most likely picking one of these up to put in my system.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
You should have looked at F@H benchmarks before you made your purchase, Mark This is just one application, out of many, for a processor, so I wouldn't hold this loss for AMD against them because they make up for it in other applications. I just notice you like to post this tidbit of yours at about every chance you get.

He sure does it, F@H is just one of many things a cpu can do. Since you own so many Intel Quads tell us what advantages you think Phenom II has over an Intel quad, if any?

I'm about to get a Q9650 to replace my E8500, i can't wait to get this puppy and push it to 4.0 ghz and i know my PII 940 won't even hold a candle to it.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
You should have looked at F@H benchmarks before you made your purchase, Mark This is just one application, out of many, for a processor, so I wouldn't hold this loss for AMD against them because they make up for it in other applications. I just notice you like to post this tidbit of yours at about every chance you get.

cusideabelincoln when I read mark's post (re-quoted below) what I see is someone who is handling the AMD situation with as tender of kid-gloves as he can.

Mark is very specific to make sure readers understand he is referring to a specific application (no broad/wide sweeping general statements here) and he ends it by giving solid advice to the OP.

In other words, the absolute last kind of a post anyone should be crying foul over is mark's post.

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Now that I can support !. And the Phenom II is a great leap forward. But you have to be careful of being a fanboy, and being Overzealous. They still have a ways to go.

Note to new member: 2 years ago, I had 12 AMD boxes. one month ago I had 10 Intel boxes, last week, I added an AMD box, and its OK for the $$, but still looses to Intel by a shade. Now, outside of F@H, I have read that it is in fact VERY competitive, but your link just isn't a good example.

As for why it might seem like mark is re-stating this sentiment in multiple posts...it's because there are posters out there who (a) haven't seen his comments on PhII yet, and (b) there are posters out there who keep creating threads like this one and they merit some form of rebuttal lest they turn into a standing example of acceptable posting quality on these forums.

He's right to submit to this thread, and any other thread regarding seemingly outlandish claims on AMD or Intel price/performance, his experience with these systems. It is being done for the betterment of the community. If the data he is submitting is in question then debate him on the merits of the data. Maybe his bench rig wasn't optimized to a level you know possible, so you could assist in giving him some pointers in getting the rig into peak performance form, etc.

But please do not question his reasons for posting the data, when you do that it kinda crosses a gray line and starts to come across as you somewhat questioning mark's integrity or implying he has an unjustified bias against AMD. (which I'm sure you don't mean to do, your post history here is a pretty good record of your straightforward levelheaded thinking, so I'm not worried about this but some people less familiar with your posts might rush to rash judgement on your credibility after seeing a post like that, and I'd like to avoid that for your sake as well)

edit: spelling

 

[imported_Asianman]

the basic i7 costs double the tri core phenoms, and they don't provide double the performance. The point is, the higher the price, the lower the gain percentage. Still, its nice to see AMD actually becoming competitive with intel again, and for many, thats enough

 

[Kraeoss]

so umm f@h is a benchmark now ? hrmmm what will be the next benching app ? btw i am trying to convince a friend to wait till april to build his am3 rig because he's running a sempron and an onboard video card and wants to play the latest games

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Asianman
the basic i7 costs double the tri core phenoms, and they don't provide double the performance. The point is, the higher the price, the lower the gain percentage. Still, its nice to see AMD actually becoming competitive with intel again, and for many, thats enough

Yeah its definitely one of those cases where you have to factor in price of the entire system and then ask yourself "does i7, with higher cpu price, make my $1.5k computer system twice as fast as the x4 720, with lower cpu price, in my $750 rig?".

 

[heyheybooboo]

Welcome to AT, fusion238. The AMD AM3 Phenom II 720 BE at 4.2+ on air is quite impressive ...

(but)

""Randy Allen? Is that you?""

 

[RallyMaster]

Originally posted by: fusion238

Yes David and Goliath is a good analogy, since Intel is a much larger company
with at least 10 times the resources. They also have been proven to be guilty
of trying to eliminate your choice as a consumer of AMD products.

So without AMD, Intel would still be pushing Pentium 100BSX+++ or P IV Dpump
Nutburst or whatever their marketing guys thought up. When a small company
like AMD brings out a hot product for a good price, then WE ALL WIN.

Uh...congrats?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Welcome to AT, fusion238. The AMD AM3 Phenom II 720 BE at 4.2+ on air is quite impressive ...

(but)

""Randy Allen? Is that you?""

ZOMG OP, when heyheybooboo is zinging you for overly pro-AMD posts you KNOW you've possibly overstated something along the way :laugh: :beer:

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Kraeoss
so umm f@h is a benchmark now ? hrmmm what will be the next benching app ? btw i am trying to convince a friend to wait till april to build his am3 rig because he's running a sempron and an onboard video card and wants to play the latest games

No, not a benchmark, just what I use the most. Check benchmarks on the games or software you use/play the most. Then look at the prices in your range, and decide what's best bang/buck.

If I were to start from scratch right now, I would get 3 or 4 slot pci-e motherboards, and the cheapest cpu I could find, and populate the box with 9800 GT cards. For F@H, thats currently the best bang/buck/ppd. The quads I have are left over from last years best bang/buck which was 2 smp units on a quad.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
You should have looked at F@H benchmarks before you made your purchase, Mark This is just one application, out of many, for a processor, so I wouldn't hold this loss for AMD against them because they make up for it in other applications. I just notice you like to post this tidbit of yours at about every chance you get.

I did research, but there are no benchmarks for F@H. Also, it looked promising, and being a prior AMD supporter, I wanted to see for myself if they finally came back.

As for posting in many places, I like to make sure I share what knowledge I have first-hand, not just some review site that I read.

Here you go. They don't have the Q6600 listed, but I'm sure these numbers are comparable to what you get, right?

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
You should have looked at F@H benchmarks before you made your purchase, Mark This is just one application, out of many, for a processor, so I wouldn't hold this loss for AMD against them because they make up for it in other applications. I just notice you like to post this tidbit of yours at about every chance you get.

cusideabelincoln when I read mark's post (re-quoted below) what I see is someone who is handling the AMD situation with as tender of kid-gloves as he can.

Mark is very specific to make sure readers understand he is referring to a specific application (no broad/wide sweeping general statements here) and he ends it by giving solid advice to the OP.

In other words, the absolute last kind of a post anyone should be crying foul over is mark's post.

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Now that I can support !. And the Phenom II is a great leap forward. But you have to be careful of being a fanboy, and being Overzealous. They still have a ways to go.

Note to new member: 2 years ago, I had 12 AMD boxes. one month ago I had 10 Intel boxes, last week, I added an AMD box, and its OK for the $$, but still looses to Intel by a shade. Now, outside of F@H, I have read that it is in fact VERY competitive, but your link just isn't a good example.

As for why it might seem like mark is re-stating this sentiment in multiple posts...it's because there are posters out there who (a) haven't seen his comments on PhII yet, and (b) there are posters out there who keep creating threads like this one and they merit some form of rebuttal lest they turn into a standing example of acceptable posting quality on these forums.

He's right to submit to this thread, and any other thread regarding seemingly outlandish claims on AMD or Intel price/performance, his experience with these systems. It is being done for the betterment of the community. If the data he is submitting is in question then debate him on the merits of the data. Maybe his bench rig wasn't optimized to a level you know possible, so you could assist in giving him some pointers in getting the rig into peak performance form, etc.

But please do not question his reasons for posting the data, when you do that it kinda crosses a gray line and starts to come across as you somewhat questioning mark's integrity or implying he has an unjustified bias against AMD. (which I'm sure you don't mean to do, your post history here is a pretty good record of your straightforward levelheaded thinking, so I'm not worried about this but some people less familiar with your posts might rush to rash judgement on your credibility after seeing a post like that, and I'd like to avoid that for your sake as well)

edit: spelling

You're right, I didn't mean to question his data or his word. I was doing what I try to do by offering a level-headed explanation as to why the Phenom II would be a good value for some users, but obviously it is not for all users. The Q9400, at the same price as Phenom is not only great at performance per dollar compared to the PhII 940, but also performance per watt (which would correlate into even better performance per dollar over more work hours).

 

[yh125d]

For someone like Mark, F@H is really the only app that matters

 

[Kraeoss]

well atleast he's got good intentions :thumbsup: if i had the resources i'd do it too