AT Barcelona previews are up

[Nemesis 1]

Here is another review

http://techreport.com/articles.x/13176/1

Its not looking as good as many are saying . Intel penryn and the new supporting platform . Will bring Intel back to the 20-25% better performance clock for clock on the desktop.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Here is another review

http://techreport.com/articles.x/13176/1

Its not looking as good as many are saying . Intel penryn and the new supporting platform . Will bring Intel back to the 20-25% better performance clock for clock on the desktop.

 

[darkfalz]

AMD is more than a year behind. Penryns will be out at the same time as Phenoms and are sure to be even more overclock friendly than C2D, while the yields for K10 make it sound like their will be almost no headroom. Only a major AMD fanboy would buy AMD in that case.

 

[Acanthus]

Im disappointed.

It doesnt look like Barc will even match Penryn clock for clock... and we will have a 3.33ghz penryn at launch.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
Im disappointed.

It doesnt look like Barc will even match Penryn clock for clock... and we will have a 3.33ghz penryn at launch.

On the desktop, it won't match Kentsfield clock for clock.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Impressive for a 2ghz barc. With the clock speeds ramped up, the server market is going to get quite interesting.

However i ask myself. Too little too late?

Unlike the netburst era, Intel isn't having any issues with clock speeds OR thermal/power issues. We are talking about the fact that Intel could possibly hit 4~Ghz before the nehalem (Q4 08) sees the light of the day. But i guess its better than having nothing. There could well be more surprises instored when the phenoms launch offically.

 

[Bird222]

Price wars and competition are good for us until AMD goes out of business and then Intel we have there way with us.

 

[daveybrat]

I wanna see a Phenom 2.5GHz running with DDR-2 800MHz on an Nvidia based desktop chipset from a company like MSI or Asus. Let's see what it will perform like then and if these manufacturer's will be able to squeeze some more performance out of the chips.

I'm not upgrading for a while anyway, i'm happy with my current K8, but i do enjoy watching the battle

 

[Cogman]

Humm, Pricing is indeed going to be everything in the future. While AMD Did make some big improvements, they aren't quiet big enough. Can we say sub $200 Quad! Glad I didn't jump on intel's 266 dollar quad.

This most definitely will result in a price war once Phenom is released. Over all, I'm not too shocked at the changes.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I fear for AMD. I am afraid this will go down as a ho-hum lunch, generating very little excitement. Just think, to be an employee who toiled for so long only to get a quiet reception in the end.

And what does it all mean for their bottom line? Can't be good enough.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: JackPack
Barcelona as a consumer chip looks disappointing, whether it's gaming or media encoding.

Barcelona for server apps looks reasonable, but the low clock speed means low ASPs. Since 45nm Harpertown/Yorkfield and 1600 MHz FSB are coming soon, there's really no reason for AMD to celebrate.

Well firstly, we haven't seen the consumer chips yet...and remember that they will be HT3.0 and not the HT2.0 that these Barcelonas are (a fact that I think they should have mentioned in the article).

Secondly, for Barcelona to do so well in power/performance even before the split power planes of the 1207+ platform bodes VERY well for server solutions!
This also means that Harpertown/Yorkfield won't be making up for very much at all...especially as the Barcelona already scales so much better!

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Viditor
Well firstly, we haven't seen the consumer chips yet...and remember that they will be HT3.0 and not the HT2.0 that these Barcelonas are (a fact that I think they should have mentioned in the article).

Which is irrelevant for performance.

Secondly, for Barcelona to do so well in power/performance even before the split power planes of the 1207+ platform bodes VERY well for server solutions!

The tested MB, the KFSN4-DRE, is split power plane enabled.

 

[classy]

Truthfully it just seems like a muddy picture at this point. On the server it looks like it may be the best solution available even against Intel's new chips. But the reality is, its clock speed is just too low for high end. On the desktop I think its pretty impressive to see 15% increase over K8, especially on a server board. If that holds true not only would it be faster than current C2D in many things clock for clock it would put it in the ball park for the newer Intel chips as well. But again its clock speed may be too low for high end. If they can reach similar clock speeds like what they have with K8 they'll do well.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: classy
On the desktop I think its pretty impressive to see 15% increase over K8, especially on a server board.

It's not very impressive at all, since the comparison uses a 2GHz K10 vs dual dual-core 2GHz Opteron. For an equivalent comparison, a QX6850 is 30% faster than two FX-74s in the same set of applications. So it looks all but certain that on the desktop, Phenom will be slower clock-for-clock.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: Viditor
Well firstly, we haven't seen the consumer chips yet...and remember that they will be HT3.0 and not the HT2.0 that these Barcelonas are (a fact that I think they should have mentioned in the article).

Which is irrelevant for performance.

And you know this how?

Secondly, for Barcelona to do so well in power/performance even before the split power planes of the 1207+ platform bodes VERY well for server solutions!

The tested MB, the KFSN4-DRE, is split power plane enabled.

But Barcelona is not...yet.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Viditor
And you know this how?

By the virtually no effect on performance when changing the clock speed of the HT bus on current desktop AMDCPUs.

But Barcelona is not...yet.

All Barcelonas should be enabled.
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3091&p=3

 

[ArchAngel777]

I cannot help but be dissapointed... Is there hope? Yeah, there always is hope for AMD, but it looks like Intel will get my money next summer... Who knows, maybe AMD will pull out a rabit this winter...

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: classy
On the desktop I think its pretty impressive to see 15% increase over K8, especially on a server board.

It's not very impressive at all, since the comparison uses a 2GHz K10 vs dual dual-core 2GHz Opteron. For an equivalent comparison, a QX6850 is 30% faster than two FX-74s in the same set of applications. So it looks all but certain that on the desktop, Phenom will be slower clock-for-clock.

21% in HL2
19% in 3Dsmax
16% in Obilivion
11% in Divx
13% in WME


Those scores are not impressive?

 

[Sunrise089]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Impressive for a 2ghz barc. With the clock speeds ramped up, the server market is going to get quite interesting.

However i ask myself. Too little too late?

Unlike the netburst era, Intel isn't having any issues with clock speeds OR thermal/power issues. We are talking about the fact that Intel could possibly hit 4~Ghz before the nehalem (Q4 08) sees the light of the day. But i guess its better than having nothing. There could well be more surprises instored when the phenoms launch offically.

At 3.33ghz or so, they are not. Notice how Intel hasn't exactly flooded the market with speed-binned 4.0ghz chips. Now part of that (the main part probably) is wanting to leave room to grow over the next year+ while waiting for their new architecture, but there is another side. While we on the overclocking fringe might easily choose a 4.0ghz capable Core2Duo over a 3.0ghz Phenom, not only does 99% of the market not overclock, but much of the market, even in desktop land, wouldn't even if given the opportunity. Because of this, if the top selling AMD chip is even a few percentage points faster than the top Intel chip, there are a lot of sales right there. And because Phenom will likely scale a bit better, it seems likely that performance per watt will relatively increase as clock speeds go up, and eventually reach the point where Intel cannot compete - they can have (potentially much) higher performance, but they possibly cannot give us 3.0ghz Phenom equivalent performance at equal power and thermals.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: classy
21% in HL2
19% in 3Dsmax
16% in Obilivion
11% in Divx
13% in WME


Those scores are not impressive?

Not compared with a QX6850 vs two FX-74s:

37% in Sysmark
43% in DivX
19% in WME
34% in Oblivion
25% in HL2
34% in 3Dsmax

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...owdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=10

 

[Reynod]

Good point

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: classy
21% in HL2
19% in 3Dsmax
16% in Obilivion
11% in Divx
13% in WME


Those scores are not impressive?

Not compared with a QX6850 vs two FX-74s:

37% in Sysmark
43% in DivX
19% in WME
34% in Oblivion
25% in HL2
34% in 3Dsmax

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...owdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=10

Dude those scores were obtained with no doubt a serious penalty on a server board.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: classy
Dude those scores were obtained at no doubt a serious penalty on a server board.

It's a fair comparison, the K10 and the simulated K8 are both penalized by the server board. The QX6850 and FX-74 are both running on enthusiast board with non-registered fast memory.

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Impressive for a 2ghz barc. With the clock speeds ramped up, the server market is going to get quite interesting.

However i ask myself. Too little too late?

Unlike the netburst era, Intel isn't having any issues with clock speeds OR thermal/power issues. We are talking about the fact that Intel could possibly hit 4~Ghz before the nehalem (Q4 08) sees the light of the day. But i guess its better than having nothing. There could well be more surprises instored when the phenoms launch offically.

At 3.33ghz or so, they are not. Notice how Intel hasn't exactly flooded the market with speed-binned 4.0ghz chips. Now part of that (the main part probably) is wanting to leave room to grow over the next year+ while waiting for their new architecture, but there is another side. While we on the overclocking fringe might easily choose a 4.0ghz capable Core2Duo over a 3.0ghz Phenom, not only does 99% of the market not overclock, but much of the market, even in desktop land, wouldn't even if given the opportunity. Because of this, if the top selling AMD chip is even a few percentage points faster than the top Intel chip, there are a lot of sales right there. And because Phenom will likely scale a bit better, it seems likely that performance per watt will relatively increase as clock speeds go up, and eventually reach the point where Intel cannot compete - they can have (potentially much) higher performance, but they possibly cannot give us 3.0ghz Phenom equivalent performance at equal power and thermals.

I think its a little strange to say that intel is in trouble because they haven't flooded the market with speed-binned 4.0GHz chips. Why would they even want to consider doing that at this point when a 3.0GHz barcelona is still probably 6 months away and the 45nm process is just starting to ramp? They have a secure performance lead with the QX6850 so why push the limits at this point? I just find your logic flawed - you assume AMD's yields will improve to the point that 3.0 will be commonplace, but intel's yields will not.

 

[Regs]

In all do respect, it's painfully obvious that AMD won't be as competitive as they were 2 years ago at least for another 6 months. And I sure hope they do plan to do incremental upgrades to the Barc and not sit on it like the K8.