Average Performance Delta between Phenom II, Core 2, Core i7, and Sandy?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
@BoomerD
I'm not calling him a nutjob. I'm calling the guy who runs van's hardware a nutjob.



So you're saying that it doesn't matter what a cpu's IPC is? Wrong.


Wrong again. I had an i7 720QM laptop. It was much faster than my phenom desktop. Especially in cpu intensive tasks the i7 at 1.6ghz(+Turbo) would match the phenom at 3ghz.


What the fuck are you talking about? You're the one who comes in with a biased opinion about how great amd is, and how evil intel is.

Reading some of the guys articles on vans hardware, I get the impression that he is a nutjob who believes in some great overarching conspiracy to justify why X is X and Y is Y.

Just like those doomsday cultists and the 7-day adventists, jehovaw's witnesses, and those baptists that spread the world will end fliers trying to get you to join them to 'save your soul.'

I made a comparison, valuable or not about two processors,
and your answer was to branding me as a conspiration paranoiac..
was that on topic ?....

Nehalem is a good proc., but saying that your laptop 1.6 is better
than a X6, that s quite exagerated..

As for IPC, of course it matters, but it s not the whole story.
As pointed by another reader, when thread count is high,
cores matter much more.

Also, about Anand neutrality, i would say that he tries
to do his job correctly, but alas, he has to more or less
abide by his sponsor will , which is quite understable since
what count for most of us is what put food on the table.
 

dac7nco

Senior member
Jun 7, 2009
756
0
0
Anandtech is not supported by Intel, dumbass, the numbers are.

Daimon

No personal insults here.
Markfw900
Anandtech Moderator
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
Anandtech is not supported by Intel, dumbass, the numbers are.

Daimon

As pointed by your post s text and your expressions, porn
sites suit you way better than IT forums....
But for your insight, go in the old pages and check s
anand s P4 review that ended being rewrited a few day
later with Intel sending a full crew to recompile the softs
before publication...


No personal insults, they are not tolerated here.
Markfw900
Anandtech Moderator.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Qbah

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2005
3,754
10
81
Obviously running the mostly used programs and some good, CPU-intensive games is showing bias :awe: And running some underground, hardly used* things would show the true picture :awe: Stay "tru"! :awe:

*I would like to point out I'm using 7zip at home and at work
 

RobertPters77

Senior member
Feb 11, 2011
480
0
0
@Abwx

I have an x4. 720QM>945. Running cpu intensive tasks the intel cpu was way better.

I never called you a conspiracy theorist. Unless you and the guy who runs vanshardware are the same person.

IPC will always matter. Core count is a strong second but IPC will always matter. Answer me this. If core count is so important then why isn't AMD competitive with intel? 100$ Quad core, 200$ hexacore. They should be making a killing.

If anandtech is intel biased then why are you here? What's the point of promoting and defending Amd? Unless you're getting paid I see no point for you to act the way you do. Or maybe you feel solidarity with the underdog and root for them.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
@Abwx

I have an x4. 720QM>945. Running cpu intensive tasks the intel cpu was way better.

I never called you a conspiracy theorist. Unless you and the guy who runs vanshardware are the same person.

IPC will always matter. Core count is a strong second but IPC will always matter. Answer me this. If core count is so important then why isn't AMD competitive with intel? 100$ Quad core, 200$ hexacore. They should be making a killing.

If anandtech is intel biased then why are you here? What's the point of promoting and defending Amd? Unless you're getting paid I see no point for you to act the way you do. Or maybe you feel solidarity with the underdog and root for them.

Well, at core parity, no doubt Nehalem is better than PH2.
I m not that mad to sustain such untenable position....

Core count matter only for geeks or professional making
cpu intensive multithreaded tasks.
For the average people , four cores is already overkill.

As for AMD not gaining marketshare , and even currently
losing some parts, it has less ro do with cpu perfs than with
market inertia, not counting intel s huge marketing means.
Just remember than in 2005, despite a huge superiority
of the Opteron64, the crappy P4 based xeon still took
as much as 75% of the server market and at least 70%
of the consumer market...
Also , manufacturers are not keen to depend on a cpu
firm that has too small manufacturing capacity, as AMD
produce less cpu than what a firm like dell or HP sell
in the same time.

I didn t say that Anand is forcibly biaised, but he has to
keep its advertisers interest in line , though he sometimes gladly
take some revenge when something is worth being critisized....

As for being on AMD payroll , just don t think about it..
Last time they served my financial interests, well, it was
quite some time ago when i short selled their stock....

About Intel, well , let s say that back in 2002 , i
i had the chance to read a contract they signed with
a big retailer , and i can assure you that it was a
totally illegal contract breaching european laws but
it happens that the secret was well garded since any
retailer that would have disclosed it was certainly
promised to bankruptcy by his countries authorities...
 

RobertPters77

Senior member
Feb 11, 2011
480
0
0
I need proof on everything you said.

Show me your amd stock sale.

Show me the intel contract.

Show me where anandtech's advertising revenue comes from.

Show me!
 

dac7nco

Senior member
Jun 7, 2009
756
0
0
Sorry about my flame, Abwx, it wasn't called for. The HTPC is my SIG has a default clock speed of 2.5GHz, but is down-clocked. It used to run a Phenom-II 940 @ 2.8GHz, but I wanted something that used a little less power. I discovered, to my surprise, that the Q8300 @ 2.5 finished 2-pass Handbrake transcodes EXACTLY as quickly as the Phenom-II. With a 300MHz clock speed deficit, Intel's lowest-end quad-core CPU family ever (The Q8XXX series is essentially two 45nm dual-core pentiums) released has a 9% IPC advantage over AMD's current architecture. That's with an ancient FSB, almost no cache, and DDR2-1066 memory. We don't know enough about Bulldozer yet, but AMD doesn't have a single relevant CPU above $100 in the desktop space.

Again, sorry for being a douchebag.

Daimon
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
I need proof on everything you said.

Show me your amd stock sale.

Show me the intel contract.

Show me where anandtech's advertising revenue comes from.

Show me!

No need to give you proofs , believe me or not , you are free..

But to disgress a little (hope the mods are cools..) , my pro degree
is on mathematics applied to markets tools, but no degree was needed
to assert that AMD s stock price was way inflated prior to the stock
market total collapse, with no relation with the firm s fundamentals.
Those with the correct tools did also know back in 2007 that the market
was exactly at the same peak value that the preceding one in 2001 s
fist months..
It always amazed me how WStreet banksters are capable of inflating
a stock price before passing the rear speed by short selling it.
Generaly, i put my devotion on Alcatel Lucent but only with daily
position , but on the case of Amd and Thomson , i did stay in position
though it was renegotiated in a daily basis.

As for the contract that Intel did sign with the reatailer , which in
france was Hypermedia now renamed as Saturn , it stipulated the
following :
- Intel pay for 50% of the advertising the retailer make , provided
the advertising show a PC with a big logo "intel inside".
- The retailer engage to not sell PC that have a non intel CPU.

The second clause, according to EU laws is illegal, the very same
EU laws say one can not take advantage of such a contract to
eliminate the concurence, moreover if the advertising is made
with Intel s name only and therefore do not benefit to its competitor.

Of course, intel did send from time to time an employee to check
if there wasn t an annoying beast in the shelves of the retailer.
As a consequence, the shelves were filled with the infamous
willamette P4 1.3 or 1.4, and no athlon 1g or 1.2g in sight...

This is how Intel retained its market, the time to devellope
a better processor which came only 5 years later.
AMD was then forced to reduce drastically its price and sell
its superior product at manufacturing costs, thus making
the good bye kiss to eventual profits that would have
allowed them to increase their capacity production.
The A64 came late 2003 , and did really unlock the situation,
but it was already too late, since its dominance didn t
exceed 2 years, not counting that intel did ressort to
dirty arrangements with some manufacturers to win some
time before they have something competitive.

As for Anandtech revenues, well , these years , there have
been a lot of Intel adverts in this site , and they surely count
for a sizable part of the site s income..
At least way more than what AMD has to offer....
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
Sorry about my flame, Abwx, it wasn't called for. The HTPC is my SIG has a default clock speed of 2.5GHz, but is down-clocked. It used to run a Phenom-II 940 @ 2.8GHz, but I wanted something that used a little less power. I discovered, to my surprise, that the Q8300 @ 2.5 finished 2-pass Handbrake transcodes EXACTLY as quickly as the Phenom-II. With a 300MHz clock speed deficit, Intel's lowest-end quad-core CPU family ever (The Q8XXX series is essentially two 45nm dual-core pentiums) released has a 9% IPC advantage over AMD's current architecture. That's with an ancient FSB, almost no cache, and DDR2-1066 memory. We don't know enough about Bulldozer yet, but AMD doesn't have a single relevant CPU above $100 in the desktop space.

Again, sorry for being a douchebag.

Daimon

No problem DAC7NCO.

The internet is a virtual world even we are real people, so
no need to be upset , since neither me nor you have an
influence in our respective lifes.
Agree that Amd was somewhat lazy and understimated the
competion the past years.
Indeed, i can only abide by the fact that low power CPU
are a better choice , and it happens that Intel has the
hedge currently..
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,227
36
91
What does any of this have to do with the thread? Save the Intel conspiracy stuff for AMDzone.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
Since you want Tech Report...

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16147/4

Q9550 beats the similar clocked 920 in most of the benchmarks, and even beats the higher clocked 940 in many of them.

Thanks Inteluser.
You will notice that the AMD are still on DDR2 on this bench,
but anyway, i generaly appreciate your technical comments,
since i ve been reading Anand s forum s posts a (very) long time
before subscribing, so i know already a lot about some
member s past contributions.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
What does any of this have to do with the thread? Save the Intel conspiracy stuff for AMDzone.

I exposed FACTS that i did live and documented with the contracts
parties name, not only intel, but the couterpart, so read more before trashing...
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,785
136
Thanks Inteluser.
You will notice that the AMD are still on DDR2 on this bench,
but anyway, i generaly appreciate your technical comments,
since i ve been reading Anand s forum s posts a (very) long time
before subscribing, so i know already a lot about some
member s past contributions.

Which affects it only by 1-2%, and isn't enough to matter.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16382

I exposed FACTS that i did live and documented with the contracts
parties name, not only intel, but the couterpart, so read more before trashing...

No, you are straight out derailing the thread so please stop. If you want to vent with the conspiracy theories create one in the Off Topic thread.

Actually, every new member is posting everything in the CPU thread. Post it in the appropriate thread please. I'm not a mod but that is something that a 10-year old should understand.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,227
36
91
ProTip: Nobody is ever going to take you seriously here of your first 20 posts involve trashing Anand's credibility, and starting thread-derailing conspiracy rumours...
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
No, you are straight out derailing the thread so please stop. If you want to vent with the conspiracy theories create one in the Off Topic thread.

.

You surely(?) did notice that i answered to the questions from others
member in the said posts.

But since you ask for a Cpu only discussion , on topic, can you answer
these few questions :
According to your past experience , how and how much a compiler
can influence the performances of a current CPU, PH2 included of
course.?..
What exactly is the influence , performance wise, of the SSSE3,
SSE4.1 SSE4.2 instructions over the usual benchmarks used by most
of IT sites ?....
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
62,681
11,026
136
5 posts are not a significative statistical sample that would allow
to draw a conclusion..
By contrast, i can see here people with hundreds if not thousands of posts all praising Intel whenever a processor discussion is on the way...

If it was 5 posts out of a couple hundred that were mixed with support for Intel, I might agree...but so far, everything you've posted on these forums has screamed "AMD Fanboi," or worse..."AMD Employee."

Myself, while I've never personally owned an AMD processor in one of my rigs, my wife's Dell has an Athlon II, and she's happy as hell with it. (of course, she doesn't know AMD from AMC :p)
I looked long and hard at the AMD Phenom II processors for my latest build. They just don't make sense for a gaming machine. It's not that they're bad...they're just not GOOD.
 

Schmide

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2002
5,581
712
126
Since you want Tech Report...

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16147/4

Q9550 beats the similar clocked 920 in most of the benchmarks, and even beats the higher clocked 940 in many of them.

As much as I loath Abwx's way of approaching this, the q9550, (which I own by the way), does so because it has a HUGE 12mb cache. If you look at its lesser brethren (the q9400/9500) they are more near parity.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
I looked long and hard at the AMD Phenom II processors for my latest build. They just don't make sense for a gaming machine. It's not that they're bad...they're just not GOOD.

Gaming ?..ALMOST all is in the GFX card...

There was a time , that said, where Intel made the greatest
achievement of their history , processor arch. wise, and that
was the time of the Pentium Pro , a genuinly innovant CPU , with
absolutely no concurrence possible , as it was not like currently,
a matter of 10 to 30% better IPC , but rather multiple times...

Those who had the luck to have one at the time were
just ahead of their time versatility wise.

But, then, we are again derailling the thread, dont we ?....
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
62,681
11,026
136
Gaming ?..ALMOST all is in the GFX card...

There was a time , that said, where Intel made the greatest
achievement of their history , processor arch. wise, and that
was the time of the Pentium Pro , a genuinly innovant CPU , with
absolutely no concurrence possible , as it was not like currently,
a matter of 10 to 30% better IPC , but rather multiple times...

Those who had the luck to have one at the time were
just ahead of their time versatility wise.

But, then, we are again derailling the thread, dont we ?....

All in the GPU? HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

Go back under your (sandy) bridge, troll.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
All in the GPU? HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

Go back under your (sandy) bridge, troll.

Obviously, you need to return to elementary school , since
you are not capable of reading a full sentence...
Did i wrote "ALL" or "ALMOST ALL"....??..

Ressorting to blatant sentence reshaping and insults
doesn t prove a point, but that seems the usual
habits of some fanboyz...
I just understand why AMD s man, JFAMD has more
or less deserted this site, since the intelmania doesn t
bother with accuracy and prefer insults as a mean to
prove itself more valuable...poor mentality, really..

Btw, i hope that you have a SB...
 
Last edited:

dac7nco

Senior member
Jun 7, 2009
756
0
0
Gaming ?..ALMOST all is in the GFX card...

I game on three 1920x1200 monitors, on a 12-core Westmere system, with two GTX580s. An overclocked i5-2500K is faster, even with x8/x8 PCIe. THATS an improvement in IPC; and yes, all improvements of late are incremental, but they are improvements, nonetheless. Playing Civ-V at my resolution and settings on ANY Phenom-II system with ANY GPU setup would be very unpleasant, and an Athlon-II <<SHUDDER>> would plain suck. Intel can do it with a measly $200 CPU with a shitty 8x8 bus. Modern games which are developed FOR the PC are horribly bottlenecked by AM3. In daily usage, you might not notice, but other people really, truly do.

Intel isn't pulling tricks with reviewers all over the planet... AMD is simply very, very behind. Adding additional mediocre cores to an irrelevant architecture is like a band-aid on a severed foot.

Daimon
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
10,854
3,298
136
I game on three 1920x1200 monitors, on a 12-core Westmere system, with two GTX580s. An overclocked i5-2500K is faster, even with x8/x8 PCIe. THATS an improvement in IPC; and yes, all improvements of late are incremental, but they are improvements, nonetheless. Playing Civ-V at my resolution and settings on ANY Phenom-II system with ANY GPU setup would be very unpleasant, and an Athlon-II <<SHUDDER>> would plain suck. Intel can do it with a measly $200 CPU with a shitty 8x8 bus. Modern games which are developed FOR the PC are horribly bottlenecked by AM3. In daily usage, you might not notice, but other people really, truly do.

Intel isn't pulling tricks with reviewers all over the planet... AMD is simply very, very behind. Adding additional mediocre cores to an irrelevant architecture is like a band-aid on a severed foot.


Daimon

Thanks for you insightfull POW.
I ll dig theses game issues, since i m not a hardcore gamer,
so i usually don t look for the last squeeze of perfs in this area.

The most demanding task i generaly feed my PC with is spice
simulations, i.e, electronic circuits sims, that require powerfull
FPUs, so you can just imagine how curious i m about the wonders
that BD is expected to deliver in a few months.
 

dac7nco

Senior member
Jun 7, 2009
756
0
0
RobertPters77, I'll try to help with your original post. In my day to day desktop usage, I can't tell the difference between C2Q, Lynnfield or Westmere. I've tested Handbrake 0.9.4 today using three Intel generations; I do not own a Sandy Bridge system.

Dual Xeon E5645 @ Stock (2.40GHz), 32nm, turbo and HT on (Westmere)
Single Xeon X3440 @ Stock (2.53GHz), 45nm, turbo and HT on (Lynnfield)
Single C2Q Q8300 @ Stock (2.50GHz), 45nm

I've used DVDFAB8 to rip a store-bought DVD of "Felon" to a folder on an Intel X25M(G2)80GB SSD in an eSATA enclosure. On each system I transcode the VIDEO_TS folder to an MKV using the "normal" preset, single-pass.

The Q8300 averages 104FPS, the X3440 averages 146FPS and the E5645s average 421FPS. Handbrake isn't supposed to take advantage of HT very well, but there is still a nice jump from the C2Q to the Lynnfield, and a lesser one per-core from Lynnfield to Westmere. I've calculated a Q8300 to be a match for a 2.9GHz Athlon-II, but the AMD chip is less than 2/3ds the price.

Daimon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.