First Phenom II review + New review 26th

[ajaidevsingh]

The reviewer used this as the i7 bases :-

http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008...yte/GA-EX58-UD5/b2.htm

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: piesquared
Speaking of auto overclocking on i7, I suppose it's as valid as auto overclocking through BIOS, so reviewers should enable that option on PhII as well when comparing the 2 architectures.

For one thing the clockspeed at which an i7 operates when in dynamic clocking has been verified/certified by Intel to be stable and properly functioning in all respects.

It is stock in as much as stock can ever be defined.

The same can't be said for buying a chip that the manufacturer is NOT willing to certify will operate properly at a clockspeed any higher than 3GHz but you force it to operate at a higher clockspeed anyway.

Clock-to-clock comparisons are a useful exercise but they don't tell the full story, just as performance/watt on its own doesn't tell the whole story, nor does performance/dollar communicate everything a consumer might want to know about a computer system prior to purchasing it.

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
A "part" does indeed shine at it's design frequency. That's what it was designed for. When you're comparing the gamut of "parts" out there - that is what we're talking about. You have to take the least common denominator. Hence - x86 instruction set, they run the same thing, the only thing that needs to be equalized is the clock in order to compare equivalent performance of the architectures

Simply put analogy: It's like comparing a Prius to a Mustang. The Mustang will kick it's ass left in right in terms of speed, but the Prius will get there in fewer tanks of gas. So how do you compare the cars? They're both cars, they both run on gas. One has 8 cylinders, one has 4, but they're both cars. Gallon for gallon at 60 miles per hour, the Prius is going to kick the Mustang's ass left and right.

And I didn't say anything about longevity of a "part". I said longevity of an "architecture". Huge difference there.

the equivalent performance of architectures at a fixed clock speed is irrelevant since clock speed itself is a property of the architecture.

your analogy only matters if power is introduced. i have never bothered to introduce power as a metric, only performance.

the longevity of a part is in the product guarantee, 7 years for C2D and i7. i was referring to architecture. why do you care about that at all?

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
Amm C2D when compared to Phenoms are done on bases of clock and Athlon 64 compared to P4's was also done on bases of clock that is why Athlon 64 was hailed as the king back then.

Sweet spot comparisons can be made to show how good a system can become with a simple upgrade to cooling systems.

lol, A64 was better because it was faster at stock than the P4 at stock. just like C2D is faster at stock than phenoms at stock. no reviewers ever recommended a CPU because of overclocking on their cherry picked parts. sounds like a fanboy delusion.

no amount of cooling is gonna get you a high overclock on a low bin part. it's that simple. so your "sweet spot" comparison is pointless because the sample size is too small. end of story.

 

[Nemesis 1]

So what ram was used I see its @ 404 with 2:6 ratio. That could explain the low numbers for the test at that freq. on the IC7 Timings were nice @ 6-6-6-17. But the V to the cpu is out and out a sin against all. 1.42V Nice testing idiots. . This test is bogus.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
So what ram was used I see its @ 404 with 2:6 ratio. That could explain the low numbers for the test at that freq. on the IC7 Timings were nice @ 6-6-6-17. But the V to the cpu is out and out a sin against all. 1.42V Nice testing idiots. . This test is bogus.

Yeah. I'll wait until AT gets their hands on it to make my mind up about Phenom II.

I don't even care what ANYONE else says about it, it's all FUD to me until AT says it's gold or it's cold.

i7 is difficult. It's wonderful for some things, mediocre in others.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I really don't believe you can judge IC7 gaming results till we see more power gpu's . AT least thats what multi. GPUs are showing on IC7 .

 

[piesquared]

So if i'm judging the overall trend this thread is taking correctly, it's that the metrics of judging which cpu to be purchased by a consumer, is whichever one benefits Intel the most at any given time to suit their architecure, power consumption, and clockspeeds. And if any single metric won't work for a certain architecure, just clump as many metrics together as needed to come up with something that can be pointed to as a valid reaosn for considering said purchase. Moving targets are always interesting, no doubt, and was bound to happen!

I'm waiting for the very high temperature that i7 runs at to become a non issue for consumers, or has that already happened?

 

[Nemesis 1]

No matter what I or anyone else says. If PHII can run O/Ced 24/7 @ 4ghz. Its a dam good deal . No matter if the performance is off between 20-80%. Its still A big move for AMD and I applaud them. Well done FAB guys. Now if your design engineers had a clue all would be great.

But what do you design a chip in 2009 to do in 2012. Right now A wrong guess by Intel or AMD would be really bad.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: piesquared
I'm waiting for the very high temperature that i7 runs at to become a non issue for consumers, or has that already happened?

This I just recently found out. Even with a 3rd party cooler, these chips run hot. Add in overclocking and even the thermalright TRUE is hitting in the 80~90C region.

Anyway, I am waiting for the AT review on this. When was the release date again? Hopefully its this month.

edit -

Meanwhile I can alread spill that Phenom II X4 has arrived in the Guru3D Labs .. and is looking pretty good.

- Guru 3D

Looks like we will be seeing reviews on this very soon.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Temps aren't a problem for the consumers. But for us it is. I am on water Now with 3 loops. Best rads . And I am staying under 70 degrees. 4.2ghz with turbo @4.4ghz. But That Alarms me . I have never seen temps above 50's till now. Hell my P4C never ever reached 50s. But I am not xtreme O/C either. I was going to freeze a few chips just for name Sake. But YA know what I hate drag racing. If the motor can't go 500 miles wide open its junk. Waste and really not talented drivers. You turn in scores for 24/7 operation @ given GHz and who has talent shines threw at the same Clock per same CPU. Thats understanding flow. Flow this word is unreal . Flow = everthing in life. Everthing evolves around flow.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: piesquared
So if i'm judging the overall trend this thread is taking correctly, it's that the metrics of judging which cpu to be purchased by a consumer, is whichever one benefits Intel the most at any given time to suit their architecure, power consumption, and clockspeeds. And if any single metric won't work for a certain architecure, just clump as many metrics together as needed to come up with something that can be pointed to as a valid reaosn for considering said purchase. Moving targets are always interesting, no doubt, and was bound to happen!

I'm waiting for the very high temperature that i7 runs at to become a non issue for consumers, or has that already happened?

I believe the argument of this thread is that you need to pick the metric that matters to you and seek out the answers to your question as to which CPU is best for you...all the while accepting and respecting the fact that other people may not necessarily be asking the same questions about the CPU's that you are asking and as such they will not necessarily value the same metrics of success that you value.

Some folks value knowing the relative IPC between two CPU's (why? who cares, that's not for us to judge) while other folks value the relative power consumption and others just simply care about absolute performance regardless of cost. None of these people are wrong to value their computing preferences over yours, just as you are not wrong to value your preferred metric over theirs.

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Thats understanding flow. Flow this word is unreal . Flow = everthing in life. Everthing evolves around flow.

Uh, Nemesis remember when you asked me to alert you when your morphine drip is on the fritz again? Ya might want to give'r a tap there.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

IMHO platforms should be compared primarily at pricepoints. This is really the only thing that makes sense to the end consumer at the end of the day.

How can I maximize x amount of dollars I have to spend on a CPU?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: piesquared
So if i'm judging the overall trend this thread is taking correctly, it's that the metrics of judging which cpu to be purchased by a consumer, is whichever one benefits Intel the most at any given time to suit their architecure, power consumption, and clockspeeds. And if any single metric won't work for a certain architecure, just clump as many metrics together as needed to come up with something that can be pointed to as a valid reaosn for considering said purchase. Moving targets are always interesting, no doubt, and was bound to happen!

I'm waiting for the very high temperature that i7 runs at to become a non issue for consumers, or has that already happened?

I believe the argument of this thread is that you need to pick the metric that matters to you and seek out the answers to your question as to which CPU is best for you...all the while accepting and respecting the fact that other people may not necessarily be asking the same questions about the CPU's that you are asking and as such they will not necessarily value the same metrics of success that you value.

Some folks value knowing the relative IPC between two CPU's (why? who cares, that's not for us to judge) while other folks value the relative power consumption and others just simply care about absolute performance regardless of cost. None of these people are wrong to value their computing preferences over yours, just as you are not wrong to value your preferred metric over theirs.

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Thats understanding flow. Flow this word is unreal . Flow = everthing in life. Everthing evolves around flow.

Uh, Nemesis remember when you asked me to alert you when your morphine drip is on the fritz again? Ya might want to give'r a tap there.

You ass! LOL . Maybe you should think about that . Everthing that has movement has flow. Water AIR Earth the solar system . the galaxy . All operate at flow and is held inplace by flow. Put what ever names you want on them it = flow. But were not concerned with life here. SO flow in a PC is everthing. HOw the electricity flows threw the circuits of the hardware. If there is a bottlenick . Flow is interrupted. If no air comes threw the case =trouble. If water flows threw rads to fast . water doesn't cool enough. If water moves to slow than blocks heat up. Than there is flow of air threw rads . That allows you to fine tune flow of water threw system .

Electrical mechanical force= FLOW
Wind blowing = flow. water running in a river = flow
Magma movement = Flow
Taking a wiz = flow and relief
Birth Growing old and dieing = flow.

Everthing that is not dormant has flow. Nothing in the universe is dorment for all time. So all things flow. If the Spice does not flow . Life changes as we know it and will rain on your ass.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: OneOfTheseDays
IMHO platforms should be compared primarily at pricepoints. This is really the only thing that makes sense to the end consumer at the end of the day.

How can I maximize x amount of dollars I have to spend on a CPU?

I agree with this to a point. When HPII with DDR3 comes out . I will buy everthing new and let ya know what it cost. Because if your looking at Cost only. Than Penryn is the ANS.

 

[piesquared]

How is Penryn the answer if only cost is the deciding factor? AMD has equality on price/performance, albeit not in the upper echelon.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: piesquared
How is Penryn the answer if only cost is the deciding factor? AMD has equality on price/performance, albeit not in the upper echelon.

I dont know about all that.....

 

[Tempered81]

I don't think AMD has anything close to Penryn, except deneb. Wether or not it overclocks as well is another story.

 

[daveybrat]

OMG.......when oh when is Anandtech going to review the Phenom II?? I can't wait!

 

[piesquared]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: piesquared
How is Penryn the answer if only cost is the deciding factor? AMD has equality on price/performance, albeit not in the upper echelon.

I dont know about all that.....

They absolutely do, and have had for 2 years. Of course you won't find that sentiment here or in many reviews, but if you are looking at numbers: price/performance parity.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: piesquared

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: piesquared
How is Penryn the answer if only cost is the deciding factor? AMD has equality on price/performance, albeit not in the upper echelon.

I dont know about all that.....

They absolutely do, and have had for 2 years. Of course you won't find that sentiment here or in many reviews, but if you are looking at numbers: price/performance parity.

Most of what's seen here is price/performance after overclocking, which is why Intel has been king ever since Core 2 came out.
Most of the people (in this thread) I would venture don't care about whether an E8400 is about the same speed as an X2 6000+ (or whatever is comparable, I don't know), but they care that the E8400 overclocks to 4GHz and that the X2 doesn't.

That's why you won't find the sentiment here, because for most of the people on this forum (or this particular part of it), price/performance is all Intel all the time because of overclocking. I do agree that it's not necessarily true for the general public though, and if Phenom II overclocks nicely then we may see a change in sentiment here as well.

 

[piesquared]

Ok, then I agree with that Lonyo. If it's not purely on a cost basis, but a cost + OC basis, then Penryn definitely has added value. And that brings clocks back into the equation which seems to be a major topic of discussion throughout this thread. So in the end, we have a very competitive part in Deneb, which some have been trying to undermine it seems. At any rate, I sense that i'm derailing this thread... lol

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Everthing that is not dormant has flow. Nothing in the universe is dorment for all time. So all things flow. If the Spice does not flow . Life changes as we know it and will rain on your ass.

Nemesis you are a delight! :laugh:

I got quite a few good chuckles out of that. If the spice does not flow...oh man :laugh:

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: piesquared
Ok, then I agree with that Lonyo. If it's not purely on a cost basis, but a cost + OC basis, then Penryn definitely has added value. And that brings clocks back into the equation which seems to be a major topic of discussion throughout this thread. So in the end, we have a very competitive part in Deneb, which some have been trying to undermine it seems. At any rate, I sense that i'm derailing this thread... lol

I haven't seen 1 person try to undermine AMD in this thread. We all remember to clearly the PH1 hype . TO clearly. IF Deneb is all its cracked up to be . Performance? Overclocking ? Why is AMD a company in trouble . Selling it so cheap. If it compares with IC7 as so many seem to want to compare to. Than its laughable. Penryn another story. But IC7 locked selling for more than PHII unlocked. Says something. We will find out that something when Ananda does review. Even tho Ananda is bought and paid for by intel . According to so many. Ya know that makes me laugh so hard.

I remember when AMD was kicking Intel around. I thought Ananda was bought and paid for by AMD. LOL. What I found out was this. When C2D came out. Ananda didn't change how they reviewed hardware . Only who got praised changed, FACT!

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: piesquared
Ok, then I agree with that Lonyo. If it's not purely on a cost basis, but a cost + OC basis, then Penryn definitely has added value. And that brings clocks back into the equation which seems to be a major topic of discussion throughout this thread. So in the end, we have a very competitive part in Deneb, which some have been trying to undermine it seems. At any rate, I sense that i'm derailing this thread... lol

I haven't seen 1 person try to undermine AMD in this thread. We all remember to clearly the PH1 hype . TO clearly. IF Deneb is all its cracked up to be . Performance? Overclocking ? Why is AMD a company in trouble . Selling it so cheap. If it compares with IC7 as so many seem to want to compare to. Than its laughable. Penryn another story. But IC7 locked selling for more than PHII unlocked. Says something. We will find out that something when Ananda does review. Even tho Ananda is bought and paid for by intel . According to so many. Ya know that makes me laugh so hard.

I remember when AMD was kicking Intel around. I thought Ananda was bought and paid for by AMD. LOL. What I found out was this. When C2D came out. Ananda didn't change how they reviewed hardware . Only who got praised changed, FACT!

Post of the day :beer: