First Phenom II review + New review 26th

[SlowSpyder]

I don't see why people are getting their panties in a bunch over turbo boost. It's just like a reverse speedstep. Ask yourself this, is dynamic clocking enabled in your current production servers? If so, then I don't see why turbo boost would be turned off.

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
The exact reason is they are starting to exhaust single thread performance increaing options.

Back when Core 2 Duo first came and Johan said Free Lunch is Back: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2748&p=6

"The result was that the reputed Dr. Dobbs journal headlined : "the free lunch is over" [1] claiming that only larger caches would increase IPC a little bit and that the days that developers could count on the ever increasing clockspeeds and IPC efficiency of newer CPU to run code faster were numbered."

Core 2 didn't use new ideas to increase single thread performance. It refined known ideas and expanded on them. Excellent prefetchers, Memory Disambiguation, better prefetcher, 4-issue, these aren't new ideas. There is no free lunch after all.

Turbo Mode was implemented because taking advantage of extra TDP headroom when running cool or not running all the cores is a good idea when implemented well. Clock speeds increase performance uniformly, unlike other architectural changes.

The next Tock, Sandy Bridge is only enhancing the Turbo Mode further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...ge_(microarchitecture)

"Dynamic Turbo allows the CPU power to exceed the TDP value when the rest of the platform is relatively cool. The frequency gain can be up to 37% for one minute, and over 20% in most cases."

10-15% performance single thread gain will come from clock speeds.

nah don't think so. the hail mary moon shot might be finished in the x86 world, but there's still a lot of options left, especially with the overabundance of transistors available. and there was never a free lunch to begin with (ask any p6 designer). the lunches are just all expensive now and not much better than the last one.

the question is, who will go for broke again, p4 style, and be able to go through with it, given the resources it will take.

 

[hooflung]

I have a ECS black dragon 790GX which is P2 AM3 compatible. I'll wait until a 3.2 - 3.4ghz P2 comes out. However, i7 is retarded to buy into right now. There is no guarantee from intel the socket will every get another CPU and even if it does how much is it going to cost and how long will they manufacture it. Might as well be an Opteron 165-180 if it costs me 2 times more than what its worth to get it when I want to upgrade a 939 today.

I won't be bitten by the same bug that got me with 939 ( of which I have 2 mobo's of and still use ). AM2+ or bust. I'll put an e7500 in my C2D machine in feb unless the 8400 is ~20 bucks more. I might even do DDR3 in it when it comes out to recycle DDR2 ( combo mobo ftw ) into another pc. But when I go quad, the phenom 2 is where I can flex bang for buck and still have something special that OC's over 3.6.

Though I am happy with my speeds now. I might wait until the 6 core phenom's come out late next year.

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008...henom_II_X4-info-1.htm

If this is true i will upgrade from q6600 to PhII asa i have money

Edit:- After i went through the whole review it seems that it can actually kill the i7 in some game and stay almost equal in others.

Also since the i7 is at a 3Ghz plane same as the PhII 940 that would mean it was basically CLK to CLK comparison.

After some experience with an i7 920 i can say that with an ULTRA 120 the sweet spot for the i7 was at 3.6Ghz and according to this review the sweet spot for the PhII 940 is at 3.8Ghz "But idk which cooler they used"

This is not a bad processor at all now the only question that arises is should i pre order this this or wait for the PhII 945 with DDR3??

Why not just OC your Q6600 and have PII speeds right now without having to do a sideways upgrade?

If you are "dead-set" on a PII, wait for the 945 and get the DDR3 with HT3.0 as well...

Just my $0.02

 

[ajaidevsingh]

Actually ExarKun333 i have an old AM2+ M/B and if i can upgrade that and game on it near the levels i get with a i7 i will so buy the cpu upgrade as it will cost me as much as an i7 940 to upgrade my processor, memory and maybe hard disk....

But if the PhII is a dud i will get a i7 920 and OC it a lot i am getting my experience with my friends 920 on a Ultra 120. My Q6600 is allready at 3Ghz = to PhII

 

[exar333]

That makes more sense...if the PII does what it is supposed to do, then you hopefully will be happy! Good luck to ya!

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Rich3077

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I read this early this morning. Could you link to were PII kills IC7 in games. I MISSED that!

Also your aware as most are that IC7 getts faster with more GPU power . The PII is a nice little cpu that O/C well. But its not even close to a match for IC7. PII will have to play against Penryn . IC7 is years ahead.

Dude.. I am not an AMD fanboy. Haven't had a favorite AMD system since K-6-III.

I just wanted to point out that neither AMD or Intel is now or ever will be YEARS ahead. Things change way to rapidly and 6 months from now either one can come up with a hefty surprise.

I have chose Intel for myself last few builds.. I did that because I am PC enthusiast and must have every bit of performance I can. I don't care for i7 myself, it maybe worthwhile in a year or so when software company's catch up with the synthetic benchmarks core i7 is currently generating. In the meantime if I think Phenom II is a better choice, then that's what direction I will head. Intel has tried hyperthreading before and it didn't pan out. Sorry for the rant.. but sometimes Intel fanboys can get annoying as AMD fanboys.

Actually, Intel is at least 12 months ahead. PII is probably going to match or come up a little short of Yorkie, which was released when?

 

[ajaidevsingh]

NEW REVIEW:- http://66.102.9.104/translate_...lp9EHXNNndr9jMVUF3awdA

mAYBE A GoOd sItE tHis tImE

Also i am selling my old am2 m/b "No point in keeping ddr2" and waiting for either the 790/8xx + 925 combo or P55 + i5 combo.... When will i5 be launched again???

 

[Nemesis 1]

I can wait for real reviews. If PH11 can run 4ghz24/7 on air I will buy for web browser use and retire P4C from the internet. She served me well.Ajaidevsingh I went threw that review. The only thing I found strange was the conclusion. The Upgrade path $$ wise should be to intel because of O/C. ON Penryns. Fot some reson they thought AMD looked good at games. I would like to see Intels using NV. ATI drivers don't seem to take advantage of intels power. So wheather ATI is doing this to help AMD is unknown right now. But Ans be clear in 6 months.

 

[ajaidevsingh]

Nemesis 1 the new review used a GTX 260 Nvidia card rather that a 4850!!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Ya. I seen that latter. But couldn't change post. I edit for grammer and spelling only . and adding content . Never remove content.

The gaming on IC7 makes no sense. If you run 3 gpu's IC7 power shows threw. If you run a single card IC7 seems to run into problem. I would say games aren't coded well for IC7.

 

[JackyP]

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
NEW REVIEW:- http://66.102.9.104/translate_...lp9EHXNNndr9jMVUF3awdA

mAYBE A GoOd sItE tHis tImE

Also i am selling my old am2 m/b "No point in keeping ddr2" and waiting for either the 790/8xx + 925 combo or P55 + i5 combo.... When will i5 be launched again???

Just did some number crunching. It's a comparison of CPUs, so I excluded the heavily GPU limited runs and the 3d Mark composite scores whenever they showed the CPU scores. I included 03 and 05, even though I believe those were composite scores, not showing the true speed of the CPU (if this is correct, Intel's advantage would be slightly bigger).
Average Performance (excluding the "synthetic" tests that came before cinebench):
Ph II 920 = 1
Ph II 940 = 1,05
Q6600 = 0,91
Q6600 clock 4 clock* = 1,06
Q9450 = 1,06
Q9550 = 1,11
i7 920 = 1,43 (turbo off)
i7 940 = 1,51 (turbo off)

So the real winner might be the i7 with a 50% clock for clock advantage if this review is to be trusted.

*comparison of Q6600 vs Ph II 920, Q6600 Performance adjusted by 16% (clock advantage 16,6%). Should be probably even lower due to non linear clock scaling, but the calculation might apply to an overclocked Q6600 (the only relevant 65nm modell anyway), because an FSB overclock should allow better scaling.