New AMD build - *budget* high performance gamer for 19x12

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: crazylegs
unlucky with the failed unlock :(

'0915FPMW' batch seems about the worst for unlocking - *fails* on a variety of MBs over at the Xteme Systems thread.

true .. but it might be a really good overclocker
- i am going to test it all week; it is up for sale [i guess a potential buyer probably wants to know it it overclocks] and i am going to order a Tri-Core next week

AFaiK, dual core is fine for single GPU gaming but "lacks" on some games compared to quad; those same games should run much closer to a quad than a dual ..
- and who knows, i might have luck getting a quad out of it and break even

- for a gambler, you have to realize that you win some ..
.. and you lose also

But in this game, the experience gained overall has been way more than worth the financial expense for me in buying the HW and exploring
rose.gif


i am *curious*

-- Taking a step down .. how does the 250 X2 unlock and overclock ?
:confused:
 

Balt

Lifer
Mar 12, 2000
12,674
482
126
Just got one of these, an 0921FPMW. Honestly I'm not sure if I'm going to attempt to unlock the cores or not. It's too damn hot here in the summer and I can't afford to run the A/C 24/7. :p

I guess I'll make my final decision when my case/PSU arrive next week.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Balt
Just got one of these, an 0921FPMW. Honestly I'm not sure if I'm going to attempt to unlock the cores or not. It's too damn hot here in the summer and I can't afford to run the A/C 24/7. :p

I guess I'll make my final decision when my case/PSU arrive next week.

It isn't like it is a major project to unlock your cores - you set 2 settings and try to boot
:p

i tried it with my AMD stock cooler; temps went up a bit when i tried 1.4v but nothing excessive
- and i am in the desert .. even a fair cooler will let you run with 4 cores
- good luck !!
rose.gif
 

MegaWorks

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
3,819
1
0
I knew this was going to happen to you apoppin :laugh:

I won't wast my money on AMD Phenom II X3 720 if I really wanted a quad core, I mean don't you learn from your mistakes apoppin? :laugh:

Just get the Phenom II X4 940, there solves your problem. Something tells me that you're not going take my advice seriously. :p
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
I knew this was going to happen to you apoppin :laugh:

I won't wast my money on AMD Phenom II X3 720 if I really wanted a quad core, I mean don't you learn from your mistakes apoppin? :laugh:

Just get the Phenom II X4 940, there solves your problem. Something tells me that you're not going take my advice seriously. :p

It's more fun if you get it for free like I did, AND can manage to OC it to 3.7Ghz with a 2.6Ghz L3 cache.
 

Sylvanas

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2004
3,752
0
0
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
I knew this was going to happen to you apoppin :laugh:

I won't wast my money on AMD Phenom II X3 720 if I really wanted a quad core, I mean don't you learn from your mistakes apoppin? :laugh:

Just get the Phenom II X4 940, there solves your problem. Something tells me that you're not going take my advice seriously. :p

It's more fun if you get it for free like I did, AND can manage to OC it to 3.7Ghz with a 2.6Ghz L3 cache.

Yeah, IF you get it for free :).

- for a gambler, you have to realize that you win some ..
.. and you lose also

But in this game, the experience gained overall has been way more than worth the financial expense for me in buying the HW and exploring

Sounds like this gambler is an addict :D a sensible gambler would try not to make the same mistake again ie. buy a full Quad :beer:

920/940 ftw :thumbsup:
 

MegaWorks

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
3,819
1
0
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
I knew this was going to happen to you apoppin :laugh:

I won't wast my money on AMD Phenom II X3 720 if I really wanted a quad core, I mean don't you learn from your mistakes apoppin? :laugh:

Just get the Phenom II X4 940, there solves your problem. Something tells me that you're not going take my advice seriously. :p

It's more fun if you get it for free like I did, AND can manage to OC it to 3.7Ghz with a 2.6Ghz L3 cache.

Congratulation soccerballtux that's an awesome achievement, well if you put that way I guess why not! :)

I have an 790FX board I might get myself one and replace my X4 9350E and try to unlock it too........shit I don't have a SB750 south bridge chipset oh well. I'll wait for the Phenom II to drop even more or change board, which I really don't want to do.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
*I didn't get the chip for free, I mean the 4th core was free; so it's like I got a 940BE for free.
Really thankful I got lucky enough to get one that unlocks.
 

crazylegs

Senior member
Sep 30, 2005
779
0
71
Originally posted by: apoppin

i am *curious*[/i]
-- Taking a step down .. how does the 250 X2 unlock and overclock ?
:confused:

AFAIK the Athlon II 250 X2 is a native dual core, not harvested x3/x4 core - thus no cores to unlock?

not looked into overclocking them, more cache and potential to unlock extra cores on the P II x2/x3 has been taking up most of my recent CPU research.

Am absolutely dying to try the exact same experiment you have just tried. Cant justify changing from my current setup atm, trying to find a friend who needs a PC building :p
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
You should have gotten the 710 when it was on sale for 99 on newegg instead. That way, if it didn't unlock, you'd still have 3 cores instead of 2.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: crazylegs
Originally posted by: apoppin

i am *curious*[/i]
-- Taking a step down .. how does the 250 X2 unlock and overclock ?
:confused:

AFAIK the Athlon II 250 X2 is a native dual core, not harvested x3/x4 core - thus no cores to unlock?

not looked into overclocking them, more cache and potential to unlock extra cores on the P II x2/x3 has been taking up most of my recent CPU research.

Am absolutely dying to try the exact same experiment you have just tried. Cant justify changing from my current setup atm, trying to find a friend who needs a PC building :p

Why i mentioned it?; yesterday, AMD sent my fellow editor a CPU/MB/DR3/HD4650
- yes *he* got it free - and i had to BUY mine :p

ma770-UD3P
Athlon II 250
HD 4650
4 GB DDR3
:roll:

the good thing is that we will trade CPUs after he tests it .. so we can compare
Athlon X2 > Phenom II X2 and Phenom II X3 on two differing platforms

:thumbsup:

Sounds like this gambler is an addict a sensible gambler would try not to make the same mistake again ie. buy a full Quad 920/940 ftw
Not if this gambler wanted to compare X2 > X3 > X4 for a series of articles ;)
- the only thing i might *not* get to compare is X4 - so what?; intel will still Overclock reliably better unless i get unreal lucky.

i don't want the handpicked HW that AMD regularly sends to review sites and to "key" forum posters that always unlocks and overclocks
- that would just give unreal expectations to potential OC'ers
rose.gif
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: Hacp
You should have gotten the 710 when it was on sale for 99 on newegg instead. That way, if it didn't unlock, you'd still have 3 cores instead of 2.

It's still $99 on zipzoomfly. It's only 2.6ghz with a locked multi though, I think.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Yup that's me, key forum poster. ;)

AMD sent you a free CPU directly?
--Are you that "key" so as to be viral ?

:D

MrK got an entire [cheapie] system [CPU/mb/DDR3/GPU] from AMD "all free" yesterday ...
. . . and no worries for me; i get to write all my HW that i buy personally off as a "business expense" on my taxes
:gift:
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Lol-- no I'm not a key forum poster.

Oh key doh key
:D

'key' but not that Key :p

i like you better already :)
- there is something about viral that i don't like :disgust:

. . .


Seriously, i would love to have a AMD quad core; but i think i really need to *educate* myself in a crash course in "AMD CPU" Advanced 101
- perhaps you guys can help me .. it looks like we can look at the differences [now] in the architecture of the Athlon x2 vs Phenom II x2 and vs P II x3
- at their stock clocks and overclocked as far as they will go [compared to C2Q and C2D performance]

how cool is that?
:cookie:

FINALLY

is there ANY reason i should use the "synthetic" tests?
- or just stick to gaming performance ?

the whole POINT of this 'exercise' is to pinpoint the CPU/platform "sweet spot" for graphics performance [upper midrange w/both GTX 280 & HD4870-X2] at 19x12 and at 16x10 since they are the "popular" WS gaming resolutions for DX10 games.
rose.gif
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Lol-- no I'm not a key forum poster.

Oh key doh key
:D

'key' but not that Key :p

i like you better already :)
- there is something about viral that i don't like :disgust:

. . .


Seriously, i would love to have a AMD quad core; but i think i really need to *educate* myself in a crash course in "AMD CPU" Advanced 101
- perhaps you guys can help me .. it looks like we can look at the differences [now] in the architecture of the Athlon x2 vs Phenom II x2 and vs P II x3
- at their stock clocks and overclocked as far as they will go [compared to C2Q and C2D performance]

how cool is that?
:cookie:

FINALLY

is there ANY reason i should use the "synthetic" tests?
- or just stick to gaming performance ?

the whole POINT of this 'exercise' is to pinpoint the CPU/platform "sweet spot" for graphics performance [upper midrange w/both GTX 280 & HD4870-X2] at 19x12 and at 16x10 since they are the "popular" WS gaming resolutions for DX10 games.
rose.gif

So here's the thing, whatever the sweet spot is _now_, the budget conscious like to know what the sweet spot will be _then_ in the future. The people with a Core i7 will be most prepared for what's to come. Even if you only need an x3 for most gaming at 16x10 and 19x12, in the future you will wish you had ponied up the extra $20 or 40 and gotten the quad.

So I'm not sure I buy into the whole "FPS with minimum resolution is irrelevant". As a matter of fact, I don't. However, in the interest of AMD, I prefer that reviewers continue doing this so that people go buy AMD's products.
 

Rhoxed

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2007
1,051
3
81
synthetic tests and gaming performance are both relevant IMO

not all enthusiasts are gamers, many buy this hardware for folding/image editing/file management/video work/modeling etc.

if you were comparing video cards i would stick to games, but seeing as you are comparing CPU's and different architecture even, i would opt to add in a few synthetic benches, maybe even some x264 work (grayskys comes to mind)

-----

as for your CPU dilemma i would say go ahead and jump on the 720, you would be satisfied even if it didn't unlock (on the other hand the 740 is about to come out IIRC @ 3ghz)

if you feel you NEED a quad, grab the 940BE and use K10STAT to downcore to a triple core for comparisons on x2 > x3 > x4 performance gains.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: Rhoxed
synthetic tests and gaming performance are both relevant IMO

not all enthusiasts are gamers, many buy this hardware for folding/image editing/file management/video work/modeling etc.

if you were comparing video cards i would stick to games, but seeing as you are comparing CPU's and different architecture even, i would opt to add in a few synthetic benches, maybe even some x264 work (grayskys comes to mind)

-----

as for your CPU dilemma i would say go ahead and jump on the 720, you would be satisfied even if it didn't unlock (on the other hand the 740 is about to come out IIRC @ 3ghz)

if you feel you NEED a quad, grab the 940BE and use K10STAT to downcore to a triple core for comparisons on x2 > x3 > x4 performance gains.

Synthetic benchmarks are a farce:

My my. Swap CentaurHauls for AuthenticAMD, and Nano's performance magically jumps about 10 percent. Swap for GenuineIntel, and memory performance goes up no less than 47.4 percent. This is not a test error or random occurrence; I benchmarked each CPUID multiple times across multiple reboots on completely clean Windows XP installations. The gains themselves are not confined to a small group of tests within the memory subsystem evaluation, but stretch across the entire series of read/write tests. Only the memory latency results remain unchanged between the two CPUIDs.

At the very least, this suggests some incredibly sloppy coding on Futuremark's part, as the company may be enabling or disabling CPU optimizations based on a processor's vendor name in CPUID instead of actually checking CPUID for SIMD support. In this case, PCMark 2005's memory subsystem test doesn't appear to be aware that Nano supports SSE2 and SSE3, and is instead running a decidedly less-optimized code path. There are two factors, however, that make this explanation a bit difficult to swallow.

First, there's the issue of timing. PCMark 2005 was released (obviously) in 2005, and was obviously coded with an eye towards supporting current and future processors. This is standard operating procedure for Futuremark, which always builds benchmarks designed to last for at least a year, and often two. VIA's C5N-T (Nehemiah) core may have only supported MMX and 3DNow!, but the C7 launched in 2005, and that processor supported SSE2 and SSE3 from day one. Even if proper extension support wasn't built into the first version of PCM2K5, we tested version 1.2.0, and that patch was released on or around 11-29-2006.

Second, there's the issue of performance when Nano is identified as AuthenticAMD. If performance between the AMD and Intel CPUIDs was identical, there wouldn't really be a story here, but it isn't, and that's curious. Futuremark could plausibly argue that VIA's C3/C7 processors weren't exactly on the radar back in 2004-2005, but AMD and K8 certainly were, and K8 launched with full SSE and SSE2 support, with SSE3 added in 2005.

None of this constitutes proof of wrongdoing, but it flies in the face of Futuremark's neutrality claims. Bad code is a fact of life, but companies that write benchmarks for a living and sell those benchmarks as evaluation tools have a responsibility to ensure that their software delivers the neutral framework that it promises. Based on the information I've gathered thus far, it seems Futuremark may have created three paths?one for Intel, one for AMD, and one generic "other" path. There's nothing wrong with optimized code paths, but our results would seem to indicate that some paths are decidedly more optimized than others.

I prefer to use a couple runs of Cinebench10 to get an idea of how the processor performs. Assuming a program is reasonably optimized for multi-core, you can expect to see performance scaling similar to what you see in Cinebench.
 

Rhoxed

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2007
1,051
3
81
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: Rhoxed
synthetic tests and gaming performance are both relevant IMO

not all enthusiasts are gamers, many buy this hardware for folding/image editing/file management/video work/modeling etc.

if you were comparing video cards i would stick to games, but seeing as you are comparing CPU's and different architecture even, i would opt to add in a few synthetic benches, maybe even some x264 work (grayskys comes to mind)

-----

as for your CPU dilemma i would say go ahead and jump on the 720, you would be satisfied even if it didn't unlock (on the other hand the 740 is about to come out IIRC @ 3ghz)

if you feel you NEED a quad, grab the 940BE and use K10STAT to downcore to a triple core for comparisons on x2 > x3 > x4 performance gains.

Synthetic benchmarks are a farce:

My my. Swap CentaurHauls for AuthenticAMD, and Nano's performance magically jumps about 10 percent. Swap for GenuineIntel, and memory performance goes up no less than 47.4 percent. This is not a test error or random occurrence; I benchmarked each CPUID multiple times across multiple reboots on completely clean Windows XP installations. The gains themselves are not confined to a small group of tests within the memory subsystem evaluation, but stretch across the entire series of read/write tests. Only the memory latency results remain unchanged between the two CPUIDs.

At the very least, this suggests some incredibly sloppy coding on Futuremark's part, as the company may be enabling or disabling CPU optimizations based on a processor's vendor name in CPUID instead of actually checking CPUID for SIMD support. In this case, PCMark 2005's memory subsystem test doesn't appear to be aware that Nano supports SSE2 and SSE3, and is instead running a decidedly less-optimized code path. There are two factors, however, that make this explanation a bit difficult to swallow.

First, there's the issue of timing. PCMark 2005 was released (obviously) in 2005, and was obviously coded with an eye towards supporting current and future processors. This is standard operating procedure for Futuremark, which always builds benchmarks designed to last for at least a year, and often two. VIA's C5N-T (Nehemiah) core may have only supported MMX and 3DNow!, but the C7 launched in 2005, and that processor supported SSE2 and SSE3 from day one. Even if proper extension support wasn't built into the first version of PCM2K5, we tested version 1.2.0, and that patch was released on or around 11-29-2006.

Second, there's the issue of performance when Nano is identified as AuthenticAMD. If performance between the AMD and Intel CPUIDs was identical, there wouldn't really be a story here, but it isn't, and that's curious. Futuremark could plausibly argue that VIA's C3/C7 processors weren't exactly on the radar back in 2004-2005, but AMD and K8 certainly were, and K8 launched with full SSE and SSE2 support, with SSE3 added in 2005.

None of this constitutes proof of wrongdoing, but it flies in the face of Futuremark's neutrality claims. Bad code is a fact of life, but companies that write benchmarks for a living and sell those benchmarks as evaluation tools have a responsibility to ensure that their software delivers the neutral framework that it promises. Based on the information I've gathered thus far, it seems Futuremark may have created three paths?one for Intel, one for AMD, and one generic "other" path. There's nothing wrong with optimized code paths, but our results would seem to indicate that some paths are decidedly more optimized than others.

i understand the disadvantages in some of these tests, i was more referring to tests such as
winrar
everest
grayskys x264
cinebench

but as for comparison of AMD vs AMD you can see improvements from the hardware reguardless if the test runs faster using an intel or not.

if you are comparing intel in this, i still do not see a problem, as the gaming performance will not rely on the results of these synthetic tests either. Maybe i am just used to seeing these skewed results and understand intel just performs some things faster.

but of all people you should know this coming from an intel e8*00 series to an AMD 720BE @ 4core (by the way, what improvements/decreses did you notice from this switch?)
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Rhoxed
synthetic tests and gaming performance are both relevant IMO

not all enthusiasts are gamers, many buy this hardware for folding/image editing/file management/video work/modeling etc.

if you were comparing video cards i would stick to games, but seeing as you are comparing CPU's and different architecture even, i would opt to add in a few synthetic benches, maybe even some x264 work (grayskys comes to mind)

-----

as for your CPU dilemma i would say go ahead and jump on the 720, you would be satisfied even if it didn't unlock (on the other hand the 740 is about to come out IIRC @ 3ghz)

if you feel you NEED a quad, grab the 940BE and use K10STAT to downcore to a triple core for comparisons on x2 > x3 > x4 performance gains.

Good advice; thank-you

Are there issues with cache affecting a downcore to a triple core as there are with Intel CPUs?
- in other words, would i see any difference between an X3 and an X4 with one core disabled?

the synthetic benches that i have available [and those i already ran on my Q9550S at 3.1 and 4.0 GHz] were Everest ultimate, SiSoft's Sandra's complete suite and PC Mark's Vantage

this experiment, if you will has a purpose - *value* .. gaming bang-for-buck on a budget

"to find the CPU/platform sweet spot for hi-performance 19x12 gaming"

. . . well, that is what i came up with so far .. it kinda sounds 'right' :p
:confused:
 

Rhoxed

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2007
1,051
3
81
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Rhoxed
synthetic tests and gaming performance are both relevant IMO

not all enthusiasts are gamers, many buy this hardware for folding/image editing/file management/video work/modeling etc.

if you were comparing video cards i would stick to games, but seeing as you are comparing CPU's and different architecture even, i would opt to add in a few synthetic benches, maybe even some x264 work (grayskys comes to mind)

-----

as for your CPU dilemma i would say go ahead and jump on the 720, you would be satisfied even if it didn't unlock (on the other hand the 740 is about to come out IIRC @ 3ghz)

if you feel you NEED a quad, grab the 940BE and use K10STAT to downcore to a triple core for comparisons on x2 > x3 > x4 performance gains.

Good advice; thank-you

Are there issues with cache affecting a downcore to a triple core as there are with Intel CPUs?
- in other words, would i see any difference between an X3 and an X4 with one core disabled?

the synthetic benches that i have available [and those i already ran on my Q9550S at 3.1 and 4.0 GHz] were Everest ultimate, SiSoft's Sandra's complete suite and PC Mark's Vantage

this experiment, if you will has a purpose - *value* .. gaming bang-for-buck on a budget

"to find the CPU/platform sweet spot for hi-performance 19x12 gaming"

. . . well, that is what i came up with so far .. it kinda sounds 'right' :p
:confused:


the only difference you would notices was a missing core, the cache still works @ 6MB for the 3cores.

(i used my 940BE and downcore to x3 when i was debating upgrading my 9850BE to a 720BE)
turned out the 720 unlocked too so i didnt really need the comparison. but so you know a 720BE @ 3.8 kills a 9850BE @ 3.33 =]

i really reccomend everest when trying to find the NB clock/RAM sweet spot as you will notice a higher NB is better than faster RAM in some instances.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
i really reccomend everest when trying to find the NB clock/RAM sweet spot as you will notice a higher NB is better than faster RAM in some instances.

That is what my friend who builds AMD boxes for a living also says. Would you give please details how to use Everest to find this NB/RAM synchronicity.

As to me buying an X-4
.. hmm
.. that is quite a premium one pays for a guaranteed 4th core :p
=at any rate, i have a little time to think about it as i have 2 CPUs to test now - Athlon X2 vs Phenom II X2
rose.gif
 

Rhoxed

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2007
1,051
3
81
give me a day to post some comparison shots of everest (as today is my GF's birthday, and she would probably prefer i spend it with her)

i will post a few ranging from ddr2-800 to ddr2-1066 with NB speeds of 1.8GHZ (stock on 940BE) to 2.8GHZ (or higher if i can)
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Rhoxed
give me a day to post some comparison shots of everest (as today is my GF's birthday, and she would probably prefer i spend it with her)

i will post a few ranging from ddr2-800 to ddr2-1066 with NB speeds of 1.8GHZ (stock on 940BE) to 2.8GHZ (or higher if i can)




For sure. Happy B-D to your GF! i most sincerely hope that you prefer to spend the day with her rather than with us :p
:Q

There is no huge hurry [well except for the most anxious of us here] and it takes a lot of time to run proper benches - especially as this is my first 'all AMD' PC. :eek:
There is a lot of potentially very interesting information yet to be discovered - at least in one place and especially slanted toward PC gaming.