Phenom 2 (deneb) vs. Core2Quad vs. Corei7

[dennilfloss]

What cooler were they using?

I suddenly wonder if the Xigmatek HDT-S1283 I bought will fit on a Phenom II. Hopefully I did not buy it for nothing (it was on sale and is still sealed in its box).

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: BlueBlazer
Looking further into the XtremeSystems thread...

The original source http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=359342

Notice the poster statistics:

Silentjack07
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2

And those 2 posts are in that thread!

Quote:
Originally Posted by geckolizard View Post
no source ??

http://www.expreview.com

the benchmarks had been there for several hours tonight. now i cant find them anymore, do you?

That's what I call fishy...

Furthermore.... http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...=3466299&postcount=504

This one http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...ng-intel-core-i7-920/7 contradicts with the so-called (fishy/dodgy) "benchmarks" http://www.freeimagehosting.ne...age.php?a4e1257410.jpg

Note its using the same graphics card also, GTX280, and same resolution 1680x1050.

BINGO, and don't tell me "the Phenom 2 was faster when AA was enabled." AA performance is not coming from the CPU, not a jump like that. Plus, look at this. With a GTX280 the total CPU usage is about 36% in DX10 and 43% in DX9 while playing Far Cry 2
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...w4LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Then there's this, a GTX280 with 4xAA and 16xAF gets 48.9fps average AT 1920x1200! with a 3.6Ghz Q9650. Clearly someone lied and was found out thus the original cannot be found.
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...QwWVpGa1pfNF8yX2wuZ2lm

Even better is here http://www.guru3d.com/article/...luxe-4870-x2-review/10

That's a GTX280 with a E8400 @ 3.0Ghz That's right, Dual core getting 53fps at 1600x1200 with everything set to very high @ 4xAA and at 1920x1200 51fps. At 1600x1200 you have more total area so it should actually be slower by a bit. It isn't.

 

[formulav8]

I honestly can't see the increased L3 cache providing such a large 20-30% increase over the 9950 when taking clockspeed out of the results.

Either the benches are fake, or AMD did more performance enhancements than just the larger L3 cache. Hopefully they reworked the L3 cache though and especially decreased latency which would definitely help in gaming.

IIRC many benches comparing the original Opteron-Quad to the new Opteron-Quad showed a 10% increase in performance clock-for-clock in some areas and even less in others??? But I could be wrong though.

I guess we will find out soon enough. Just my opinion.


Jason