Phenom II x4 960T Zosma Bottlenecking AMD Radeon HD 7850 OC for Gaming?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

minitron

Member
Mar 12, 2012
124
0
0
Why should I find benches to prove a point I never said? I did say the 960T would be fast enough for the games he mentioned with his video card. Then you came in here ranting and raving about games no one ever mentioned. Then, BF3 MP, a game that does like moar cores, you claim that an i3 is the better choice. Yet you have provided no benches, though. I have provided BF3 MP benches that show AMD CPU's provide plenty playable frame rates, especially hexcores which the 960T has a chance of unlocking to. In fact the 1100T provides a very similar experience as the 2500K. So I guess if the i3 is faster than the 2500K, you win.
And now the 1100T is the same as a i5-2500K in games.:sneaky:

Find me any gaming bench where the 960T is superior to the i3 in any game. You can't seem to do this simple task when there's millions of benchmarks out there for millions of games.
 

Durvelle27

Diamond Member
Jun 3, 2012
4,102
0
0
And now the 1100T is the same as a i5-2500K in games.:sneaky:

Find me any gaming bench where the 960T is superior to the i3 in any game. You can't seem to do this simple task when there's millions of benchmarks out there for millions of games.

you say there millions of becnmarks for millions of games but you can't find one to prove a i3 is better than a 960T in BF3 mp ?
 

notty22

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2010
3,375
0
0
There are increasing amounts of games that like more cores.
Did I win the internet ? lol -kidding.
CPU2.png
Despite packing a more efficient architecture and higher operating frequencies, the 2500K and 2600K processors were slower than the 920 and 750 processors. In fact, the Sandy Bridge-based parts were also slower than the Phenom II X4 980 and X6 1100T.
It was also interesting to see that Dirt 3 really dislikes dual-core processors as the Phenom II X2 560 averaged 54fps, making it effectively twice as slow as the Phenom II X4 980. Another fun fact: Dirt 3 seems to prefer hexa-core processors over their quad-core counterparts as the higher clocked Phenom II X4 980 performed worse than the Phenom II X6 1100T.
 

Hatisherrif

Senior member
May 10, 2009
226
0
0
And now the 1100T is the same as a i5-2500K in games.:sneaky:

Find me any gaming bench where the 960T is superior to the i3 in any game. You can't seem to do this simple task when there's millions of benchmarks out there for millions of games.

I am too lazy to do so now, but later on I am going to find more benchmarks which show that Phenom II is actually a decent competitor to the i3 once overclocked.

First of all, to my knowledge there is no current i3 CPU which can be overclocked (if I am misinformed, please correct me). Going by that fact, your i3 would be locked at 3.1GHz (with turbo boost going to some higher speed under load I guess).

Now, considering the fact that Zosma and Deneb Phenoms are *fairly* similar in performance at the same clock speeds, I am going to post an Anandtech benchmark which you could have searched for hours ago.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=362

Okay, these are some benchmarks from the very site you yourself claim to be legitimate (I do as well, Anand is cool). What can we conclude from the many benchmarks shown?



1. At a higher clock speed, an old Deneb Phenom II has no trouble beating the i3 in nearly every single test, even though the i3 is light years ahead in the implemented technology and architecture (even I was surprised at how well the Phenom did in some instances).

2. A Phenom II has even greater overclocking potential and could probably go to 4.0GHz, but only if you get the C3 stepping (I believe there are no more C2s lying around, so you should be safe).

3. A 960T would have potential to unlock two additional cores. This, combined with a greater clock speed achieved via overclocking, would actually probably go near the i5 2400 on rare occasions. If you find the 960T for less money than an i3, it is a no-brainer.

4. The power consumption of the AMD chip is a lot higher - it's the downside of the aging technology, but if you can live with it, it is not that bad at all.

5. Gaming - I see the obvious advantage the i3 has in games, but I do not think it is enough to justify buying it over the Phenom II which does so good in everything else. The biggest difference I see is around 10 frames per second, and the minimum framerate is probably even closer to the i3. But 10 frames is the max you'll see. Everywhere else, it's a dead tie.

Forgive me if my lack of knowledge on the Zosma CPUs made this entire thing irrelevant. If the performance is really that different to old Denebs, then this whole thing I posted is invalid. Also, my apologies go to the OP for straying from the topic, but I hope this concludes the stupid argument about which side is better.

It is always your choice!
 
Last edited:

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
And now the 1100T is the same as a i5-2500K in games.:sneaky:

Find me any gaming bench where the 960T is superior to the i3 in any game. You can't seem to do this simple task when there's millions of benchmarks out there for millions of games.


No one said that, at least I certainly didn't. I said the 1100T provides a similar experience to the 2500K in ONE game, which happens to be one of the three games the OP mentioned.
 

minitron

Member
Mar 12, 2012
124
0
0
I am too lazy to do so now, but later on I am going to find more benchmarks which show that Phenom II is actually a decent competitor to the i3 once overclocked.

First of all, to my knowledge there is no current i3 CPU which can be overclocked (if I am misinformed, please correct me). Going by that fact, your i3 would be locked at 3.1GHz (with turbo boost going to some higher speed under load I guess).

Now, considering the fact that Zosma and Deneb Phenoms are *fairly* similar in performance at the same clock speeds, I am going to post an Anandtech benchmark which you could have searched for hours ago.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=362

Okay, these are some benchmarks from the very site you yourself claim to be legitimate (I do as well, Anand is cool). What can we conclude from the many benchmarks shown?



1. At a higher clock speed, an old Deneb Phenom II has no trouble beating the i3 in nearly every single test, even though the i3 is light years ahead in the implemented technology and architecture (even I was surprised at how well the Phenom did in some instances).

2. A Phenom II has even greater overclocking potential and could probably go to 4.0GHz, but only if you get the C3 stepping (I believe there are no more C2s lying around, so you should be safe).

3. A 960T would have potential to unlock two additional cores. This, combined with a greater clock speed achieved via overclocking, would actually probably go near the i5 2400 on rare occasions. If you find the 960T for less money than an i3, it is a no-brainer.

4. The power consumption of the AMD chip is a lot higher - it's the downside of the aging technology, but if you can live with it, it is not that bad at all.

5. Gaming - I see the obvious advantage the i3 has in games, but I do not think it is enough to justify buying it over the Phenom II which does so good in everything else. The biggest difference I see is around 10 frames per second, and the minimum framerate is probably even closer to the i3. But 10 frames is the max you'll see. Everywhere else, it's a dead tie.

Forgive me if my lack of knowledge on the Zosma CPUs made this entire thing irrelevant. If the performance is really that different to old Denebs, then this whole thing I posted is invalid. Also, my apologies go to the OP for straying from the topic, but I hope this concludes the stupid argument about which side is better.

It is always your choice!
You are correct in your assumption that it's like other Phenom II.

Yes a quad core Phenom II is faster in encoding than the i3 but we're talking about gaming, in which case an overclocked Phenom II is still slower than the i3 in some games.
Well, its not a Phenom II Quad but an FX4100, i say close enough. Now do your self a favor and stop trolling.

1024.jpg


1024.jpg


1024.jpg
Your personal blog does not count as a legitimate review site. Your posts are utter crap. Now do yourself a favor and go away.

Again, this is coming from someone who claims the i7-920 is better than a i5-2500K in gaming. We can completely disregard anything you say.

If you were actually good at benchmarking and testing hardware I would think you'd have your own review site. But you don't because your blog is a joke.

Here's what a real bench from a real review looks like:
DiRT3%206950.png

It's obvious your blog is garbage considering the disparities it has with real review sites.

Poster has been warned about the personal attack in this post. -Admin DrPizza
 
Last edited by a moderator:

N4g4rok

Senior member
Sep 21, 2011
285
0
0
Yes a quad core Phenom II is faster in encoding than the i3 but we're talking about gaming, in which case an overclocked Phenom II is still slower than the i3 in some games.

Looking at the Anand bench he posted, the Phenom II had he edge in two out of the four games that were benched. I know four games doesn't warrant absolute proof, but when you consider that the 3.7Ghz Ph II 980 in the review could receive a 300-400Mhz bump in overclocking, i feel like the difference between the two would be a wash. They could perform equally well in gaming, even at stock.

I think the price/performance ratio and higher multithreaded performance is what most Phenom II adopters would say sealed the deal, but realistically, i think they are similar enough that the best price for one of the two would be the deciding factor.
 

minitron

Member
Mar 12, 2012
124
0
0
Looking at the Anand bench he posted, the Phenom II had he edge in two out of the four games that were benched. I know four games doesn't warrant absolute proof, but when you consider that the 3.7Ghz Ph II 980 in the review could receive a 300-400Mhz bump in overclocking, i feel like the difference between the two would be a wash. They could perform equally well in gaming, even at stock.

I think the price/performance ratio and higher multithreaded performance is what most Phenom II adopters would say sealed the deal, but realistically, i think they are similar enough that the best price for one of the two would be the deciding factor.
Bench is somewhat inaccurate: the only game where the Phenom II "wins" is L4D2 which we know is dual-threaded. In other games the performance gap between a Phenom II and i3 is huge:
starcraft.png


If you're overclocking the Phenom II it will cost more considering you will need a decent motherboard and CPU cooler. With the i3 you can slap it in a crappy H61/P75 and be good to go with the stock cooler.

Yes the Phenom II X4 will be superior in multi-threaded performance but we're talking about gaming. Also, it's not like general usage is going to slow down an i3.

The i3 has some clear advantages I mentioned before including much lower power consumption and much better upgrade path.
 

Durvelle27

Diamond Member
Jun 3, 2012
4,102
0
0
Bench is somewhat inaccurate: the only game where the Phenom II "wins" is L4D2 which we know is dual-threaded. In other games the performance gap between a Phenom II and i3 is huge:
starcraft.png


If you're overclocking the Phenom II it will cost more considering you will need a decent motherboard and CPU cooler. With the i3 you can slap it in a crappy H61/P75 and be good to go with the stock cooler.

Yes the Phenom II X4 will be superior in multi-threaded performance but we're talking about gaming. Also, it's not like general usage is going to slow down an i3.

The i3 has some clear advantages I mentioned before including much lower power consumption and much better upgrade path.

ok you said a Phenom II would be superior in multi-threaded apps well BF3 is multi-threaded ? DUH
 

minitron

Member
Mar 12, 2012
124
0
0
ok you said a Phenom II would be superior in multi-threaded apps well BF3 is multi-threaded ? DUH
It's not Cinebench. The gaming load is not evenly distributed among all threads and will inevitably require one thread that is very strong.
 

N4g4rok

Senior member
Sep 21, 2011
285
0
0
Bench is somewhat inaccurate: the only game where the Phenom II "wins" is L4D2 which we know is dual-threaded. In other games the performance gap between a Phenom II and i3 is huge

Starcraft 2 benefits from processors with higher single-threaded performance on a larger scale than most games. From what i've read, it's way more cpu intensive than your average game, so i can't personally be convinced that it speaks for games in a general sense. I'd have to see other benches comparing the two.

The i3 has some clear advantages I mentioned before including much lower power consumption and much better upgrade path.

It is hard to argue with the expandability of the 1155 socket. The only technicality for most Phenom II owners being that they still had better gaming performance than Bulldozer.
 

Hatisherrif

Senior member
May 10, 2009
226
0
0

Well, this only goes to confirm what I wrote in my statement. In new games or new applications, the i3 will surely have an edge and be better optimized since it has a newer architecture.

So, let's just conclude that AMD isn't crap that should be avoided at all costs - between the four-core Phenom II and the i3, I'd say it is pretty much even in most things. It's your call though. Do you want a newer, more energy-efficient and cooler CPU, or a faster, overclockable older CPU which can still pack a punch and deliver reasonable performance in most things, consuming more power and generating more heat. Also worth mentioning is the possibility of unlocking the Zosma to (practically) Thuban, making it a hex-core able to match the i5 in some things, though only with a great clock speed advantage.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,685
3,957
136
BF3 FX performance? There you go:
CPU_01.png


CPU_02.png


CPU_03.png


Even Athlon II X4 @ 3.1Ghz is better than i3 2120. This is with GTX 580 (second fastest GPU on the market) so GPU is not a bottleneck.
 

KingFatty

Diamond Member
Dec 29, 2010
3,034
1
81
The ixbt StarCraft 2 bench are pure rubbish because they don't even dare to touch overclocking the cpu-nb clocks. Take any phenom II and OC CPU-NB @ 2.8~3Ghz and come talk to me about how amazing SB is in gaming. :rolleyes:

graph7.jpg


graph9.jpg


http://www.anandtech.com/show/3877/...investigation-of-thuban-performance-scaling/7

When I made this point earlier, how benches for "overclocked" Phenoms are missing the benefit of CPU-NB, I think minitron shot me down because apparently he has insider information that all the benchmarks online already overclock the CPU-NB too?

But I don't want to take the time to support my claim with proof, so it's my unsupported claim against his unsupported claim. however, to see who is right, it's just a matter of checking how the numbers you cited (e.g., showing a roughly 20% boost in performance to SC2) correspond to the existing benchmarks, whether they include them.

anyway, thanks for finding those benchmarks with the CPU-NB overclock, I think those are the only publicly available benchmarks that I know of that account for CPU-NB and show the AMD chip overclocking in a more realistic light by not overlooking the additional performance improvement.

i mean 20% change is a big deal, missing that additional performance is usually typical of most benchmarks out there that claim to overclock the Phenom but then fail to change the CPU-NB too.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,000
3,357
136
Here's what a real bench from a real review looks like:
DiRT3%206950.png

It's obvious your blog is garbage considering the disparities it has with real review sites.

1024.jpg


What is that ?? a real bench in my blog ?? it cant be true.:whiste:
Im sure you will dismiss this too simple because it is from my blog. :p

The more you troll, the more you embarrass yourself.
 

minitron

Member
Mar 12, 2012
124
0
0
The ixbt StarCraft 2 bench are pure rubbish because they don't even dare to touch overclocking the cpu-nb clocks. Take any phenom II and OC CPU-NB @ 2.8~3Ghz and come talk to me about how amazing SB is in gaming. :rolleyes:

graph7.jpg


graph9.jpg


http://www.anandtech.com/show/3877/...investigation-of-thuban-performance-scaling/7
So none of the people at legitimate review sites know more than you about overclocking and computer hardware? I'm sure almost all of them are more technically knowledgeable than you.

There isn't an i3 on that chart so I fail to see how that is even relevant.

Even if we assume you overclock to 4.0 Ghz and here is a 1 to 1 gain in percentage of fps (there isn't), that would still be slower than the i3. That's the best case scenario.
BF3 FX performance? There you go:
CPU_01.png


CPU_02.png


CPU_03.png


Even Athlon II X4 @ 3.1Ghz is better than i3 2120. This is with GTX 580 (second fastest GPU on the market) so GPU is not a bottleneck.
BF3 single player is GPU limited and you get the same fps with almost every CPU on there. This does not show the Athlon II X4 is superior to anything.
1024.jpg


What is that ?? a real bench in my blog ?? it cant be true.:whiste:
Im sure you will dismiss this too simple because it is from my blog. :p

The more you troll, the more you embarrass yourself.
Your blog is garbage hence why nobody gives a crap about it. You obviously have no clue what you're doing considering how different your results are from legitimate review sites.

I don't get what's so hard to understand, legitimate review site are much more trustworthy than your terrible blog.

Bolding and underlining personal attacks merely make them easier for the moderators to find. -Admin DrPizza
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mallibu

Senior member
Jun 20, 2011
243
0
0
BF3 FX performance? There you go:
CPU_01.png


CPU_02.png


CPU_03.png


Even Athlon II X4 @ 3.1Ghz is better than i3 2120. This is with GTX 580 (second fastest GPU on the market) so GPU is not a bottleneck.

According to this rubbish graph (which all processors are ~ 1 frame within eachother, so it makes you look desperate to prove your non-existant fanbased point) the OP should not bother with FX / I7 / Phenom and get an Athlon x2 250 since it's the same performance.
Cherrypicking single player benchmarks, from a game that is universaly accepted as the most multithreaded one, that show a dual core == 8 core, makes FX look an even bigger failure.
 
Last edited:

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,000
3,357
136
that show a dual core == 8 core, makes FX look an even bigger failure.

It also shows us a 4 core FX4100 being within two fps of an 8 thread Core i7 2600K costing only 1/3 the price. How would you call the 2600K ?? an EPIC failure ??

Everyone is still waiting for minitron to show us that Core i3 is better than a quad Phenom II in BF3 MP.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
So none of the people at legitimate review sites know more than you about overclocking and computer hardware? I'm sure almost all of them are more technically knowledgeable than you.


Lots of review sites just adjust the multiplier when testing overclocking. It has nothing to do with knowledge, it probably has a lot more to do with getting the overclock done quickly so the article can be published.

Anandtech did not adjust the NB/L3 in their Thuban review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/11

Nor did Tomshardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/phenom-ii-x6-1100t-thuban-amd,2810-8.html

Or Hardwarecanucks: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...055t-1090t-six-core-processors-review-16.html

Some sites do, some sites do not. Anyone who does not overclock the NB/L3 of a Phenom is not using it to it's potential.
 

Hatisherrif

Senior member
May 10, 2009
226
0
0
Your blog is garbage hence why nobody gives a crap about it. You obviously have no clue what you're doing considering how different your results are from legitimate review sites.

I don't get what's so hard to understand, legitimate review site are much more trustworthy than your terrible blog.


Chill out. Even if his results are fake, what does that have to do with you? You cannot disprove certain benchmarks based off what other reviewers write. Maybe they are wrong and/or biased and not him.

Either way, the only way you can know and really be helpful to all of us (along with the OP) is to buy both of the CPUs and test them yourself. Then you will know the definite truth.

Please, stop the hate. It is unnecessary.
 

Phynaz

Lifer
Mar 13, 2006
10,140
819
126
Your blog is garbage hence why nobody gives a crap about it. You obviously have no clue what you're doing considering how different your results are from legitimate review sites.

I don't get what's so hard to understand, legitimate review site are much more trustworthy than your terrible blog.

My spidy sense is tingling. Yes, I feel a vacation coming on.

Take this crap elsewhere, it's not wanted here.
 

minitron

Member
Mar 12, 2012
124
0
0
So apparently nobody can provide even one benchmark from a legitimate review site where the Phenom II, overclocked or not, beats the i3-21xx in any game? I guess that's to be expected.

It's also against the TOS to post things that are inaccurate:
You agree that you will not use our Forums to post any material, or links to any material, which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.
Someone should go on vacation for posting biased garbage. Biases aren't necessarily bad - providing nothing but personal attacks to refute them seems to constitute "garbage."

Plus I can pretty much attack the credibility of his personal blog all I want.

Personal attacks are not allowed here. If you want to attack the credibility of his personal blog, then you need to do it in a reasonable manner which means you need to provide factual evidence that disproves what he's stated. You've done nothing of the sort, and merely have stated repeatedly that his blog is garbage. That is not allowed. -Admin DrPizza
 
Last edited by a moderator: