I have the impression that, people think Intel crashed only becouse of wrong cooler, that allowed temps to go up to 90C.
As a reminder. http://koti.welho.com/pnystro2/somepics/Intel.dual.core.70.degrees.crashed.JPG
I have the impression that, people think Intel crashed only becouse of wrong cooler, that allowed temps to go up to 90C.
As a reminder. http://koti.welho.com/pnystro2/somepics/Intel.dual.core.70.degrees.crashed.JPG
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,256
- 16,113
- 136
OK, you still are ignoring all the heat , the power so great it burned out the regulators, and the way the test is skewed, and every other site that had problems even getting the chip to boot ? (motherboards.com I think it was for one...)
keys, are you really surprissed because PEE 840 (four threads capable: two physical CPUs plus HT) run faster four intensive CPU tasks at the same time than a X2 4800+ (two threads capable: two CPUs)? I can't believe it.
Would you be surprised because two dual core Opteron (four physical CPUs) run faster four intensive CPU tasks than a system with two CPUs plus (only) HT? I think you wouldn't be.
Do you (or any of us) run four intensive tasks at the same time?
Do you think because PEE run faster four intensive tasks at the same time (or win three of four or whatever), is better CPU than X2?
Is this test (from a perfomance point of view) a real life situation, a valid situation for us, customers?
Would you be surprised because two dual core Opteron (four physical CPUs) run faster four intensive CPU tasks than a system with two CPUs plus (only) HT? I think you wouldn't be.
Do you (or any of us) run four intensive tasks at the same time?
Do you think because PEE run faster four intensive tasks at the same time (or win three of four or whatever), is better CPU than X2?
Is this test (from a perfomance point of view) a real life situation, a valid situation for us, customers?
1) The PD EE is priced the same as the Athlon X2 4800+
2) It's supposed to be a stability test, not a performance test.
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What are we supposed to look at here? Sorry, I'm a little slow today as Mark can probably verify.
I wanted to remind people that Intel fries MB's at 70c.
So it wasn't that "wrong cooler +90c temp" that fried MB's.
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,219
- 54
- 91
No I'm not surprised at all. Which is why I think a single Pentium D840EE with HT would be better suited for database/application servers than a single DC opteron or X2. Don't think that I am not fully aware of the irony here. 4 apps/4 logical processors. No Duh.
For the average PC user, and that includes you and me, I don't think any major difference in performance can be detected without benchmarking or using something like fraps in a game. Heat, power consumption, entirely different story of course. I have an open mind brudda. Just like to observe more than I should.
Like I said before, another factor which influences the numbers and has been left out. the numbers are also hard to compare amongst eachother. how does 1 encoded CD count in minutes DivX encoding ? how much is a winrar archive worth ? how much a single benchmark run ?, lots of questions. so imho the performance cannot be compared here.
ROFLMAO !!
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2397&p=10
So you really believe that 100% cpu usage tells us something about server performance ?
Server WILL loose it's performance if CPU use is 100%, so testing how it does at 100% is meaningless crap.
100% usage won't even tell us how server performs when it is overloaded.
You see, all the applications in THG test are running at their own pace, not like in servers, since servers work at the pace of requests made.
So test with 80-90% CPU usage is the way how servers are tested, and AMD64 systems are winners at everything.
PDF from HP -> http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/servers/benchmarks/dl145-webbench.pdf
Looks like you are getting burned by the incosistency again...Now the INtel has been running 27fps for awhile again has lost ground once again......
Too hard to tell for sure but it appears with how long the test has been at 27fps versus the quirky 37fps the AMD would have still one the Far Cry test....
One thing to remember it was stable in the first round of test for quite some time at relatively same temps and same cardiac usage pattern that has consisted all along .....
Your numbers are wrong...Anyway you look at this the AMD and Intel both stable would have...
INtel win CD encoding by as much as AMD would likely win the Far Cry...
AMD wins big 30-40% in winrar
INtel wins big as AMD applie NO TIME to Divx encoding....
Bottom line...Heat was not a factor in all of the mobos.....INtel platform is newer and less mature as quite evident in the testing...INtel runs on average 13c hotter under load....That is fact..Intel cpu draws about 100 more watts...That is fact....
If I ran that many CPU intensive apps (which again you morons all told me a year ago was insane and I didn't run more then 2 cpu intensive apps and a handful of non cpu intensive apps then...) then I guess I would have to weigh the option of heat , power, and cost to see if it was worth it.....
I think running the test with 3 would be nice but some other site should do it with a different suite of test...Also show 3 test of single threaded apps versus 3 test of 2 single threaded apps (like this one) and 1 multithreaded app...
Then ofcourse run the test with a 4400+ (500+ chip) and an 840 (500+ chip)......
Running stress test on 1000 dollar chips doesn't tell us here too much cause I doubt many will buy these chips around these parts...especially related to numbers of 4400's and 840 non EE chips...
NO Keys you are wrong.....I think the Intel was only perhaps down 4 hours max and not the difference of up[time...It is not AMD's fault the system went down 3 times and there was work done before the latest length of stability...in those areas the pattern of usage was similar so I can only conclude it doing similar in performance...MOvement now in the test is not far of what it (other then the rather randomness of app priority switching) was at the beginning so I cant see anything to prove your claims the currnt results of what cpu is winning each test would be any different...
Well, If I would build or would buy a *server*, my only options would be Opteron & Xeon, Xeon & Opteron. You know, server board, Reg ECC mem etc. Pentium & Athlon, Athlon & Pentium, aren't an option at all for me
Yes, but heat, power consumption and noise are capital factors in this story. In fact, IMO, *the factors* to choose one or another option. And, of course, if the less power angry, the less hot and the less noisy, additionally is the best general performer... well... my friend I don't see any reason to consider the other one hehe
WOW I love how you spin the data....
It is averaging 4000+ rpm and according to the chart that is what it has done...About a day ago it ran for over 6-8 hours at 4400rpm.....The chart itslef shows the lowest speed was 3800 so I cant see where you got the 3500...quit exaggerating....
Current amd is running 4600 on average....
If you have noticed anything the AMD fan (stock) is a low profile nless then 80mm fan so those rpms are needed to push same amount of cfm...The fact the INtel cpu clearly an 80mm fan which is also higher profile from specs I have seen makes the 4000 rpm possibly more audible and pushinng more cfm...If AMD had my aftermarket fan 80mm 35mm deep I would run it at 3400 push as much air as the intel HSF and likely have colled this thing about another 3-4c cooler....Oh and likely quieter....
So dont get so cocky cause you misrepresented the data and dont know what you are looking at....
so when do you think they're gonna disable HT to see if it makes a difference in thread processing?
And don't forget, like I said before, that Tom's is using for X2, a crappy HSF (Ajigo MF043-044, the HSF supplied with for example a Newcastle 3000+ s754). I'm sure that HSF included with retail X2 will be, at least, the supplied with FX-55, a much better one than this low end Ajigo.
You are calculating downtime as work time, and keysplayr2003 do not calculate time before last reboot.
He presents those number like it only took 73 hours for Intel to make all the work..
At the start of a test with a clean score reset, the Intel lead on all the sub tests. When the Intel crashed, the AMD caught up. Also there was a strange situation where the AMD slowly distracted itself form the divx task and improved on the other three.
The overall observation is the Intel 840EE would have nailed the AMD X2 if the AMD stuck to the divx thread. Maybe THG needed to install a AMD CPU driver to get the cpu to equally dedicated itself.
The THG was a real life test on what a customer could expect to see with the system sitting in front of them, not these single/solo brenchmarks from other sites that don't reflect the true nature of the CPU other than to prove who's winning from the angle of the reviewer that has a vested interest in one CPU winning.
Here is an example of a AMD cpu driver that allows os user to change priority and other schemes. http://www.flexbeta.net/main/comments.php?catid=5&shownews=13382
.
I'm replying to posts that contest my opinion of the THG tests. Alot of people saw the Intel winning all the tests for themselves. There is no lie about the statement.
Can you stop declaring situations that are off topic to the thread, please.
.
Can you stop declaring situations that are off topic to the thread, please.
.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter