# phenom not so far away..



## von kain (Jul 10, 2007)

According to amd we are 2-3 months until the phenom comes out
but the AM2+ motherboards are starting to produce... 

biostar demonstrate the TF560 AM2+ Motherboard which is suppose to be the first am2 mobo

the chip is the Nforce 570. Aside from the complete lack of SLI support, Nvidia's new single chip supports lots of different power-related technologies that enable the usage of split power planes.




p.s. and i wait like a idiotshadedshu


----------



## von kain (Jul 10, 2007)

and as a complete idiot i forgot to put the image












p.s. if anyone say i am an idiot i have attach a spell virus meaning that your dog will die and that the vcr gonna burn among other thing......


----------



## DrunkenMafia (Jul 10, 2007)

idiot.....  haahaaaa 

I thought am2 was the normal amd socket after 939??


----------



## Ben Clarke (Jul 10, 2007)

One thing I'm confused on... will the Phenom's work on the AM2 socket or do they have to be AM2+ or whatever it is?


----------



## von kain (Jul 10, 2007)

DrunkenMafia said:


> idiot.....  haahaaaa
> 
> I thought am2 was the normal amd socket after 939??






yes but the am2+ are for the phenoms.





p.s. for your luck of loyalty your beta max disks are now erased among other things...


----------



## von kain (Jul 10, 2007)

Ben Clarke said:


> One thing I'm confused on... will the Phenom's work on the AM2 socket or do they have to be AM2+ or whatever it is?





this is supposed to be the first am2+ which is for phenoms i don't know for the am3 though?


----------



## Atech (Jul 10, 2007)

von kain said:


> this is supposed to be the first am2+ which is for phenoms i don't know for the am3 though?


Not quite sure what the question here is but ...
Phenoms will work with AM2, AM2+ and AM3.

IIRC, AM2+ will provide automatic (hardware controlled) independent (each core) voltage scaling ...

While AM3 will support DDR3.

Or it might be the other way round 

I guess Googleing it might be in order.

Edit:
AM2+ uses HyperTransport 3 (up to 2.6GHz) and separate power planes for the northbridge and the cores.


----------



## Darknova (Jul 10, 2007)

From what I've read, AM3 will be the same core, but have an intergrated DDR3 memory controller as well as the normal DDR2 memory controller. This means you can use AM3 is an AM2+ board but you won't get DDR3 support.


----------



## von kain (Jul 11, 2007)

Darknova said:


> From what I've read, AM3 will be the same core, but have an intergrated DDR3 memory controller as well as the normal DDR2 memory controller. This means you can use AM3 is an AM2+ board but you won't get DDR3 support.



yes but there is any real gain?
from what i remember the am2 was the same it was only add ddr2 support and the bench was  say the diffirence was rubbish


----------



## Atech (Jul 11, 2007)

Darknova said:


> From what I've read, AM3 will be the same core, but have an intergrated DDR3 memory controller as well as the normal DDR2 memory controller. This means you can use AM3 is an AM2+ board but you won't get DDR3 support.


The northbridge is integrated into the K8 and K10, there is no memory controller on the motherboard.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 11, 2007)

Atech said:


> The northbridge is integrated into the K8 and K10, there is no memory controller on the motherboard.



thats what he said the AM3 based chips will have both a DDR2 and DDR3 mem controller and AM2 will only have a DDR2 controller


----------



## DaMulta (Jul 11, 2007)

AMD2+ chips will work in a AM2 board, but will lose some things if it is in a AM2 board.


----------



## Atech (Jul 11, 2007)

Edit: Really sorry, got confused between people.

cdawall please don't reply to my response to someone else's post by saying that you had in fact said what I said in my response to that other person's post. I wasn't saying _you_ had got it wrong, I was saying someone _else_ had got it wrong.

It confuses this old brain.

Edit: Now that change is just confusing too. I give up.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 11, 2007)

Atech said:


> Edit: Really sorry, got confused between people.
> 
> cdawall please don't reply to my response to someone else's post by saying that you had in fact said what I said in my response to that other person's post. I wasn't saying _you_ had got it wrong, I was saying someone _else_ had got it wrong.
> 
> It confuses this old brain.



lol sry


----------



## Darknova (Jul 11, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> AMD2+ chips will work in a AM2 board, but will lose some things if it is in a AM2 board.



Hypertransport 3 and the ability to control the voltages of some of the on-chip parts (ie memory controller)



Atech said:


> yes but there is any real gain?
> from what i remember the am2 was the same it was only add ddr2 support and the bench was say the diffirence was rubbish



Well like all new technologies it takes a while to settle in. Remember when DDR2 was first introduced? there was no gain as the latencies were so high, but now that the latencies are so much lower they outperform DDR in a lot of cases.

Oh, and remember that the K10 is a hugely revised architecture, but until we see some benches we can't say for certain if there will be any gains, on paper atleast the new K10 is better than anything on the market.


----------



## von kain (Jul 14, 2007)

in the paper??? in the paper the hd2xxx should have outperfom the 8800xxx by miles..
i thing that the phenom will be fast but the best on them will be the price like ati..


p.s.intel is a really big company with a lot of money it is easy for them to desorve our reality


----------



## von kain (Jul 14, 2007)

i find this on the www.atiteam.com

http://www.realworldbenchmarks.com/article.php?cat=&id=59


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 14, 2007)

von kain said:


> yes but there is any real gain?
> from what i remember the am2 was the same it was only add ddr2 support and the bench was  say the diffirence was rubbish



http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT051607033728&p=7

I would say we should see an improvement to DDR2 performance.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 14, 2007)

von kain said:


> i find this on the www.atiteam.com
> 
> http://www.realworldbenchmarks.com/article.php?cat=&id=59



they could have mentioned performance... like i dont know how fast the chips rant he game? that would have been nice


----------



## von kain (Jul 14, 2007)

amd says they din't want a bench and we have to respect that ...its still early



p.s. so intel would cought on sleep


----------



## largon (Jul 14, 2007)

Hmmm, I don't see Intel sleeping. Infact they'r quite busy building some revolutionary nasties:
Merom DC 65nm 3Q06 -> Penryn DC 45nm 3Q07 -> Nehalem QC 45nm 3Q-4Q08 -> Nehalem-C 32nm ?Q09 -> Gesher 32nm ?Q10 -> unknown

Unfortunately AMD has a slower pace with conservative architectural evolution: 
Barcelona QC 65nm 4Q07-1Q08 -> Shanghai QC 45nm 3Q-4Q08 -> Fusion 45nm ?Q0? -> unknown

Even if Barcelona beats Merom clock-2-clock there's no way in hell they will beat _Penryn_ in core speed scalability. 
I'd buy AMD products over Intel any day if they just were competitive. But...  

Even worse is that the improvements AM2+ offers makes little sense on desktops: 
 - HT3.0? 
-> No real world gains whatsoever. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch. 

 - electrically split NB/CPU core? 
-> slightly lower power consumption. 

 - Barcelona? 
-> Based on what AMD is saying: Doesn't look good. SpecFP and SpecInt comparisons don't make sense since even normal K8 beats Merom in those synthetic benches.


----------



## von kain (Jul 16, 2007)

please allow me to disagree the Barcelona is very good on papers as hard as it is it's still on papers but the amd have let us down before.

for me the worst think happend was the buying of ati after that amd was to snob to be innovating and was have a lot of balls in the air.


p.s. but none on their pant's


----------



## largon (Jul 17, 2007)

> phenom not so far away..


Giuseppe Amato (EMEA Sales & Marketing Technical Director @ AMD) shed some light on Barcelona and Phenom release dates in an interview by _Hardware Upgrade_[/I]. 





> Opteron release date (...) is in September (...) the *first samples* of Phenom FX CPUs will be available by the end of the year, while the remaining versions of the family will arrive by March 2008.



btw,
What do you mean by saying "Barcelona is very good on papers"? 
Would you like to post a small compilation of all the Barcelona's performance numbers released?


----------



## von kain (Jul 17, 2007)

as you can read when dark nova say that in papers is faster i also disagreed but after i see most of spec i see that it should be fast.but still on papers.

this is one nice feature http://www.amd.com/gb-uk/Processors/SellAMDProducts/0,,30_177_15019,00.html

read and this http://www.amd.com/gb-uk/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~117412,00.html
 "Delivering The Ultimate Visual Experience™ for Desktop and Mobile Platforms”). AMD expects true quad-core and dual-core AMD Phenom-based desktop systems will ship in the second half of 2007."


p.s. this does't mean that thay deliver them on time


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 17, 2007)

largon said:


> btw,
> What do you mean by saying "Barcelona is very good on papers"?
> Would you like to post a small compilation of all the Barcelona's performance numbers released?




"Released" numbers really are irrelevant at this point, until enthusiasts have time to get them in their hands and torture them with final specc'ed chips. Giving AMD this much time allows a lot of room for changes.

what he means by "is good on paper" means the released changes and enhancements to the core most definatly suggest this CPU has a lot more in it than the previously "released" benchmarks reveal. If you read through what AMD has shown about the internal workings of the CPU, you too would see there should be a very significant performance difference between a K8 and a K10, specifically when it comes to memory, cache, and floating point performance. (And virtualization! NPT! Those of us that use VT a lot will love this 8) )


----------



## kwchang007 (Jul 17, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> "Released" numbers really are irrelevant at this point, until enthusiasts have time to get them in their hands and torture them with final specc'ed chips. Giving AMD this much time allows a lot of room for changes.
> 
> what he means by "is good on paper" means the released changes and enhancements to the core most definatly suggest this CPU has a lot more in it than the previously "released" benchmarks reveal. If you read through what AMD has shown about the internal workings of the CPU, you too would see there should be a very significant performance difference between a K8 and a K10, specifically when it comes to memory, cache, and floating point performance.



Doesn't the current AMD (K8 right?) excel in floating point compared to core 2 (maybe that was different type of process...idk)?  I would much rather see AMD kick it up where Intel beats it though.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 17, 2007)

kwchang007 said:


> Doesn't the current AMD (K8 right?) excel in floating point compared to core 2 (maybe that was different type of process...idk)?  I would much rather see AMD kick it up where Intel beats it though.



Actually the core 2 picked up FPU performance a ton in comparison to the P4, which is one of the reasons the core 2 duo is so hard to compete with, but they're adding a lot of juice to the k10's FPU.

But yeah, AMD's have naturally been quite a bit more powerful in the FPU department than ALU. This was because Intel used dual double clocked ALU's in the P4. 3ghz p4 would have 2 6ghz ALU's working full time, and with SSE/SSE2, and a long pipeline, it really paid off when it came to ALU stuff. 

UT2k3 benchmarks show the big picture of FPU performance  The AXP stomped on a P4 so badly it wasn't even funny- because the game had so much FPU in the engine.


Returning to a shorter pipeline in the core 2 duo gives you a FPU advantage, because a mispredict doesn't send you flushing all *31* stages of the CPU.


----------



## kwchang007 (Jul 17, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Actually the core 2 picked up FPU performance a ton in comparison to the P4, which is one of the reasons the core 2 duo is so hard to compete with, but they're adding a lot of juice to the k10's FPU.
> 
> But yeah, AMD's have naturally been quite a bit more powerful in the FPU department than ALU. This was because Intel used dual double clocked ALU's in the P4. 3ghz p4 would have 2 6ghz ALU's working full time, and with SSE/SSE2, and a long pipeline, it really paid off when it came to ALU stuff.
> 
> ...



Yeah, I remember p4 being able to compete against A XP in things like video encoding, but getting killed in everything where it's SSE advantage didn't pay off.  

Speaking of pipelines, how long is K10's pipeline supposed to be?  Also, what clock speeds do they expect to release, if K10 can beat Core 2 by 10% clock for clock, but Core 2 can clock 15% over K10...


----------



## cdawall (Jul 17, 2007)

kwchang007 said:


> Yeah, I remember p4 being able to compete against A XP in things like video encoding, but getting killed in everything where it's SSE advantage didn't pay off.
> 
> Speaking of pipelines, how long is K10's pipeline supposed to be?  Also, what clock speeds do they expect to release, if K10 can beat Core 2 by 10% clock for clock, but Core 2 can clock 15% over K10...



i think i read somewhere that the FX chips would go up to 2.4-2.8ghz not sure though but if that is right it would well out perform the C2D which only go up to 2.66ghz


----------



## kwchang007 (Jul 17, 2007)

cdawall said:


> i think i read somewhere that the FX chips would go up to 2.4-2.8ghz not sure though but if that is right it would well out perform the C2D which only go up to 2.66ghz



hmmm i bet you intel's just holding a 3ghz quad core up their sleeve (but it'd have to have a good cooler...)


----------



## cdawall (Jul 17, 2007)

kwchang007 said:


> hmmm i bet you intel's just holding a 3ghz quad core up their sleeve (but it'd have to have a good cooler...)



no doubt can you say solid copper cooler


----------



## von kain (Jul 17, 2007)

from this point what i can say is that the amd will make a bad move if the only intension is to beat c2d then i thing the game is over if it is to beat penryn again game is over ,my thought is to make a computer for a new decade not just a c2d competitor....

as for tech facts the c2q isn't a real 4 core cpu is more a 2 c2d in one die,but the new intel cpu gonna have something that amd never thought and this is a enormous l2 you see amd tries is to cut the l2 for cost purposes instead of add some more, the phenom has a 512 per core which isn't much when some penryn  gonna have more than 6mb per core http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/17/upcoming-45nm-xeon-processors-from-intel/

i will give some time in amd to buy something they have alot of financial problems so i think that something really good gonna comes out because they don't have the luxury  of a failure 
but still i thing phenoms are just a c2d competitor and not a c2d killer


p.s. some times i wish i am wrong.......


----------



## cdawall (Jul 17, 2007)

yeah but if you, looks at the way the current chips perform with the 512k cache vs the 1mb cache the difference is very little and makes chips very cheap. Intel chips on the other hand address the cache differently and seem to use it A LOT more look at the old prescott celeron with a 256k cache vs a p4 prescott with a 1mb cache the 1m cach KILLS the 256k, but the same comparison with a 256k sempron and 1m a64 the difference is tiny. honestly AMDs design addresses the RAM more than the cache and because of the much lower lats it is able to make up for the lower cache restrictions.


----------



## Atech (Jul 17, 2007)

von kain said:


> as for tech facts the c2q isn't a real 4 core cpu is more a 2 c2d in one die,but the new intel cpu gonna have something that amd never thought and this is a enormous l2 you see amd tries is to cut the l2 for cost purposes instead of add some more, the phenom has a 512 per core which isn't much when some penryn  gonna have more than 6mb per core


Meh, I'll take more execution units over a ridiculous amount of cache. Rename registers, too.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 17, 2007)

von kain said:


> as for tech facts the c2q isn't a real 4 core cpu is more a 2 c2d in one die,but the new intel cpu gonna have something that amd never thought and this is a enormous l2 you see amd tries is to cut the l2 for cost purposes instead of add some more, the phenom has a 512 per core which isn't much when some penryn  gonna have more than 6mb per core http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/17/upcoming-45nm-xeon-processors-from-intel/
> .




Yes, they cut L2 because a lot of times it will simply prove un necessary to provide adequate performance and trimming the fat is very justified.

Just beefing L2 on a C2duo will not solve performance issues magically.

However, the K10 just saying "512k per core is small" is ignorant. AMD *DOUBLED* l1 cache amount, which will absolutely fly. And then they are giving each core its 512kb personal L2 which was enough for a good bit of performance in venices.  They also doubled the L1 cache width to 256bit.

L3 is going to become the "big cache" so both CPU's can share it. Its very important to note, AMD is changing the basic "path" of L1, L2, instead opting for a L1, L2, and a -shared- L3.. This should greatly show when it comes to multitasking. If CPU needs a certain set of data from thread x, it can get it.


----------



## von kain (Jul 18, 2007)

don't know if it is new or old but i found a phenom pic














p.s. no i don't know where or when i found it....


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 18, 2007)

More detail and a better pic found here..

http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT051607033728&p=8


----------



## largon (Jul 18, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> AMD *DOUBLED* l1 cache amount, which will absolutely fly.


No they didn't. Look again.  
Doubling the L1 bus width along with doubled instruction fetch should yield some level of execution rate increase tho.


----------



## von kain (Jul 18, 2007)

very nice







p.s. the Barcelona has a real quad core architecture


----------



## largon (Jul 18, 2007)

A native design doesn't really make much difference performance wise as can be seen from current quadcores from Intel; a 1GHz FSB is perfectly enough for any required intercore data transfers between the two dies with only a neglible performance hit. A native design will naturally make data transfers faster but manufacturing a large monolithic die is much more expensive to fabricate due to yield issues. A multichip solution like Core 2 Quad is a perfectly viable approach and allows easier and more efficient manufacturing due to much smaller die sizes allowing low end user costs. 

No matter what level of performance K10 will put on the table, one thing is clear: K10 cannot compete Intel's QC offerings price-wise.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 18, 2007)

largon said:


> No matter what level of performance K10 will put on the table, one thing is clear: K10 cannot compete Intel's QC offerings price-wise.



see the same thing could have been said about the native dual cores but the price dropped to a lower than C2D price eventually. in short yeah at the beginning the AMDs will cost more but will eventually drop like all there chips do oh and they also had a multicore sempron planned and that will be one cheap/fast chip


----------



## largon (Jul 18, 2007)

> (...) they also had a multicore sempron planned (...)


There's only one quad part coming and that's Agena. Rest of the family are either duals or singles; Kuma (DC with L3), Rana (DC, no L3) and Spica (SC no L3).


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 18, 2007)

largon said:


> There's only one quad part coming and that's Agena. Rest of the family are either duals or singles; Kuma (DC with L3), Rana (DC, no L3) and Spica (SC no L3).



mmmm dual core sempron...  if L3 is all they cut, that could be a very very nice CPU.

Conroe celerons are already showing their worth.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 19, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> mmmm dual core sempron...  if L3 is all they cut, that could be a very very nice CPU.
> 
> Conroe celerons are already showing their worth.



as long as they oc like the current AM2 ones ill be happy with one 3ghz on a $30cpu is insane

found an unlock eng. sample pick of the celly conroe chips




hope these are supported by via P4M800 chipset cause i wanna get one for my sister LGA775 system to replace here celly 351 (only got a measly 4.2ghz after oc)


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 19, 2007)

cdawall said:


> as long as they oc like the current AM2 ones ill be happy with one 3ghz on a $30cpu is insane
> 
> found an unlock eng. sample pick of the celly conroe chips
> 
> ...



psh thats nothing.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=148382

3160mhz.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 20, 2007)

3540mhz beat you 
http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/2170/3540cellyqj0.jpg
thats an unfair test to start the old school FX-57 vs brand new celeron w/ DDR2 lol next we can compare it to an AXP on SDRAM


http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=210648
4ghz stock aircooled, vcore limited 1.68-1.7v :/






-106°C under 2 stage cascade  (evap temp)

cooling less it was around 80°C idle and 100°C full (core temp)


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 20, 2007)

cdawall said:


> 3540mhz beat you
> http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/2170/3540cellyqj0.jpg
> thats an unfair test to start the old school FX-57 vs brand new celeron w/ DDR2 lol next we can compare it to an AXP on SDRAM



My point wasn't to compare it to an FX, my point was that it clocks really really high.

The fact is just wtfpwns an FX is just gravy.


----------



## von kain (Jul 20, 2007)

when i was starting this post was just tu put facts about phenoms.....






p.s. i thing that the overclock of the celleron is the least that i care comparing with phenoms


----------



## von kain (Jul 20, 2007)

this is an asus mobo for the phenoms....
















p.s. i thought that the new chipsets from ati  was crossfire.........


----------



## Atech (Jul 20, 2007)

von kain said:


> this is an asus mobo for the phenoms....


/drooool

I'm a sucker for heatpipes ...

Though I hope they release another motherboard like the Striker Extreme, with the heatpipe completely surrounding the cpu socket by the time I get an Agena


----------



## largon (Jul 20, 2007)

Me on the other hand, dislike heatpipes. 
I always watercool the chipset so all these clunky heatpipe contraptions come out first. 


			
				von kain said:
			
		

> p.s. i thought that the new chipsets from ati was crossfire.........


Umm... 
Yes, RD790 is a Crossfire chipset. Why?


----------



## cdawall (Jul 21, 2007)

Atech said:


> /drooool
> 
> I'm a sucker for heatpipes ...
> 
> Though I hope they release another motherboard like the Striker Extreme, with the heatpipe completely surrounding the cpu socket by the time I get an Agena



now if they could just fix the crappy BIOS that gives shit control to the vcore we would all be happy


----------



## von kain (Oct 13, 2007)

largon said:


> Me on the other hand, dislike heatpipes.
> 
> Yes, RD790 is a Crossfire chipset. Why?



in the screen it says m2n32 "sli" premium


----------



## von kain (Nov 2, 2007)

i thing now is the time to say not far away ... it is just 17 days away....


----------



## zekrahminator (Nov 2, 2007)

NVIDIA has quite the operation going on...AMD makes a new processor, and NVIDIA makes the chipset that runs it.


----------



## von kain (Nov 2, 2007)

i really don't thing amd see any competition on the chipset market with nvidia rather than the intel i will say which is the biggest(baddest) competitor and as you can say the enemy of my enemy is a friend


----------

