KeiI think this is officially the best post in the entire thread and my point exactly...thank you for this. Sadly it'll prolly fall on deaf ears and someone will be throwing mud at you as soon as they're uber fast (wish I had money for the best) machine will load the page up which is exactly .0000413429 seconds faster than an equivalent AMD processor.

K

x2 man.


Hey Marcos (AMDGUY), can you chime in here an explain to them what you told me about the intels and their cache etc etc. I forgot exactly what it was that you told me. Then we can see what other people think about that.

your welcome Kei.

My buddy told me something interesting about intel, which helps them get such great scores on Super Pi. Of course not bashing intel, their cpu's are fast regardless, but maybe can prove a point that nobody sees!!! However he can still be wrong hehe.

my cheap($50) 945g chipset mobo can run Wolfdales aswell...

KeiUmmm...you must be following on a handful (if that) of the Phenoms that are out now because my 3.1Ghz Phenom is faster than your 3.3Ghz 6000+ in nearly every single test you can make up even if I'm running on only two cores. And yes I've done the testing using only two of my four cores, read my thread you'll see the difference. Even people with 3.5-3.6Ghz 6400+ systems realize that if the current Phenom was clocked at 3.2Ghz regularly it would beat the 6400+ in every single test very significantly. If your 6000+ and my Phenom were at the exact same clock (regardless of the clock) I'd leave you for dead.

No offense, but you definately didn't do your research when you made the claim "shitty current quads". And what do you consider low speeds for the Northbridge, yes 1.8Ghz isn't the fastest of all the Phenoms (which makes this even better for the results) but that doesn't make it slow. Also remember on a Phenom we can just turn our speeds up because we have control of all the cpu parameters unlike the Athlon lineup (and yes I've owned those too).

No offense to anyone in this thread but there is only a handful of responses that should even still be listed here as legit responses to the thread, the rest should be deleted or the thread should be locked because it seems as though 90% of the people posting here are only here to throw dirt as opposed to make legit comments useful to anyone.

K

WTF are you talking about the K8s for? I'm specifically talking about the K10 suffering from low NB and L3 clocks. I was saying that if they crank those up on Deneb, those quads will be pretty damn fast, especially compared to the current ones (that are shitty).

And no shit that a new architecture beats the previous gen. K8 is from like '03. I hope the new ones are faster than my chip.

And my post was relevant, even if ranting. The Pi time would be lower with decent clocks. I'm an AMD fanboy ripping AMD. Is that not allowed now or something?

KeiUmmm...you must be following on a handful (if that) of the Phenoms that are out now because my 3.1Ghz Phenom is faster than your 3.3Ghz 6000+ in nearly every single test you can make up even if I'm running on only two cores. And yes I've done the testing using only two of my four cores, read my thread you'll see the difference. Even people with 3.5-3.6Ghz 6400+ systems realize that if the current Phenom was clocked at 3.2Ghz regularly it would beat the 6400+ in every single test very significantly. If your 6000+ and my Phenom were at the exact same clock (regardless of the clock) I'd leave you for dead.

No offense, but you definately didn't do your research when you made the claim "shitty current quads". And what do you consider low speeds for the Northbridge, yes 1.8Ghz isn't the fastest of all the Phenoms (which makes this even better for the results) but that doesn't make it slow. Also remember on a Phenom we can just turn our speeds up because we have control of all the cpu parameters unlike the Athlon lineup (and yes I've owned those too).

No offense to anyone in this thread but there is only a handful of responses that should even still be listed here as legit responses to the thread, the rest should be deleted or the thread should be locked because it seems as though 90% of the people posting here are only here to throw dirt as opposed to make legit comments useful to anyone.

K

just to point it again my 9500 phenom at 2.8ghz beats my 5000BE @3.4ghz in every test except single threaded CB10

you all can bitch that phenom is terrible all you want and this release is bad but it shows more increase clock for clock than nahalem is

cdawalljust to point it again my 9500 phenom at 2.8ghz beats my 5000BE @3.4ghz in every test except single threaded CB10

you all can bitch that phenom is terrible all you want and this release is bad but it shows more increase clock for clock than nahalem is

I guess I'll rephrase. K10 sucks ass compared to what it's capable of.

I guess I'll rephrase too since everyone seems so offended, dollar for dollar intel is faster. That's w/o oc (although this is an enthusist forum so I don't know how that argument came up), w/ oc they are faster still. Average user, doesn't make a lick of difference. Anything recent that suits their needs for the best price is the best choice. Enthusist user, intel currently offers more bang for your buck and 9 times out of 10 is the best choice. What I don't understand is why people seem to have such a personal attachment to amd, like it's their best friends company or they're a sales rep or something. They're just another company trying to earn your money.

And this is indeed a nice step up from the last phenoms, I still see no compelling reason to get it though as you get more for your money across the way.

farlex85I guess I'll rephrase too since everyone seems so offended, dollar for dollar intel is faster. That's w/o oc (although this is an enthusist forum so I don't know how that argument came up), w/ oc they are faster still. Average user, doesn't make a lick of difference. Anything recent that suits their needs for the best price is the best choice. Enthusist user, intel currently offers more bang for your buck and 9 times out of 10 is the best choice. What I don't understand is why people seem to have such a personal attachment to amd, like it's their best friends company or they're a sales rep or something. They're just another company trying to earn your money.

It's their personality, so to speak (among many other things :)). The way they do business is like the difference between best lie and newegg.

TheGuruStudIt's their personality, so to speak (among many other things :)). The way they do business is like the difference between best lie and newegg.

Is it? Isn't that just b/c they are currently the underdog? Don't you think they would conduct business differently if they owned the majority of the market share? I see no difference b/t the two other than their current economic situation and the measures taken to keep/change it.

Haha, I like the AMD ripping AMD comment Guru that made me laugh. Haha

Seriously though I'm not beating you over the head I'm saying that you said the current quads are shit, yet they're WAY faster than the previous AMD processors per given clock even when you run the quad on two cores only. That does not in any way qualify as shitty.

I'm just saying put it into perspective versus the rest of AMD's lineup. There is really not point in comparing Intel cpu's versus anything but Intel cpu's and AMD versus AMD until it comes time to buy one then and only then does it make sense (let that soak in for a second, no it's not directed at you I mean everyone).

If AMD made Intel's processors that'd make sense to compare it to older/newer Intel processor, and if Intel made AMD's processors it'd make perfect sense to compare it to older/new AMD processors. But each company is trying to better their own work and in the process try to make the product that will make them the most money not just looking for the best at achieving a certain benchmark performance (though that's nice to have and helps you sell...in both ways not always good).

It's the same with nVidia and ATi right now, for a rather long time nVidia was easily sitting at the fastest end of things so they could charge whatever they wanted because their wasn't anything else that would give a similar or better ratio. Then the 3xxx series came from ATi and they came close to the performance with a much lower price, so people bought it like hotcakes while nVidia still stayed at the fastest level. This next round the 4xxx series is doing the same thing only this time it's just as fast if not faster than the equivalent from nVidia and with a significantly lower cost so ATi was sitting very pretty. This caused nVidia to lower the prices on their things significantly to avoid too much loss of profits.

I think AMD is doing exactly what they need to do to make themselves money which in the end is all their worried about. There aren't enough people in this forum (nor any other enthusiast forum) that will break them or really even dent their pockets much so they focus on making the high, mid and low level processors instead. They don't need an extreme version (the FX's) yet because it won't do a lick of good for them right now except make you guys jump fence again and you don't have enough money for them to care. Else...they'd have done it a long time ago........

It's a smart move indeed, these are significantly faster than what we have now which was significantly faster that what came before so they'll just keep doing it until they don't make money and then move on again. Intel is doing the samething, they could make something faster than what they're making but they don't need to....else they'll make it harder to make money later on.

Why make the 600hp version of your car first and sell 1200 for $500k when you can make the 300hp version and sell 200,000 for $40k, both companies know exactly what they're doing and how to plan out their portfolios.

K

KeiHave you ever got mad because you had to sit and wait for 3 seconds longer for a program to load or lost 7-10 fps in a game when running at 75fps ...prolly not

I get pissed all the time like that :banghead:

I need new hardware :(

TheGuruStudIt's their personality, so to speak (among many other things :)). The way they do business is like the difference between best lie and newegg.

That's a good point it's one of the reasons why I like AMD so much. I've owned Intel machines (still have some) but there is just something about them that never quite got me. Then you go into the business part of it all and it's more of the same.

It's just like when you go to a certain store for something knowing that another business has the samething is closer to you and will get it to you faster...you just prefer the other company more. Everybody has that samething they just don't relate it to what they do, but if you think you'll notice it too. :)

I do not in ANY way deny the speed of Intel's current offerings but it's excess speed that I'm not gonna use or notice at a price that's higher than I'd need to spend anyway so that's just another reason to buy AMD. If I was to buy an Intel product though tomorrow I'd buy both a QX6700 and E8400 because they're both phenominal products from them! Easily my two favorite products they have out right now, I could careless about the uber processors they make even though I can buy them, I don't really care for the lower end processors either but those two I mentioned are fantastic pieces of engineering and very worthy of my dollars.

K

Btw, good to see people are beginning to play along nicely and talk more seriously now too :toast:

farlex85Is it? Isn't that just b/c they are currently the underdog? Don't you think they would conduct business differently if they owned the majority of the market share? I see no difference b/t the two other than their current economic situation and the measures taken to keep/change it.

I can't say for sure, obviously, but google hasn't been evil much, yet (for example). There are a select few (people/businesses) that I trust, no matter their positional dominance. For some reason, I believe they'll always take the high road. I hate almost everyone, so I figure my selective choices can't be that bad haha.

TheGuruStudI get pissed all the time like that :banghead:

I need new hardware :(

:roll::roll::roll:

That's not being mad...that's being an addict haha :slap: You just like a shiny box of "new" doesn't matter how old the old is. haha

K

TheGuruStudI can't say for sure, obviously, but google hasn't been evil much, yet (for example). There are a select few (people/businesses) that I trust, no matter their positional dominance. For some reason, I believe they'll always take the high road. I hate almost everyone, so I figure my selective choices can't be that bad haha.

Hey, everyone does that most just don't recognize/state that they do it. Otherwise everyone would shop at Walmart and Best Buy and nowhere else.

K

Edit:and for that matter they'd all buy Creative sound products too :p

Personal Attachments- User Experiences.

Intel is the same way, just trying to make money and it seems there are many that have a personal attachment to them, so it goes both ways. I don't care if one is faster than the other, its my personal preference, i mean i will recommend something for someone and something different for myself, because i usually tend to have a better understanding of the stuff i work with. I don't try to get people to switch over to one part or the other, sans PSUs, i will try to help them find a solution to a problem. I finally got to see a 4850e cpu in action at work, it was quick, vs the machine an acquaintance put together during the hayday of A64 (939-4600) (2005/2006) as his didn't seem to be any quicker than my current machine. (3200+)

farlex85I guess I'll rephrase too since everyone seems so offended, dollar for dollar intel is faster. That's w/o oc (although this is an enthusist forum so I don't know how that argument came up), w/ oc they are faster still. Average user, doesn't make a lick of difference. Anything recent that suits their needs for the best price is the best choice. Enthusist user, intel currently offers more bang for your buck and 9 times out of 10 is the best choice. What I don't understand is why people seem to have such a personal attachment to amd, like it's their best friends company or they're a sales rep or something. They're just another company trying to earn your money.

KeiEdit:and for that matter they'd all buy Creative sound products too :p

Are you a

That one made me smile big. Creative needs a good

Well I guess whatever works then. I personally don't trust any corporation outside of what kind of product they can provide for me. Too much shady dealings for money (especially w/ so much on the line), and I tend to think the halo effect (seeing someone or something as good b/c of personal, somewhat irrelevant reasons) plays more of a part in company loyalty than anything. But hey like I said, whatever works. :toast:

TheGuruStudAre you a

That one made me smile big. Creative needs a good

Haha, nah but I got jokes. I figured that was the easiest way people would understand the point I was trying to make. And it seems like it worked :D

Every single person on the world does it on something including the fence jumpers but either way isn't bad it's just a personal preference. If someone likes a certain company do what makes you happy, if someone just likes to hop around to have the 'best' of the 'best' (another very relative term as it depends on your view of the word 'best') then keep on hoppin!

Everyone has their own view of good, better, and best so there is really no point in arguing that as we all see differently and always will, even among AMD/AMD and Intel/Intel camps. Another good example is the ATi/AMD 4850 gpu, it's not the fastest video card in the world but it's damn close and costs very little for what it gives. Even buying two of them costs very little and can slaughter any game that's currently out and is more than enough for those to come I'd imagine. I could've bought a 4870, or GT 280, or 4870x2 but the 4850 gives me the performance I need and if I want to add significantly more later on I can just pick up another one. It's a win win, play now, play even better later for cheaper. It just depends on what you want to do...

The 4850, 4870, GT 260, GT 280, 4870x2, and 4850x2 will all play Call of Duty 4 at over 60fps+ on max without breaking a sweat...but only one of them will do it for under $200 and take up little room with no noise. I don't see the extra 20fps as must haves in a game where you can only see 60fps max anyway so I buy the best option to me.

K

to add onto what Kei said, is we shouldn't try to force a bias upon one another as it will not work and cause the opposite to be even more stern on their personal views.

KeiYou've seen a single test and fail to put that into perspective...the Phenoms now are significantly slower than the new models shown here. Those same current Phenoms are competition for Intel today perhaps not the exact speed of some of the Intels but far far far from slow.

Homework assignment for you: Define the word "competition"...then define the word "we"

Forgive me if it seems as thoguh I'm slinging mud at you; just saying choose your words more carefully and check as many facts as you can first. :)
K

back to the Q6600 vs. 9850BE...so they're even, but look at power consumption, and how one is brand new, while the other has been out for over a year...and has already been replaced by a better model--Yorkfield.

Even if Deneb is more energy efficient, overclocks better, and is 10% quicker per clock cycle over the current Phenom, Intel would probably still have a small advantage with Yorkfield, sure. But Nehalem? I don't think 45nm will be a huge breakthrough for AMD, not yet at least. But we always know how bad AMD's first revisions on a new process turn out. Decent, but the second is always a bit better. Hopefully this happens before Nehalem launches.

well how sequencing has been 90nm was AMDs, 65 Intels, i believe 45 to be both companies payday.

Chicken Pattyyour welcome Kei.

My buddy told me something interesting about intel, which helps them get such great scores on Super Pi. Of course not bashing intel, their cpu's are fast regardless, but maybe can prove a point that nobody sees!!! However he can still be wrong hehe.

Well going back to this, from my understanding, Intel's core2's have access to a much larger cache than amd's. If i am not mistaken if an amd dual core has 1024kb of cache only 512 is available to each core, Intel on the other hand can access the complete cache for just one core, I believe that if the application that is being ran is highly optimized for multiple cores the performance gap will be a hole lot narrower.

And well since super PI is not multi threaded this may very well help to some extent even though it is number crunching.


This is not an intel vs amd thing, this is just an observation. :rockout:

AmdguyWell going back to this, from my understanding, Intel's core2's have access to a much larger cache than amd's. If i am not mistaken if an amd dual core has 1024kb of cache only 512 is available to each core, Intel on the other hand can access the complete cache for just one core, I believe that if the application that is being ran is highly optimized for multiple cores the performance gap will be a hole lot narrower.

And well since super PI is not multi threaded this may very well help to some extent even though it is number crunching.


This is not an intel vs amd thing, this is just an observation. :rockout:

Thank you sir. Anybody wishes to chime in on this statement, let us know what you think. Please keep in mind, it is an observation only, not favoring anybody in particular.

TheGuruStudIt doesn't help that the NB and L3 is running at low speeds, just like the shitty, current quads.

If the NB would be jacked up and the L3 ran like cache is supposed to be (full core speed), then superpi time would be fast. Idk wtf their problem is. It's a simple solution and it's not like it can't be done easily.

i think that deneb without L3 cache will bi faster in super PI and cheaperbecouse L3 is slower than CPU clk