Legit Reviews

The guys over at OC.COM.TW have a 2GHz Phenom in house and have posted benchmark numbers on it... The results are so-so... I think this is on the X4 GP 9000, which will be 2.0GHz.

Well, I just took the Phenom numbers from that site and plugged them into the chart I did on my last CPU test... They used 2GB of memory on Windows XP and I used 4GB of memory on Windows Vista 64-bit, so these results should be taken with a grian of salt... I wonder if the Phenom 2.0GHz numbers are right... If so, AMD is in trouble.

Well you already know the answer to that one seeing as you have a Phenom, care to share? or atleast share when the NDA is up?

HONkUS wrote:or atleast share when the NDA is up?

How long are you a member here? Of course you'll get the numbers.....

Waiting for results on a 790 chipset and at higher frequency before making any conclusions ;)

Zertz wrote:Waiting for results on a 790 chipset and at higher frequency before making any conclusions ;)

well you could roughly estimate the difference between 2.0Ghz and 2.4GHz and you'd get 110.4 seconds on the 2.4GHz processor.

2.0GHz - 138 seconds
2.2Ghz - ~124 seconds
2.4Ghz - ~110 seconds

It also means 68s at 3ghz

Ok, I know that might be expecting alot, but hopefully they are atleast as fat as C2Q.

Zertz wrote:It also means 68s at 3ghz

Ok, I know that might be expecting alot, but hopefully they are atleast as fat as C2Q.

Well don't forget Intel has the QX9770 (3.2Ghz at 1600MHz FSB), which is another great Yorkfield processor. It's due out Q1, but something tells me you'll see it much sooner than you'd expect. So, 66 seconds on the 3.0GHz 1333MHz QX9650 is about to be bested.

It looks like Phenom is going to be a phlop. How long before the "next" break through by AMD?

Apoptosis wrote:

Zertz wrote:It also means 68s at 3ghz

Ok, I know that might be expecting alot, but hopefully they are atleast as fat as C2Q.

Well don't forget Intel has the QX9770 (3.2Ghz at 1600MHz FSB), which is another great Yorkfield processor. It's due out Q1, but something tells me you'll see it much sooner than you'd expect. So, 66 seconds on the 3.0GHz 1333MHz QX9650 is about to be bested.

Let me guess... you have one sitting on your desk?

Anyways, can't wait to see what AMD's 300$ quad core can do! Especially after being pushed back that much

DX wrote:It looks like Phenom is going to be a phlop. How long before the "next" break through by AMD?

they next break through will be an update to their quadFX platform, so you'll see a dual socket eight core platform... After that... uhh Fusion?

Well we should see "Sand Tiger" (45nm, DDR2, Octal core) by the end of 2008 maybe AMD can learn some lessons from Phenom and make some changes but who knows Intel might be to 32nm by then

Seems like the first cores to hit market always need improvement, I wonder if they do it to recoup research money early, cause later on you know their going to make changes and increase speed. Generally though I never buy the new stuff immediately, let it age for 6 months and get reviews (and price drop).

HONkUS wrote:Well we should see "Sand Tiger" (45nm, DDR2, Octal core) by the end of 2008 maybe AMD can learn some lessons from Phenom and make some changes but who knows Intel might be to 32nm by then

I can't see 8 cores from AMD for a while! My guess would be 2Q 2009.
You right Intel will be at 32nm by then, but they could still make a few mistakes and let AMD in.

well from what ive heard AMD is trying to get their 45nm process up and running ASAP (although it would be nice if they could get 65nm working first) and Sandtiger isn't a native octal core, it appears as if AMD will take a page from Intel's book and make it a dual die "module". If they can get their 45nm process up and running in 2008 then I don't see why Sandtiger in late 2008 is out of the realm of possibility.

If AMD is still around by then that is.