Largest Performance Gain

Status
Not open for further replies.
the only way to know if something is better is to wait till it comes out and see tests and benchmarks

True,

But many AMD fanboys in the forum claim that K10 is going to beat Conroe with any proof, just like ATI fanboys who claimed that R600 is going to be two times faster than G80.

And penryn is going to be released after few months after K10 comes out. So we should compare it to Penryn, not Conroe

how can we compare penryn to k10 if we're not supposed to compare things that are not out yet? im confused...

Just reread my post, I said that it was my feeling, I didn't say it will beat k10
 
You can see here a benchmark test done sometime on 2001. At that time intel fastest processor was Pentium 2.0GHz and AMD fastest processor was AMD Athlon 1.4GHz

LOL. The 2000+ was a 1.6GHz chip. My old rig is still running one. You can't compare apples and oranges.

Besides, you're talking comparing the P4 with AMD's old chips. If you compare comparable chips (2.0/2000+, 3.0/3000+) you would see the difference. And once the 64's hit the scene, the game was over for now.

Intel has finally came out with a viable chip family that can get up and go. AMD has a bit of catching up to do, but I foresee them doing it. Intel has AMD whipped with money, research, marketing, and distribution, but AMD hangs in there, making the big boy stay on his toes.
 
Anyway, I have a strong feeling that Penryn will kick AMD's ***.
I don't think it will. The architecture changes for K10 look very solid. Penryn hasn't got a lot of change, apart from a die shrink.

I read some where that Intel is going to release Penryn on Q4 2007, just 1 or 2 months after AMD releases K10
I think K10 will be released in June. That's further apart than 1-2 months.

Pentium E2xxx will be released on June 3rd, after intel release this processor, it is going to be the best processor for price/performance.

Note: Pentium E2xxx is just like Core 2 Duo E4xxx with half the cache
And K10 will be released sometime close to then, too.



Not true

You can see here a benchmark test done sometime on 2001. At that time intel fastest processor was Pentium 2.0GHz and AMD fastest processor was AMD Athlon 1.4GHz
The Tech Report - Intel's Pentium 4 2GHz processor - Page 5

Pentium 4 kicked AMD *** in all benchmarks.

...........

And even though the newer Athlon64 beats Pentium 4 in gaming (only single threaded games)
Not just the new ones. Besides, it's not like there were any multi-threaded games out then. Come to think of it, what games are multithreaded even now?
That list will be very short.

Pentium 4 beats Athlon64 by far in video editing, mutitasking...

wb-wme.gif



So, it is untrue that Athlon owned intel for years. Those false statements are made by AMD fanboy.
in encoding, yes it did win. But that's about all it won in.
Netburst was inefficient, produced more heat, and used more power. Simply put.

That's comparing apples and oranges. That's two dual core CPU's against a single quad core of a newer generation.

What's it actually comparing, anyway?
is it comparing the 4x4 platform itself? or the CPU's?
 
I don't think it will. The architecture changes for K10 look very solid. Penryn hasn't got a lot of change, apart from a die shrink.

I think K10 will be released in June. That's further apart than 1-2 months.

And K10 will be released sometime close to then, too.



Not just the new ones. Besides, it's not like there were any multi-threaded games out then. Come to think of it, what games are multithreaded even now?
That list will be very short.

in encoding, yes it did win. But that's about all it won in.
Netburst was inefficient, produced more heat, and used more power. Simply put.

That's comparing apples and oranges. That's two dual core CPU's against a single quad core of a newer generation.

What's it actually comparing, anyway?
is it comparing the 4x4 platform itself? or the CPU's?

i was just showing nagasama the benchies he asked for?
 
Penryn hasn't got a lot of change, apart from a die shrink.

It seems that you don't know anything about Penryn

Penryn has 45nm die shrink, more cache memory, SSE4 instructions and many other features

The Tech Report - Intel's Gelsinger reveals new Penryn details



I think K10 will be released in June. That's further apart than 1-2 months.

In wikipedia article it says that Phenom X4 will be released on August

And in this website, it says that Phenom will be released on September or October
The Tech Report - Phenom FX, X4 scheduled for September-October?

From where did you get June ?
 
i was just showing nagasama the benchies he asked for?
I know. But I still don't think you can really make a judgement on 4x4 if you're using entirely different CPU's to benchmark with.

I think it's best to wait for K10; then, compare a K10 quad with 2 K10 dual's in a 4x4 platform.

I do think 4x4 is a solid platform. The problem is the CPU's (K8), which have an aging architecture.
 
lol.. i know nagasama wants to see the basically quad-core to real quad cores.... can't wait for phenom... gonna take advantage on intel... (in dark class room with a flashlight) muahahahahahaha
 
It seems that you don't know anything about Penryn
Why? because I didn't explicitly state all the features it has?

Penryn has 45nm die shrink, more cache memory, SSE4 instructions and many other features

The Tech Report - Intel's Gelsinger reveals new Penryn detail
It's still not near the level of change as K10.
Have you seen what I posted here?:
http://www.techist.com/forums/f78/barcelona-architecture-changes-143544/




In wikipedia article it says that Phenom X4 will be released on August

And in this website, it says that Phenom will be released on September or October
The Tech Report - Phenom FX, X4 scheduled for September-October?

From where did you get June ?
Various sites. I can't remember which ones, but I think theinquirer was one (but not the only one)
 
Barcelona.

Barcelona is a server processor


It's still not near the level of change as K10.
Have you seen what I posted here?:

The only major difference I see is higher HT speed, and the addition of L3 cache.

But I don't see how those changes will make any big difference. L3 cache is usually slower than L2, in other words increasing L2 cache size would be better than adding L3 cache, and thats what intel did with their Penryn.


Why? because I didn't explicitly state all the features it has?

You said in your previous post that "Penryn hasn't got a lot of change", which is not true at all.

Just look at the benchmarks at this website, you can see a comparison between QX6800 and Quad core version of Penryn (Yorkfield)
Welcome to AnandTech.com [ Article: Intel Penryn Performance Preview: The Fastest gets Faster]

In one of those benchmarks tests Yorkfield performed 111% faster than QX6800 !!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom