AMD K10 Architecture - technical explanation by InsideHW

Status
Not open for further replies.
LOL locked!!

I guess they want people spending more for the faster chips

They just threw AMD a bone here... I mean most people buy Core 2 Duo/Quad because of its high performance when OC'ed... without that, AMD has the edge
 
Yea, thats why intel won't do it. They are too smart, most people don't go out and buy those $1,000 processors... Most people go for the $450-lower range of processors. If Intel did this they would just be losing business until they realized why no one was buying the **** cheap nehalems.
 
I have heard that Nehalem is having some difficulty, specifically in getting clock speeds up, and being able to manufacture them with good yields.

Maybe you heard that from fudzilla or The inquire

I'm %100 sure that Nehalem is going to be a lot faster than. The difference between Phenom 65nm and Phenom 45nm is just like the difference between 65nm C2Q and 45nm C2Q. The current 65nm C2Q are better and have better performance per watt than 65nm phenom. So, I highly doubt the 45nm Phenom will be able beat 45nm C2Q

While Nehalem is going to be based on a new architecture and it supposed to be faster than 45nm C2Q which is already better than 45nm Phenom (I think).

In addition, Intel nowadays have great products for budget market that can compete with AMD even if you don't overclock. Just look at E2180 and E7200
they are great product for the price !

And Q6600 is one of greatest quad core for the price. Q6600 is cheaper and consume less power than Phenom 9850. Q6600 has better performance per $ and better performance per watt. And I'm not attacking AMD because what I said is a fact
 
yeah I heard overclocking will be impossible on Nehalems....meaning poo on Intel and back to AMD.

Of course a simple q6600 at 3.6ghz will still be plenty powerful for some time to come.
 
Maybe you heard that from fudzilla or The inquire
huh.
Yes, it might not be reliable. I don't know if it is. And I even said that it's just a rumor so far.
But even so, it could be true. We don't know.

I'm %100 sure that Nehalem is going to be a lot faster than.
Well, we'll see when it comes out.

The difference between Phenom 65nm and Phenom 45nm is just like the difference between 65nm C2Q and 45nm C2Q. The current 65nm C2Q are better and have better performance per watt than 65nm phenom.
I wouldn't be so sure about that, now that Phenom is clocking past 3GHZ. It does scale well with clock speeds.

While Nehalem is going to be based on a new architecture and it supposed to be faster than 45nm C2Q which is already better than 45nm Phenom (I think).
Newer architectures may not always equal better performance.
All we've got now is speculation as to how they're going to perform.

In addition, Intel nowadays have great products for budget market that can compete with AMD even if you don't overclock. Just look at E2180 and E7200
they are great product for the price !
Yeah, and so are X2's, and the X3's, and the low power Phenom's, and even Sempron LE's.
I also think that Via is starting to really get things together with their new Isaiah architecture.

And Q6600 is one of greatest quad core for the price. Q6600 is cheaper and consume less power than Phenom 9850. Q6600 has better performance per $ and better performance per watt. And I'm not attacking AMD because what I said is a fact
Well I disagree that it is.
If you're talking about media encoding, Q6600 will win.
But, that's not something I do a lot of. I play games, and Phenom does really well there.
Even when I do encode media, I'm far less worried about its speed than in games.

A lot of the time, the 9850 BE will win in game benchmarks when clocked over 3GHZ (which can be done on 9850's with little or sometimes no voltage increase) compared to a Q6600 at the same clock speeds.

Now, even if the Q6600 does get a higher overall frame rate, there are a lot of people (high-end reviewers) who say that Phenom systems seem smoother
I'm not sure if it's something that is quantifiable. And there are some discussions on XtremeSystems over it, if you want to check on it.
 
Newer architectures may not always equal better performance.
All we've got now is speculation as to how they're going to perform.

I don't think intel will make a new architecture that performs worse that its current one

Nehalem is a native quad core, it has integrated memory controller, Quickpath will replace FSB and it will have 8MB L3 cache. In addition, to that Nehalem supports hyper threading and SSE4.2. Also, those improvements are supposed to make Nehalem much better than Yorkfeild


And Q6600 is one of greatest quad core for the price. Q6600 is cheaper and consume less power than Phenom 9850. Q6600 has better performance per $ and better performance per watt. And I'm not attacking AMD because what I said is a fact

Well I disagree that it is.

You disagree that Q6600 has better performance per $ and watt ? Because thats what I said

Q6600 is cheaper than Phenom 9850 in most places, please check the price at newegg. Q6600 cost $215 while 9850 cost $235

So, even if we assume that Q6600 performs on par with Phenom 9850, Q6600 would still have better performance per $, but Q6600 performs better overall anyway

And from here you can check the power consumption
bit-tech.net | AMD Phenom X4 9850, 9750 and 9550
Legit Reviews - AMD Phenom X4 9850 Processor Review - B3 Stepping - Power Consumption and Final Thoughts
AMD's Phenom X4 9750 and 9850 processors - The Tech Report - Page 15

This proves ^^ that Q6600 consume less power, even though Intel motherboards consume more power because of the south and north bridge. If they compare processor alone vs processor alone, the difference is even greater.

So, as you see Q6600 has better performance per watt and better performance per $ than Phenom 9850
 
I don't think intel will make a new architecture that performs worse that its current one
maybe not worse, but maybe not better.
Remember Netburst?

Nehalem is a native quad core, it has integrated memory controller, Quickpath will replace FSB and it will have 8MB L3 cache. In addition, to that Nehalem supports hyper threading and SSE4.2. Also, those improvements are supposed to make Nehalem much better than Yorkfeild
Will it clock high? will the IMC actually perform like it should and willl it give it a real world benifit?
It is just speculation.

I have heard that they have had some difficulty in getting clock speeds up. Maybe that turns out to be false, maybe it won't.
Maybe Intel will lock their processors from overclocking.

You disagree that Q6600 has better performance per $ and watt ? Because thats what I said
I think I misread you: I don't think Q6600 always has better performance.

I think there is merit in the Phenom being smoother in games. And that's something that is important to me.

On top of that, it isn't an Intel processor.
Now, I'm not attacking Core 2's performance. I just don't like Intel as a business.
 
Quickpath... that reminds me a lot of something... I think its called HyperTransport... lol..

but knowing Intel, they probably will lock Nehalem just so people buy the higher end ones and give them more money... (also Apokalipse you should post those Phenom 9850 beating Intel C2Q Q6600 Benchmarks you posted somewhere else [if you know what I mean])
 
Locking Nehalem from overclocking would be a stupid move on Intel's part. One of the reasons Core 2 has been such a success is their impressive overclocking ability.

As far as the Phenom 9850 vs q6600, even if the Phenom has better stock performance you have to take into account the Q6600 is a great overclocker and can easily reach 3.6 ghz with air cooling.
 
True... but if you already have an AM2 Board + CPU, and looking for a quick upgrade, the Phenom is your only path to upgrade (unless you want to buy a whole new board + CPU)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom