2 Phenom reviews

[baron5]

hrmm in reguards to 3.6 on air w/ little or no extra voltage.. that is a bold faced lie!!! lol

and i must say.. i'm sad that its come to this.. but i'm happy to say.. i went w/ the right cpu

do you want me to post some cpu-z?

 

[Apokalipse]

i did not assume that they wouldnt get to 3.5GHz+ i am just saying even if a phenom gets stable at 3GHz a q6600 can reach 3.5GHz relatively easy.

how about you compare apples and apples?
how do you know Phenom's won't get 3.5GHZ on air?

I'll actually be honest. I have sometimes considered getting a Core 2 system.
But, with the way Intel fanboys have been drumming on, it's turned me away.

Plus, it's just nice to see a company so much smaller still fighting in the face of such a big company like Intel.

That, and their CPU's really aren't that bad. Really.
Phenom's really aren't bad processors. Even if Intel fanboys will tell you otherwise.

 

[baron5]

how about you compare apples and apples?
how do you know Phenom's won't get 3.5GHZ on air?

i dont and never said they wouldnt, but if there a fairly equal now then i assume that if both are running at 3.5GHz the margin would not be stretched too far either way.

 

[Apokalipse]

i dont and never said they did, but if there a fairly equal now then i assume that if both are running at 3.5GHz the margin would not be stretched too far either way.

exactly.

Which contradicts the idea of a "fair beating"
if you're talking about actual performance difference, that is.

 

[baron5]

exactly.

Which contradicts the idea of a "fair beating"
if you're talking about actual performance difference, that is.

my orignal point was that by 'fair beating' not in performance as i said, but i my eyes an old cpu beating a new cpu seems like quite an achievement to me.

 

[Apokalipse]

my orignal point was that by 'fair beating' not in performance as i said

But what's the point of making a judgement such as that, if it's not based on actual performance difference?

but i my eyes an old cpu beating a new cpu seems like quite an achievement to me.

Considering that Intel has much, much more resources than AMD?
It's not earth shattering by any means.

But the fact is, the Phenoms do perform well, irrespective of what Intel fanboys will tell you.

 

[Merkwürdigeliebe]

Wow, not surprisingly, this thread blew up really fast. I've read the first 4 pages to get an update.

Anyway, that's a real shame. Not too long ago I was bashing AMD when some early "iffy" benches came out, but my speculations have proven to be correct.

I mean, this is really bad. What many people have to consider is that AMD's product came MUCH later than Intel's Core 2 Quad, and that AMD touted it to be much more superior too. I mean, how embarrassing is it for a "True-Quad" to get beaten by the fake "Dual-Core x 2" quad?

I guess I know what kind of setup I'll be getting then. Well, at least Intel has some competition now, which means even lower prices, because people making new builds might still go the AMD route if they want a Quad for cheap (9500/9600) or they may want more than a dual-core and might go for a tri-core, and people loyal to AMD will still support them, and I'm sure in real-world performance, most won't really notice that much of a difference if they're not picky. Quad-core is really overkill for a lot of games anyway.

 

[baron5]

But what's the point of making a judgement such as that, if it's not based on actual performance difference?

Considering that Intel has much, much more resources than AMD?
It's not earth shattering by any means.

But the fact is, the Phenoms do perform well, irrespective of what Intel fanboys will tell you.

It doesn't bother me if you don't like my assumption but that is my opinion.

They have lost resources due to their own mistakes and that doesn't mean they cant produce something better than intels old core 2 duo architecture.

i am not and intel fanboy, and would actually like to see the x4's kill all the intels lineup but it seems like they will not surpass intels processors for now...

"Quad-core is really overkill for a lot of games anyway" cept crysis lol

 

[maroon1]

Q6600 not only outperformed 9700, but it outperformed the higher clocked phenom 9900 2.6GHz in most cases

Please check the review from anandtech
AnandTech: AMD's Phenom Unveiled: A Somber Farewell to K8

Q6600 consume less power as well

 

[Apokalipse]

It doesn't bother me if you don't like my assumption but that is my opinion.

I don't care what opinion you have. But you made an assumption about them (being bad), and you posted it here, in a thread where AMD fans are telling people that they don't like people beating down AMD processors.

They have lost resources due to their own mistakes and that doesn't mean they cant produce something better than intels old core 2 duo architecture.

But it's very hard work. Especially when, even before you lost resources, the other company (Intel) still has far far more resources anyway.

i am not and intel fanboy, and would actually like to see the x4's kill all the intels lineup but it seems like they will not surpass intels processors for now...

Faster models will be released.