AMD Phenom FX running

[MeAndTheJews666]

its all about deneb now

[missswanson]

wow 8 cores to watch spiderman.

[Feircejaguar]

listen, this was made/released early last year!, the chip used here was a 65nm post-production/beta model of the Phenom FX, now, its 45nm and a more mature version, not final, but mature, so stop blabing, a little research wont hurt!

[Feircejaguar]

oh and btw, this system was also converting an HD video at the same time...

[yaiknowscrewme]

Iam going spyder all the way..all msi and 4000 series GPU's

[qwertymac93]

msi k9a2 platinum = the best mobo eva.

[Clebertj]

A M D !R U L E Z

[fraction360]

indeed for its price.

[Otacrunk]

Not even for its price. I love AMD CPUs, but they arnt even good bang for your buck anymore, Intel is altogether running them out. But i will still buy AMD, only cuz im not looking for the fastest CPU, my X2 is already fast enough to run Crysis perfectly so the Phenom should be just fine as well.

[crazyladydriver69]

Intel is better if you're going for performance. However, it will cost you a lot of money. AMD however, is MUCH cheaper because you usually dont have to buy a new motherboard to go with your new cpu.

Top of the line amd processors are about as good as mid-top range intel CPUs. AMD makes the most powerful graphics card though. Not Nvidia.

[solitairius]

"AMD Makes the most powerful graphic cards, not nVidia"

*Laughs*

Someone mind telling me why the 8800 Ultra is STILL the fastest single GPU on the market? This is of course, after a whole 2 years since release, and nothing has surpassed it yet.

[crazyladydriver69]

TWO years????? not quite.

I don't remember when the 8000 series came out, but i think it was beginning of 2007.

[solitairius]

No, it was sometime during 2006. My apologies if it's late 2006, but that's still a year and a half unsurpassed single GPU. The others were released during early 2007 with the 8800GT coming mid 2007.

I do agree though, that AMD/ATI make the best value for money products, but by no way the fastest.

ATI have to watch it come the next nVidia series (G100/G200) release. Could be looking at a GFX Card that now has intergrated Physics chips too, thanks too nVidia buying out Aegia

[pimpinout1]

i thought 9800 GX2 was faster..

[solitairius]

And you're right. It is faster, with gains of up to 20-30FPS faster on alot of titles. Only on certain games does the ATI Multi-GPU card get faster performance than the nVidia 9800GX2.

[pimpinout1]

true.

[xxhaloownerxx]

There is no "Better" its all based on opinion, Example, i will say Phenom, because i simply like AMDs cheap, reliable Great processors,plus i already have a AMD mobo. and the AMD phenom is a true quad, unlike many intel models. again all based on opinion, i just like AMD better.

[george15461546]

all of u dont get ur hopes up cause 4 n 8 cores in amd now

i read report dat the amd quad fx got slaughtered in cpu testing bye a

QX6700 2.66 GHz

intel rules

[wootness3000]

Amd= gaming

Intel= everything else

[eggainst]

That was true up until the advent of multi-core CPUs. Now Intel dominates gaming and most other tasks. However, I do think AMD is the better value. I just purchased a Phenom yesterday for a new build.

[qwertymac93]

no, it was true up until the core duo, befor that athlon 64 x2 was the best dual core cpu(compaied to the dual cor epentium, which sucked anyway)

[wootness3000]

Well, I thought that now AMD has a quad that everything would be put into its right place, =)

[runie360]

amd= hardcore gaming

intel=hardcore everyday computing.

[crazyladydriver69]

now that's biased

I really dont see what phenom has over penryn.

45nm is better than 65nm- and the intel has a massive l2 cache.

I still like amd better than the others because you can get everything from them- cpu, gpu, and mobo. that new spider platform looks sweet because you can get all the drivers for it in one package.

[arranmc182]

yeah but Intel need be L2 Cache to do the same as what the AMD chips can because intels are known for having the longer data pipe line

[lowridrtruck]

nm is the amount of transistors on the chip, which only reduces power usage, and can slightly increase speed. However, Intels L2 cache doesnt do shit, when the bottle neck is their 1333FSB, which AMD has surpassed with HT3.0 while having a 3600Mhz bus speed. AMD wins.

[crazyladydriver69]

wow.... nm stands for number of transistors??? no it doesnt, - its the size of the transistors.

man, 45transistors wouldnt do sh1t.

GPU's nowadays have 666million transistors (ati hd3870)

[lowridrtruck]

to be technical. nm means nanometer. 45nm technology means theres more transistors on the chip because yes, they get smaller. More transistors = more power usage. More power usage but still bottlenecked. i explained that below.

[crazyladydriver69]

but it has less power usage per transistor due to the improved process.

you contradicted yourself: "More transistors = more power usage"

"nm is the amount of transistors on the chip, which only reduces power usage"

so according to your reasoning in the first thing i quoted- the current quad cores should use 1000s times more electricity than the old pIII's

[Petronilus]

45nm (45 billionth of a meter) is just expressing how fine the details of the chip circuit is. If a wire on the silicon is 100nm wide you could have 1000 in parallel of them to make the width of a hair (one hair is approx. 100,000nm wide). That translates into potentially more transistors on the same space. If you look at Tom's hardware site, Phenom CPUs are tested slower than Q6600 quite consistently in real usage! And Q6600 G0 overclocks further. AMD is truly behind! Period...

[crazyladydriver69]

But amd is cheap, and as soon as AMD gets 45nm, their unified quadcore architecture will help them out a lot- especially if they increase their cache sizes.

Also, with amd it is easy to get all your drivers in one package- amd gfx, amd mobo, and amd cpu

[Petronilus]

I agree, AMD can get back with a better integrated architecture. If they really get their departments to work together towards a seamlessly optimized architecture it could become an interesting situation. We consumers want competition so I hope AMD will be back with a winning product to push Intel further. Instead of moving to 8 cores I would suggest AMD should make a chip that had 4 AMD CPU cores + 2 ATI graphic cores on one die.

[crazyladydriver69]

at least they should move to 55nm with phenom, just like the HD3000 gfx cards. Next they should be the first to make a dualcore gpu.

[Petronilus]

Perhaps but with the new company structure the ability to integrate graphics and CPU intelectual properties is a true advantage they have. 4 CPU cores + 1 or 2 gfx cores will of course require significant cache and a more complex chip I/O incl. high speed I/O for the RAM - but could help save total system cost.

[solitairius]

Yes, it would save total system cost but AMD would lose bare money on manufacturing, researching and development for this new type of chip. I personally don't recon you could do this, having CPU's and GPU's on the same die. They could of course, make the transit faster on a specific type of Quad, and dedicate 2 CPU's too mainstream duties, and the other 2 dedicated to graphic rendering. but this essentially is what the CPU's already do so..

[evhgl87]

whats really hilarious is intel advertising their puney 1300FSB as mega-transfers per second to make it sound bigger xD

[bass6352]

does the phenom work on am2 motherboards

[buzzin92]

yes it does but not at the required compatibility, you wont get hypertransport 3 with a am2 board, you need an am2+ mobo for full system working

[zytekfan]

I favor AMD, but right now Phenom isn't looking too good.

Hopefully B3 stepping will solve all the problems and bring the clockspeed up and more OCing headroom :)

[dregothic]

Well just an update though. Phenoms "naitive" quad doesn't even beat the Q6600. Can't wait to see what a Q9450 will do.

And for all those who say Intel took the cheap route, look at ther 80 core design. Its a Naitive 80 core CPU(all on one die) that can do the work of 130 CPUs. Yes Intel did go the faster route for Quad core but only to give the people what they wanted a 4 core CPU for 250bucks.

[gunzkevin]

I do favor amd but i have to agree and i would of thought that with the new 700 series of mb's they would of made at least one board compatible with ddr3 but i love the fact at quad graphics cards.

[lollipop2kewl]

You need to let the Phenom mature before attacking it.

[dregothic]

1. Quad graphics sounds great but until there is proof that there is a gain its useless. Its kinda like SLI and CF only give 20-30%. In Crysis SLI 8800Ultras only added 3FPS.

2. I am not attacking Phenom, I just stated a fact. Even the 2.6GHz Phenom doesn't do what they stated it would do and thats 40% better performance than anything Intel has. It doesn't beat a Q6600.

[lollipop2kewl]

The phenoms overclock well and produce low heat, when the L3 bug is fixed they can hit 3.2GHz easily. My buddy and i overclocked a 9600(2.3GHz) to 2.7Ghz with the same temps.

[wererer2]

Don't attack the phenom when theyre motherboards, gpus, and cpu compatibility are way the fuck cheeper than the Q6600 and its component compatibility.

[qwertymac93]

oh hell yeah, an amd system usng am2 sockett and athlon x2 will costa ya $110, and intel mobo with even just a pentium will run you $140, and the pentiums not even dual core like the athlon.

[shaun928]

Why are you comparing a old Pentium with a new quad core Phenom?

Compare a quad core Penryn and AMD's Phenom..

You would be a idiot if you were to buy a Pentium these days.

[qwertymac93]

1) i said ATHLON not phenom

2) yes, pentiums have alwase sucked, but they are the cheapest way to get an intel system tat is dual core.

[shaun928]

lol, even ill admit the that the Intel Pentium e2150 brings shame to the name of intel lmao

[IceAMD]

I'm an AMD-fan.. but you must learn that Phenom is an Athlon with 4 cores.

[qwertymac93]

no it is not, one, they use diferent socketts, two, phenoms are 65nm and are designed for 65nm, and the athlon was designed for 90nm. they use more watts, use the b2 stepping rather then f2, they have 2x the ram per core(so 4mb L2 rather then 1mb L2) and have much faster fsb. and they have hypertransport 3.0 instead of 2.0.

[IceAMD]

It's the same architecture.. not the same speccs. Learn you're just embarrasing yourself.

[qwertymac93]

its not the same architecure! 65nm is part of the architectur you douche, so is L2 cache, AND fsb!

[IceAMD]

Phenom is a pimped Athlon with more cores, just face it - havnt checked architecture? Mail them and ask or check the phenom presentation (.pdf). ohh sry you maybe cant get it..my bad, want to read the deneb presentation? I've got it so plz stop talking like you know anything!

[qwertymac93]

ok dick head, think what you want, its not my fault if you buy a core 2 extreme and then realize that the phenom was a better choice.

[IceAMD]

Who want to buy a c2d? Noone mentioned it. I'm an amd-fan still stick with my athlon 64 (Clawhammer), first 64-bit processor! Waiting ona new architecture.. not an old. Athlon is old as hell, but really good!

[qwertymac93]

the g5 was the first 64 but cpu, the athlon was the first PC 64 bit proccesor.

[ktxed]

G5 is built with IBM's PowerPC architecture (and it's not the first 64-bit processor, enough with apple bullshit aiiight ?) whereas Amd did a great job extending the x86 architecture to 64bit support.

quote from wiki: 1991: MIPS Technologies produces the first 64-bit microprocessor, the R4000 (the third revision of their MIPS RISC architecture).

[qwertymac93]

i ment first consumer 64 bit.

[ktxed]

;-)

[IceAMD]

I'm never going to use Mac anyway. You're right about thay Mac was 5-6 months earlier.

[FORYOUANDMEALWAYS]

65NM (nanometers) is the size of the core YOU MORON !!!

[qwertymac93]

lol, its the size of the transistors, if it were the core you wouldnt even be able to see the freaking cpu.

[ShionUzuki]

Man. Qwertymac. You really are embarrassing yourself. Different process / cache does not equal to different architecture. K10 is just a modified version of K8, with the added SSE4a instructions and L3 cache. They probably redesigned the part for handling communications between different cores to make it more scalable, and the hypertransport interfacing. But the core itself didn't change much.

[qwertymac93]

so what is an architektur change since EVERYTHING that has ever changed for cpus is aparently not an architekture upgrade.

[evhgl87]

an architecture upgrade would be something major. and example would be how the machine code uses the first A0-A1 (1+2=3) address bits to enabe bus enable where A2-31 allows addressing anywhere in the 1Gx 32 memory locations. quad cores use A0-A2 (1+2+4=7), 3 address lines total compared to a dual cores 2address lines at the beginning. also adding one more address line, which would doubel the capactiy in which the processor can address memory segments would be a major architecture change.

[qwertymac93]

ok, to changing that would be an architecture change, thats true, but how can you say that changing the way the two cores communicate, including another level of cache, and moving the parts of the actual die design to reduce the size not an architectural change?

[evhgl87]

if you have a plate with peas, carrots, and steak. and move your peas to your carrots and your carrots to your peas, you havent added any food to it or taken anything away. its still the same ammount. same thing here. =] cache is irevellent when trying to move large ammounts of code at once instantly like in games. thats what paging is for. so no, its not a major architechture change. just their way of making more money and calling a new model. still addresses the same and transfers the same.

[qwertymac93]

yes but the switch to z-ram(or whatever its called) reduces the size of the cache, the new dies are smaller(logic portion, i think at least) amd the cache is of lower latency, its not adding MORE steak, its more like going from a ny strip to a fillet(or Delmonico in the case of the phenom vs athlon) sorry, i guess I'm not as good with analogies as you.

[MeAndTheJews666]

yea lets see if its realy more than 6mb of a cache and a die shrink..denab will be here in a month i hope it surpasses core 2 in gaming..if it does i will over that shit ..there are rummers that deneb will do over 4ghz on air and be 15 to 20% faster clock for clock to existing phenoms..but that dosnt mean it will be stable at those high overclocks...there being real hush hush like they were with the 4800 series gpu,s...do you smell a come back cuz they been working on this chip for the longest

[buzzin92]

theres one problem with the 80 core die, you dont get the perfect/stable speeds at the same time, if one of those cores are faulty, there all gone

[Nobodyl2k]

9 want to buy a Phenom FX with 3Gb (*4) and an asus motherboard.

Do anybody know what the asus name for nforce 780a Sli is?

[BorkaBonum]

I'm getting a AMD Phenom X4 at 2,2GHZ (9300?) and a MSI K9A2 790FX board. Overdrive for 790FX looks more than promising - clocking will be a dream.

[zytekfan]

Yorkfield isn't native quad core. It's still 2 dual core dies on one package.

[stoppedcode12]

Why does "native quad core" matter? Yorkfield will run laps around barcelona because kentsfield can easily beat barcelona today. How the processor is made isn't nearly as important as how it performs

[zytekfan]

the problem with two dual core dies is that the cores communicate via the front side bus, which does create a problem. although it isn't too noticeable during day to day things, only when stressed at the absolute limit will it become obvious of the deficiencies.

with native quad core it is easier to each core to communicate with one another.

nehalem will be the first intel native quad.

[enigma067]

stoppedcode12, what you said blew away with a feather. Understand?

[shaolindreams]

erm guys... Intel releasing Native "true" quadcore too... "Yorksfield".. thou we dont know how they compare against each other as its early days yet.

[nt300]

Same here. I am getting the AMD Phenom X4 CPU

[Makedonce93]

im so buying a AMD quad when released

[golem72002]

FX 91 & in 4X4.

[bollywood2]

Phenom is huge. Go AMD Go!

[radudman]

is AMD's quad core better then intels quad core? im prettey sure it is...

[AlexIsUber]

AMD got true Quad core.

[nt300]

AMD built a Native Quad-Core. Two individual cores on one die, Intel released Double Dual-Core's. They are simply two Dual-Cores glued to a package communicating through a already bottlenecked FSB. This is why Intel jacked up the L2 cache, to limit the FSB bottleneck.

Intel took the easy route just to release them before AMD. AMD took the innovative & technological route to release a product which should be well worth the money.

[kithylin]

Comppletely correct, go through google images and look for "die shots" of the DIE-chip level. you can see that the intel quad cores designed with each 2 cores sharing one cache bank, and for 2 cores to talk to the other 2 cores, they have to first talk to the chipset, way out on the motherboard. Amd's quad core on the other hand, each core has it's own die, on-chip memory controller, and a 2000mhz inter-connect on-chip. Anyone can see this is vastly superior to anything else on the market.

[zytekfan]

it is. it's substantially faster.

yes i know i am going to get the barrage of intel fanbois.

[propaintballa]

its yorkfield