Thread: AMD phenom quad cores....

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

my entire analysis here is that you wuold have to OC your INTEL to 3.7ghz to compete with a STOCK CLOCK Phenom 9600 or 9700.

IF the AMD gets an OC, of even 10-15%, then the Intel 6850 is going to have to OC well over 4.0.

As a price per performance.....the POINT of this post was that the AMD wins, clearly. even if the intel could match the AMD by OCing, the AMD is STILL cheaper by 25% WITHOUT overclocking.

after reading the article that i posted i didnt get the same feeling that you have. the point that came across to me was that intel wins (stock and overclocked) when it comes to gaming. yea, i saw the benchmarks but their recommendation was still intel. POINT

im not an amd hater at all. as a matter of fact i just about bought the phenom 2.2GHz this December but after some research, i learned that its just not good enough yet. the spider platform looks promising.

Originally Posted by MaKe_OuT_33

Its not time to buy phenom yet...if there ever will be a time...i dunno? intel is kicking ass right now.
Below is from this article: http://www.techspot.com/review/84-am...ce/page01.html

Final Thoughts
While initial reports might have scared many away from the Phenom, in reality it's not that bad at all. While it is hard to make a one-sided conclusion about the Phenom's performance, as we just saw the results can greatly vary depending on the program tested, overall it came really close to Intel's Core 2 Quad which we believe to be a phenomenal CPU (no pun intended).

When testing using business applications, the Phenom processors were able to stick with the Core 2 Quad Q6600 for the most part. In fact, the Phenom 9700 and 9900 were considerably faster in a few tests. The Phenom also showed superior processing power for tasks such as compressing files, where even the Phenom 9500 was able to defeat the Q6600.

But performance tended to fluctuate, which was again evident in the gaming benchmarks. While the Phenom processors were all much slower than the Core 2 competition in Unreal Tournament 3, Company of Heroes and Prey, they were able to provide competitive performance in Crysis and F.E.A.R.

Clearly those more interested in gaming are certainly better off with a Core 2 Duo for now, as even the Core 2 Quad processors do not provide a performance advantage to justify the added cost. The Core 2 Duo E8400 has really stirred things up even more for AMD as this new Intel processor features a 6MB L2 cache, operates at 3.0GHz, uses a 1333MHz FSB and is built using a 45nm design process. In other words, you get its incredible performance for just $183.

Furthermore, while the upcoming B3 stepping Phenom processors are still on the back burner, Intel is preparing to unload the new 45nm quad-core processors just before the B3-revised Phenoms arrive. If AMD thought they were sailing through rough seas at the moment, we fear things could even get worse given Intel’s aggressive pricing strategy for the upcoming 45nm processors.

The good news is that we have seen a great deal of potential from the AMD Phenom processors, and with a little more work they could become great alternatives to the Core 2 competition. For the moment though it almost seems as the Phenom design is a little ahead of its time, with this true quad-core design still waiting for software developers to catch up.

Arguably, the most technologically advanced game on the planet right now is Crysis, and this just so happened to be a game where the Phenom processors did quite well. Granted they did not wipe the floor with the Core 2 Quad Q6600, but at the very least provided competitive results.

But if today was all that mattered and we saw enthusiasts as the prominent target market for these processors, what we see hurting the value of these new Phenom processors is their lack of overclocking headroom. The retail Phenom 9500 and 9600 CPUs that we purchased really struggle to squeeze another 200MHz out, while the Phenom 9900 engineering sample could hit 3000MHz thanks to an unlocked multiplier. So with limited overclocking headroom the Phenom loses a lot of points in terms of value, as the average Core 2 processor is happy to squeeze out another 1000MHz+ on top of the default operating frequency.

check the link. or just read the final thoughts...the link is more interesting though

im just speaking of the chips available now. they say the current phenoms have not much overclock headroom...200MHz. yea, i saw that it wasa 45nm tech dual core chip and not the 6850. hell, if i were buying right now id probably go with the wolfdale. runs cooler. overclocks great on stock voltage. we are gamers and any of the games offered at ttp will run best on the dual core. thats what it says.

Intel has made overclocking an easy reality and not so much of a dream anymore. If you are looking at it from a price performance difference and keeping it stock, then sure go for the phenom. But I am a diehard overclocker. I never look at a chip for its base freq. I like to buy something cheaper and get alot more performance out of it.. My e4300 at 3.2 is just as fast as a $279 6850 ( at stock ) . And it only cost me $129... But the 6850 has alot more headroom than my 4300 does. Im just cheap . And I know that the new amd's are not overclocking very well if at all.. A buddy of mine has a brand new phenom and guess what? He is selling it to get an Intel e8400. Why? because it will only overclock about 200 mhz. The same goes for the AM2 5200,5600,6000 .. My old x2 3800 at 3.0ghz murdered all of those am2 chips in benchies.. I have yet to see anyone with an amd system on here getting over 10k in 3dmark06.. My AMD system with an 8800GT broke 10 and was on the verge of hitting 11k.

Dont me wrong im not a fanboy of either platform.. I am a fanboy of performance and what I can get out of something. If amd comes out with a chip that will overclock and hang with the Intel's then I would probably jump ship again.
Just a slight overclock of an intel will crush the phenom.. 27% oc to beat one is childs play. Hell you can do that with the stock cooler.

What is not true? link to my old 06 score .. http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3615460
I am in no way trying to be smart ass or over step my boundaries.. I am new here yes. But I have put in a lot of time and effort to learn what I know .. I have two kids one is 8 and one is 17 ( yeah im an old fart ).. I have been building pc's for a long long time. And over clocking them for just as long. I just want to share what I know to other people. And that is with a little time and reading, overclocking is fun and very easy.

And nothing I have posted in this thread is false.

Overclocking is overrated? I hit 10k on a chip i paid $60 ( sckt 939 )bucks for? took it from 2.0 ghz to 3.0..
And now I am about to hit 14k with a chip I paid $130 for? Yeah overrated..

If you think over clocking is overrated then I encourage you to join www.blazingpc.com and hang out with some world record setting overclockers. And you might even learn a little something along the way