|
Uh
there are so many multithreaded apps atm for people who need extra cores. "not using cores very well" is already a thing of the past in everything except probably gaming.
AMD also has that autoclock feature similar to TurboBoost that activates when 3 or less cores are working (can bump up 500MHz apparently)
|
as far as i can tell the X6 will be a strong contender for its price range ($299-320 for a 3.2ghz 6 core thx). it would be a tough choice between the i7 930/860 and the 1090. preliminary benches (from asian markets) show it clocking to 4ghz as easily if not more easily than its quad core predecessors. very exciting stuff!
|
yea this shit is awesome. im studying materials science engineering and seeing the crazy shit they do to get it to 32 nm and beyond is just amazing. its just one of those industries that has the incentive and the knowledge to really keep outdoing itself.
|
On April 26 2010 12:16 mahnini wrote: as far as i can tell the X6 will be a strong contender for its price range ($299-320 for a 3.2ghz 6 core thx). it would be a tough choice between the i7 930/860 and the 1090. preliminary benches (from asian markets) show it clocking to 4ghz as easily if not more easily than its quad core predecessors. very exciting stuff! it's still based on the worthless arch that amd has they seriously need a full revision clocks is a penis nice to show around but doesn't mean jack. Seriously AMD needs to get their shit together they compete with intel in games but everywhere else it's just shit.
|
On April 26 2010 12:30 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 12:16 mahnini wrote: as far as i can tell the X6 will be a strong contender for its price range ($299-320 for a 3.2ghz 6 core thx). it would be a tough choice between the i7 930/860 and the 1090. preliminary benches (from asian markets) show it clocking to 4ghz as easily if not more easily than its quad core predecessors. very exciting stuff! it's still based on the worthless arch that amd has they seriously need a full revision clocks is a penis nice to show around but doesn't mean jack. Seriously AMD needs to get their shit together they compete with intel in games but everywhere else it's just shit. um. wat.
AMD isn't that far behind intel in terms of ipc. sure, if they were priced within the same range performance/price easily goes to intel but they aren't so it's pretty difficult to say that deneb plain sucks when it provides 90% performance at 80% the price and that's not taking into consideration platform costs. i also find it impressive that they are doing all this on the 45nm process and still achieving such high clocks.
50% of the price if you don't count microcenter :D
|
Thuban x6 is the most pointless chip coming out. The i7 920/930 still beat it in most situations when clocked similiarly, not to mention that improvements over a phenom x4 955/965 are very minimal as well. The two added cores will only be good for benchmarks and video encoding. This is because it really is just two more cores, no real changes to architecture to improve anything.
What will be exciting is AMD's bulldozer release next year that will have 4/6/8 cores, a completely new architecture, possibly an AM4 platform mobo with back support, and competitive pricing. This will probably force down Intel's Sandy Bridge pricing to something affordable, and if it doesn't I'll be making the switch to AMD.
Funny how Intel is killing AMD while ATI is killing Nvidia atm.
|
i7 will be better for gaming in the end imo. The stronger turboboost, and the limited 'threadedness' of games will probably benefit the i7 arch and clock speed.
mahnini, I never trust chinese benchmarks. Remember those 5830 benches that were performed? looool.
AMD fucking packed 6 cores into a cpu with 45nm and the cpu still has overclocking headroom. That is very impressive imho.
http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u69/Phenom_OC.jpg
impressive.
The Thuban is a decent chip that will contend against the lower end i7s (920/930/860) which currently don't have any real competition. The Phenom II X4s are great, but they trade blows with the i5 750 ><. No matter how 'unrevolutionary' it is (who cares?) it's still a 6 core. The decision atm is probably 4 virtual vs 2 physical cores (which benchmarks will clear up)
Bulldozer is either going to be SPARKLE SPARKLE AMAZING or ABSOLUTELY FUCKING TERRIBLE, yeah. It seems to be AM3 compatible as well.
uh superbabo, your conclusions don't have any backing to them whatsoever...
|
if we look at thuban from a value perspective it is definitely not a pointless chip. the addition of 2 extra cores allows it to compete with the i7 in video rendering and other such multithreaded apps while still keeping the same pace in gaming. the phenom ii x4s have dropped below $180 with the only one that really matters (the 955) hitting $160 while the entry level i7s still hover at $299. with the X6 AMD is able to compete in the higher price ranges and take a jab at intel in the middle ranges with the 955.
the people who say the i7s will still beat it blahblahblah. a few seconds in a few benchmarks is something i would easily give up for +2 physical cores, i am sure many people would feel the same way. i mean, it's a 6 core that performs pretty closely with the i7s in multithreaded apps (might surpass it now, still waiting for reliable benches) provides on par gaming performance and costs the same amount. what's left to be seen is the temperature / power consumption numbers which may be a deal breaker but for now i think people are just being butthurt that their i7s didn't sit on the throne as long as they wanted them to. :D
|
I doubt temps will be very high :|
i7 chips running lower than $300 will probably all succumb to it I doubt hypertheaded cores will be able to stand up to actual physical cores.
I kinda want to see how the quad core performs as well, though it is most likely just a 965 with that weird AMD TurboBoost. Power consumption would probably be the place I am concerned the most in (especially with overclocking. 3.8ghz on stock voltages plz!)
|
AMD turbo boost from my knowledge is automatic throttling and disabling of cores, it works by cutting the available cores in half giving 500mhz of more head room due to freed up tdp, it's always half the amount of cores which i found odd else eh idk too much about it runs much the same as intel in my book "oh that's nice". I still want a better arch from them intel has clearly been winning in profits for years now amd gobbles up the low end selling for little profit hell most of their product now seems like defective chips that would have been trashed other wise that have been crippled and sold as a new chip t-t. I really don't care for this cripple a defective chip trend that coming out of amd I'm used to it to some extent in the GPU business although i don't care for how prevalent it is now, the R5850 R5830 GTX480 GTX470 5750 basically the whole high end market.
per clock intel still wins, it's why they can sell their chips for more becuase they are better. not that clock matters to much performance is performance doesn't matter how it's dressed up. Just saying AMD needs to fix their arch it's the lame boy in the corner. Although I'm not too found on intel right now hearing their new chipset will require active cooling...
ramble ramble ramble
|
Can't really blame AMD/ATi/Nvidia for the problems that TSMC and Globalfoundries have...
It's not just defective chips, since there are many, many people who succeed in unlocking the disabled AMD cores data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt=""
I mean ATi has had to delay their Northern Islands GPUs and their second half 2010 refresh because of the problems TSMC and Globalfoundries have had with their 32nm processes. I believe Intel is suffering the same problem...
|
"The Patsburg chipset is going to require active cooling which seems like a flawed design, but presumable the PCI Express 3.0 controller runs quite hot and requires additional cooling beyond a passive heatsink." and that's not from Charlie so you can believe it. http://semiaccurate.com/2010/04/15/intels-patsburg-replace-x58-2011/ active cooling on my mobo?!?! if i want active cooling i'll use a zip tie and a tiny fan and strap that to my northbridge which is what i do use on my older p45 chipset to allow for a good oc in a silent case that isn't a typhoon to cool everything. along with this which is also a bit worrying http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/04/21/sandy-bridge-rumors/ but that is just a rumor so far we can see how shitty it becomes later.
|
|
Thank you for posting this. Nice information!
|
FINALLY Tomshardware has it!
FINALLY
Semantics: Yeah, I heard about that and just went 'wtf'. I was never excited about Sandy Bridge in the first place (since Bulldozer will RAPE IT YEAH), but that just pushed me further away from it rofl
Those numbers as abyssmal
;_;
|
Actually after looking at these numbers I'm calling bullshit. I didn't really like the Legionhardware benches, but these Tomshardware benches are absolutely unbelievable. A 3.06Ghz i7 and an HD 5870 should be able to push out more than 46FPS at 1920x1200 Ultra.
|
Yeah I ran test using a 5770 oced to 1050/1405 and a E8400 at 4.0ghz and i get pretty much ~55fps with drops to 40fps and max at upper 60's not quite sure what's going on in their test. maxed out the game on ultra with extreme shaders
Ofc i only ran it at 16 resolution i noticed toms is a 16:10 i t could be a ratio bad luck thing but i wouldn't think so.
games performance tend to be more tied to the raito rather then the resolution unless you get into the 2k resolution.
|
well, an OC'd 5770 doesn't help that much, but I have seen people here post 50+ FPS with 5770s at 1680x1050 so I'm confident that there is something wrong with the TomsHardware benches. The LegionHardware ones look a bit more attractive atm.
and I don't even like those either.
|
The prob is that the cpu bound game theory is consistent with the fps given. Easy way to clear it up with be to re run the test with higher clocks on the cpu.
Also what was their testing method i only skimmed and didn't find it i noticed fps in games vs fps in replays tend to differ.
|
some guy got 150fps-200fps with i7 920 @ 4ghz and 5870
1ghz = 100 frames?
lol...
|
|
|
|