Phenom II vs QX9650 @ 3.81Ghz

[Thenura]

I tried to get settings on each system as close as possible for a fair comparison. I've had this done for a week or two now, but due to RL haven't been able to get it posted until now.


Denab System:
Phenom II 940 @ 254*15
Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H
2x1gb Team Xtreem PC8000 @ 501mhz, 4-4-4-10 2T
Gigabyte HD 4850 @ 750/1100mhz, 8.12 driver
Gigabyte ODIN Pro 1200w
WD Raptor 36gb
Windows Vista Ultimate


Yorkfield System:
QX9650 @ 401*9.5
Gigabyte EP45-UD3P
2x1gb Team Xtreem PC8000 @ 501mhz, 4-4-4-10 2T
Gigabyte HD 4850 @ 750/1100mhz, 8.12 driver
Gigabyte ODIN Pro 1200w
WD Raptor 36gb
Windows Vista Ultimate

*For PCMark 05, an ACARD ANS-9010 and a GTX 280 @ 770/1230 were subbed. That's why the scores are so high. That test could have gone either way though, as finicky as the benchmark is with no tweaking added.

I've been working on a 4ghz shootout, and have the QX9650 part finished and half of the Denab part, but my single stage decided to crap out so I need to fix it first.

source

 

[jeffhardy]

wht is this

 

[Thenura]

wht is this

a thread

 

[nadun_perera]

hoping to go for the phenom II , it's good for the price I guess. thanks for the info

 

[roshant]

AMD is now cutting down its manufacturing plants due to economic crysis.

 

[coolshano]

cool////

 

[Intel_Nehalem]

AMD is now cutting down its manufacturing plants due to economic crysis.

so Is intel ( they are cutting down fabs which use old technology like 65nm and 90nm)

 

[buddhika19]

mmmmmmm

 

[¤--bACarDi--¤]

Machan These Benchmarks are Synthetics
I think all guys Expect huge gaming Experience
So look @ Gaming Benchmarks.
AMDs are Stable on huge Work load
But Intel always fucked up with high Resolution like 2560X1600 with full AA
But @ low resolution Intel gives huge Frame rates. Upcoming games are High-End. So AMDs are better for gaming

And other thing How could u compare PII 940 & QX9650 huh...? Wot abt da QX9650 Price
AMD prices r nice >> PII 940 - $230
And 790 GX/FX Platforms are nice

 

[deegopower]

wow 12.4 on the super pi........seems cool......
not happy about the phenom.coz my C2D does it in 20 secs as well....

 

[Thenura]

wow 12.4 on the super pi........seems cool......
not happy about the phenom.coz my C2D does it in 20 secs as well....

my E8400 did the 1m calculation in 12.9s

 

[Anusha]

Machan These Benchmarks are Synthetics
I think all guys Expect huge gaming Experience
So look @ Gaming Benchmarks.
AMDs are Stable on huge Work load
But Intel always fucked up with high Resolution like 2560X1600 with full AA
But @ low resolution Intel gives huge Frame rates. Upcoming games are High-End. So AMDs are better for gaming

And other thing How could u compare PII 940 & QX9650 huh...? Wot abt da QX9650 Price
AMD prices r nice >> PII 940 - $230
And 790 GX/FX Platforms are nice

Dude! Do you have any idea about games and CPU????

In games, you can compare CPU at only low resolutions where the VGA doesn't bottleneck the CPU. At high resolutions, it is the VGA that bottlenecks the CPU. If you are saying AMD performs better at high resolutions, it is not a problem with the CPU, but a problem with the other parts of the system (bus links and PCI-E latencies/bw) that is causing it.

And don't compare the QX9650 to P-II 940. QX9650 is an enthusiast CPU. If you want, compare it to the Q9650 which doesn't have a huge price premium that they ask for unlocked CPUs.

P.S.
I don't see what you are saying anyway:
http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/in...sk=view&id=667&Itemid=27&limit=1&limitstart=5

You are unfairly comparing a 3GHz CPU to a 2.66GHz CPU I think. U can get even a 920 to 4GHz.

Not to say that AMD is crap. But I expected more of them. And I'm not saying you should go out and buy a Corei7 platform either. A Core 2 platform is the way to go, until prices come down.

 

[kamalmawa]

Price wise AMD wins....
Intel QX9650 over $1500(AUD) and AMD Phenom II 940 around $450

who wants to spent 3 times more money for a small different... And Phenom II is more overclockable...

 

[deegopower]

if u wanna game the i prefer AMD.with ATI...................

 

[Intel_Nehalem]

Machan These Benchmarks are Synthetics
I think all guys Expect huge gaming Experience
So look @ Gaming Benchmarks.
AMDs are Stable on huge Work load
But Intel always fucked up with high Resolution like 2560X1600 with full AA
But @ low resolution Intel gives huge Frame rates. Upcoming games are High-End. So AMDs are better for gaming

And other thing How could u compare PII 940 & QX9650 huh...? Wot abt da QX9650 Price
AMD prices r nice >> PII 940 - $230
And 790 GX/FX Platforms are nice

you've got it all messed up
Intel is the better choice with 2560x1600 and Full AA with sli or crossfire
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i7-multigpu-sli-crossfire-game-performance-review/

you see?

 

[Intel_Nehalem]

Dude! Do you have any idea about games and CPU????

In games, you can compare CPU at only low resolutions where the VGA doesn't bottleneck the CPU. At high resolutions, it is the VGA that bottlenecks the CPU. If you are saying AMD performs better at high resolutions, it is not a problem with the CPU, but a problem with the other parts of the system (bus links and PCI-E latencies/bw) that is causing it.

And don't compare the QX9650 to P-II 940. QX9650 is an enthusiast CPU. If you want, compare it to the Q9650 which doesn't have a huge price premium that they ask for unlocked CPUs.

P.S.
I don't see what you are saying anyway:
http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=667&Itemid=27&limit=1&limitstart=5

You are unfairly comparing a 3GHz CPU to a 2.66GHz CPU I think. U can get even a 920 to 4GHz.

Not to say that AMD is crap. But I expected more of them. And I'm not saying you should go out and buy a Corei7 platform either. A Core 2 platform is the way to go, until prices come down.

 

[¤--bACarDi--¤]

Dude! Do you have any idea about games and CPU????

In games, you can compare CPU at only low resolutions where the VGA doesn't bottleneck the CPU. At high resolutions, it is the VGA that bottlenecks the CPU. If you are saying AMD performs better at high resolutions, it is not a problem with the CPU, but a problem with the other parts of the system (bus links and PCI-E latencies/bw) that is causing it.

And don't compare the QX9650 to P-II 940. QX9650 is an enthusiast CPU. If you want, compare it to the Q9650 which doesn't have a huge price premium that they ask for unlocked CPUs.

P.S.
I don't see what you are saying anyway:
http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/in...sk=view&id=667&Itemid=27&limit=1&limitstart=5

You are unfairly comparing a 3GHz CPU to a 2.66GHz CPU I think. U can get even a 920 to 4GHz.

Not to say that AMD is crap. But I expected more of them. And I'm not saying you should go out and buy a Corei7 platform either. A Core 2 platform is the way to go, until prices come down.

He he...
Dude All game benchmarks are testing on Same Graphic Card...
so if VGA Bottleneck how could we get different FPS from High-End CPU...huh..?
I think u can understand this problem

And QX9650 & 9770 r got huge price tags... So ppl think they r Extreme CPUs...
Bt i7s gives much performance than old Extremes...Bt Intel dnt Cut their prices...

And ur link is so funny
why dnt they put SLI or CrossfireX to avoid Bottleneck problem...
And they r using 4X AA Sometimes in 1280 X 1024
These r High-End CPUs...So who wants to play 4X AA with these CPUs...

 

[Anusha]

He he...
Dude All game benchmarks are testing on Same Graphic Card...
so if VGA Bottleneck how could we get different FPS from High-End CPU...huh..?
I think u can understand this problem

And QX9650 & 9770 r got huge price tags... So ppl think they r Extreme CPUs...
Bt i7s gives much performance than old Extremes...Bt Intel dnt Cut their prices...

And ur link is so funny
why dnt they put SLI or CrossfireX to avoid Bottleneck problem...
And they r using 4X AA Sometimes in 1280 X 1024
These r High-End CPUs...So who wants to play 4X AA with these CPUs...

Why do you think gamers aren't more interested in VGA cards than the CPU? Simple truth is at higher resolutions VGA is the bottleneck.

Remember you're comparing a 2.66Ghz CPU to a 3GHz CPU. Maybe the benchmarks you showed don't get bottlenecked by VGA until CPU speed reaches 3GHz Put in an i7-940 and the results will be changed

why they don't use SLI or CF? It's a CPU review, not a VGA review. DUH!

P.S.
Have you seen reviews where sometimes nVidia cards have a lower FPS than ATI cards, EVEN WHEN IT IS CPU LIMITED? It could simply be a driver issue!!!

 

[gayancc]

wht is this

 

[¤--bACarDi--¤]

you've got it all messed up
Intel is the better choice with 2560x1600 and Full AA with sli or crossfire
http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i7-multigpu-sli-crossfire-game-performance-review/

you see?

WTF...wot is this link...
This is abt i7 965 & E8400...

wot abt this...