![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
First AMD 45nm desktop CPU "announce" date: Jan 8, 2009 at CES
- Thread starter pxc
- Start date
TheBlueChanell
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 4,658
I would take that with a grain of salt but we could really only hope that things get better from here. I am probably a fool but I have faith in AMD so I'm willing to try out a 65nm Phenom and 790FX board and see how this goes while I wait for affordable Core i7's or AM3. If AMD does get their shit together on the CPU side of things it would be great because prices for CPU's all across the board, from both sides of the camp would be cheaper. Look what happened with the GTX 200 prices after the 4800's were released.
I have no bias I've always tried to go with what's cheapest and fastest at the time. My laptop has both intel and nvidia parts. I prefer AMD and ATi always have but I'll gladly swing Nvidia or Intels way should they be cheaper and faster and that has been the case the past year pretty much. I'm glad ATi is back with something competitive.
AMD has the upper hand in a way because they can offer a complete platform at a cheap price. You can't beat a 9950/790GX mobo for $300. If I don't purchase my old Opteron back from a buddy, I wouldn't even hesitate to recommend the spider platform to my Mom for her computer in her new office. I'd even recommend it those looking for a nice HTPC as soon as 790GX mATX boards surface.
In the future if AMD can manage to stay alive, and manages to get a nice performing part with decent power consumption and TDP, I really see things picking up for them as a whole. They will be able to offer complete platforms to OEM's for much cheaper (I'd assume) than X Company could get from buying through intel and nvidia. No one can challenge that right now, until larabee and even than we'll see. With all the rave with the 4800's it would be a great time to do this but with the Phenom's rough launch, and what some would call dismal performance it's hard. AMD NEEDS a competitive part, something to at least match Penryn.
What exactly are you trying to compare? The unreleased and *overclocked* Deneb is using a faster video card than the one used with *stock speed* QX9770 in the other link.
The one common CPU between the two sites (X4 9650) doesn't even match scores. The benchmark settings could be different, just to start with.
What exactly are you trying to compare? The unreleased and *overclocked* Deneb is using a faster video card than the one used with *stock speed* QX9770 in the other link.
The one common CPU between the two sites (X4 9650) doesn't even match scores. The benchmark settings could be different, just to start with.
9800gtx + = hd 4850. Btw since crysis is a twimtbp title 9800gtx+ gets more fps then hd 4850 under the same settings anyway.
cannondale06
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 16,180
well with AA on the 4850 will edge out the 9800gtx+ in some benchmarks. it doesnt really matter though because neither card is really strong enough to pull off using AA with high settings anyway.
well with AA on the 4850 will edge out the 9800gtx+ in some benchmarks. it doesnt really matter though because neither card is really strong enough to pull off using AA with high settings anyway.
Well both sites didn't have either aa or af cranked at 1024 by 768 so 9800gtx is a little bit faster in that territory in crysis.
wizzard0003
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2005
- Messages
- 198
Athlon X2 6500 is a dual core K10
Kuma confirmed
Source: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9233&Itemid=1
Pre-order: http://geizhals.at/a361555.html
Don't shoot the messenger... Just passing it on...
Kuma confirmed
Source: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9233&Itemid=1
Pre-order: http://geizhals.at/a361555.html
Don't shoot the messenger... Just passing it on...
Nice try, but no.
It's not comparable because there's no details of which CPU benchmark or settings were used.Link 1: X4 9650, HD 4850, unknown drivers, unknown settings, unknown Crysis CPU benchmark (see the pattern?)
Link 2: X4 9650, 9800GTX+, Physics very high, DX10, high details, 1024x768, no AA/AF, Island CPU benchmark
----
different scores
It would be nice to have some comparable scores. I'm sure we'll see some soon.
Weird. Most of the places that list the TDP state 95W, but a few that list the identical item show 65W. The model isn't listed on amdcompare.com yet to confirm, but it's definitely not the 45W that AMD promised alast July. Smells like salvaged, leaky Agena chips with disabled cache and cores.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
Sounds pretty good and should be good cpu for non-overclockers - for overclockers I doubt if they will be able to beat value and performance of q6600 G0 @ 3.2-3.6 Ghz.
Nice try, but no.
Link 1: X4 9650, HD 4850, unknown drivers, unknown settings, unknown Crysis CPU benchmark (see the pattern?)
Link 2: X4 9650, 9800GTX+, Physics very high, DX10, high details, 1024x768, no AA/AF, Island CPU benchmark
----
different scores
It would be nice to have some comparable scores. I'm sure we'll see some soon.
Well there's only one crysis cpu benchie and I believe it uses default graphics settings on high etc regardless of your settings. Unknown drivers, unknown settings...c'mon it's not like they got some magical specialty 4850 drivers over there that boost fps by 20% at low res.
There are at least 2 CPU benchmarks. I read results for both in the Q8200 vs Q6600 review I read recently. The Crysis benchmark utility has support for user settings.
I'm not sure how much the benchmark is worth anyways. Here's the E8400 @ 3GHz getting 53.95 in the CPU benchmark: http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=3817&pageid=3125
topdog5050
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2008
- Messages
- 832
I think AMD is going to make a major come back at INTEL they had the crown for years I have faith they will come backreal soon.
I think AMD is going to make a major come back at INTEL they had the crown for years I have faith they will come backreal soon.
I don't.
One word sums it up: Nehalem
DeadSkull said:
I find xtreview.com lacking in credibility. They are plagiarizers. Here's an article they stole from Xbitlabs:
http://xtreview.com/review134.htm
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/power-noise.html
Just as well, they can make things up on a whim.
Regardless, there is no point of comparison.
The link was posted on the front page, but this AMD roadmap slide (click it) confirms the clock speeds and release date of the 45nm desktop processors:
http://www.chw.net/foro/roadmap-de-procesadores-amd-para-el-2008-a-t183507.html or use this link if the site is down: http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/5499/1220492096amdroadmaplogee4.jpg
The line up through the end of the year is *very* weak. The fastest desktop chip being released from now to the end of the year is the 2.5GHz X3 (Toliman). Remember the talk about cranking up X3 speeds since one core was disabled? I bet AMD hopes you don't.
http://www.chw.net/foro/roadmap-de-procesadores-amd-para-el-2008-a-t183507.html or use this link if the site is down: http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/5499/1220492096amdroadmaplogee4.jpg
The line up through the end of the year is *very* weak. The fastest desktop chip being released from now to the end of the year is the 2.5GHz X3 (Toliman). Remember the talk about cranking up X3 speeds since one core was disabled? I bet AMD hopes you don't.
for everything except gaming i agree, but i will go with anand tech when they say nehalems focus on floating point will bring nothing new to the table for gamers.
amd could very well have a competitive gaming product with Deneb.
Temporarily yes, perhaps.
Deneb should bring AMD's performance back in line with the faster Core2 Quads.
Currently we're at a point where games are either GPU-limited or run at such high framerates that the CPU doesn't really matter anyway.
We've been at such a point various times in the past. Eventually new GPUs and/or games would tip the balance and make CPU speed important again.
Since there's little doubt in my mind that Nehalem will be the fastest CPU available on the market, it will become the best gaming CPU once games start depending on CPUs more again (also don't forget that X58 will be the only Intel platform that supports SLI, another interesting feature for gamers). And then AMD is in the same spot again: they don't have the fastest CPUs, so they don't have the most attractive gaming solution.
wow, you managed to completely ignore the reason why i said AMD will be backin the game.
two important points:
1) anandtech said gaming relies on integer performance from a CPU, given that FP is taken care of by the GPU.
2) anandtech said Nehalem doesn't bring anything new to the party with regards integer performance, as it is intended as a business CPU rather than consumer.
two important points:
1) anandtech said gaming relies on integer performance from a CPU, given that FP is taken care of by the GPU.
2) anandtech said Nehalem doesn't bring anything new to the party with regards integer performance, as it is intended as a business CPU rather than consumer.
I don't think so, I just think you didn't manage to relate the two.
That's the state of the world today yes... although already not entirely true anymore with games like Crysis performing heavy physics on multicore CPUs (yes, that is FP).
I'm saying that future games may well do more processing on the CPU.
Not entirely true either. Firstly, it's not as black/white as integer/FP. Nehalem brings HyperThreading and an integrated triple channel memory controller. This WILL make certain types of integer code run faster, even if the ALU is identical to the one in Core2 (which it probably isn't, they've had a few more years to tweak and optimize the design).
Secondly, even if Nehalem would be no faster than Core2, it's still faster than any Phenom, Deneb included. So when it comes back to point 1) where faster CPUs are required for gaming, AMD is still not 'back in the game'.
It doesn't really matter whether Nehalem or Core2 is the faster Intel CPU, bottom line is that AMD isn't, so gamers will still go Intel. Whether they go Nehalem or Core2 is irrelevant.
Deneb doesn't improve on integer performance over Agena either, so any improvements in gaming performance are likely due to the larger L3 cache.
I still expect Nehalem to be faster per clock than Core 2 even in gaming, but not to a large extent.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
Nehalem will use intel chipsets only - no competition = expensive
Nehalem will use ddr3 only iirc = expensive
there won't be any entry level nehalems any soon.
So as a whole amd platform might still offer better price to performance compared to nehalem.
And speaking about nehalem it seems to oc like crap so far which means any value consious overclocker will continue to use core 2 cpus.
Nehalem will use ddr3 only iirc = expensive
there won't be any entry level nehalems any soon.
So as a whole amd platform might still offer better price to performance compared to nehalem.
And speaking about nehalem it seems to oc like crap so far which means any value consious overclocker will continue to use core 2 cpus.
Which might have been nice for AMD if Core2 didn't exist. But Deneb will be up against Penryn mainly.
Speaking of which, Intel has introduced new Xeons... including a 3.4 GHz 1600 FSB quadcore, and a 3.5 GHz dualcore:
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20080907comp.htm?iid=pr1_releasepri_20080907m
So they are finally ramping up those clockspeeds past what 65 nm already offered. No doubt there will be desktop versions of these CPUs.
Xeons are aimed at the workstation/server market, where people don't really care about the pricetag on a CPU. These prices are nothing special in the Xeon range. You should see what the 6-core Dunnington will cost
My point however was that we've had a 3 GHz Core2 at the introduction over 2 years ago, and Intel simply didn't have any need whatsoever to increase the clockspeeds. But just before Deneb arrives, they're ramping up.
The 45 nm seems to be quite mature, as is the E0 stepping of the Penryn CPUs. This will probably prove favourable to Nehalem aswell.