• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Early Tri Core look

Da sich beim AMD Phenom einzelne Kerne der CPU deaktivieren lassen, haben wir sowohl einen Dual-Core-Phenom als auch einen Triple-Core-Phenom simuliert und mit einem Quad-Core-Phenom und einem Athlon 64 X2 4400+ verglichen.
Click to expand...
They just deactivate some of the cores of the Phenom X4 to do the benchmark, they are not using a real Phenom X3 or Phenom X2 which don't exist yet.
 
alg7_munif said:
They just deactivate some of the cores of the Phenom X4 to do the benchmark, they are not using a real Phenom X3 or Phenom X2 which don't exist yet.
Click to expand...

There's no difference between a X4 with cores disabled and a X3 or X2 performance wise.
 
savantu said:
There's no difference between a X4 with cores disabled and a X3 or X2 performance wise.
Click to expand...

It depends on how a core is disabled through actions of the motherboard and how AMD will disable a core in hardware. There could be a difference in performance from what AMD does or does not disable.

I doubt that the performance difference would be large, but there could be some difference.

 
Not bad, there isn't a lot of pricing room between an X2 6400+ and Phenom 9500 though, so it will be interesting to see how these are priced.
 
Yeah, really. Where are these things going to be priced after the Barcelona performance/price correction vs Clovertown or Yorksfield?
 
pxc said:
Yeah, really. Where are these things going to be priced after the Barcelona performance/price correction vs Clovertown or Yorksfield?
Click to expand...

Will there even be a price correction? From an enthusiast's perspective, I hope they do. However, at the end of the day, AMD is out to make money. If they can sell every Phenom made at current prices, they wouldn't give a damn about a few enthusiasts thinking it's overpriced. ;)

If current prices stay the same, I would say tri cores will fall around the $200 mark. Just enough to make the savings worthwhile over quad core.
 
I wonder how many steppings away the Tri's are,and will the L3 still be fubared @ 1.6 to 2Ghz MAX on the tri's?... ??
 
harpoon said:
Will there even be a price correction? From an enthusiast's perspective, I hope they do. However, at the end of the day, AMD is out to make money. If they can sell every Phenom made at current prices, they wouldn't give a damn about a few enthusiasts thinking it's overpriced. ;)
Click to expand...
There are a couple of things about that. The pricing of Phenom was to fulfill the conference call promise that the quad cores would launch for more than the dual cores. The 6400+ was launched for around $239, and the Q1000 launch prices of the 9500 and 9600 are around $10-40 more than that.

Built into that pricing was the hype that AMD *expected* "across a wide variety of workloads for Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent" (a laughable claim now) and the previously higher price of the 6400+ (which is now $180). So now we have Phenoms that are overpriced compared to performance, and priced mainly on a promise.

How will it be corrected? What you pay at retail for a boxed chip is more than what large OEMs pay. If you pay $260 for a Q6600, large OEMs are probably paying $200 or less due to larger quantity orders and no retail mark-up. For Phenoms to sell to those same customers, it will sell for even less due to the performance deficit. That is the erosion of the volume pricing, which trickles down. I'm not talking about huge price cuts. It only takes $30-$40 cuts for the official Q1000 price list to bring it into line. The Q6600 has demand that Phenom doesn't. Period.

If AMD manages to sell all it can produce for the premium (minus the retail mark-up and larger quantity discounts), that's more of a problem with poor yields and scarcity. Would AMD be in a better position to sell 3-4x more than it seems capable of producing at corrected prices, or would it be in a better position to sell few at inflated prices? :p It's not a real question because AMD seems to have little choice for the short term. The analysts are starting to get tired of being lied to.
 
harpoon said:
Not bad, there isn't a lot of pricing room between an X2 6400+ and Phenom 9500 though, so it will be interesting to see how these are priced.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the phenoms are not priced competitively. I doubt a phenom priced above an athlon X2, but under a phenom X4, would be competitive.

Once phenoms are priced competitively, there is little room for an X3 unless athlon prices drop.
 
nonameo said:
The problem is that the phenoms are not priced competitively. I doubt a phenom priced above an athlon X2, but under a phenom X4, would be competitive.

Once phenoms are priced competitively, there is little room for an X3 unless athlon prices drop.
Click to expand...


X2 prices will have to take a good sized tumble,to compete with Intels Q1 offerings,and the rumor (likelyhood) that AMD will further cut Phenom X4 prices.


I bet we see 9500 X4's B2/3's for ~199$ by Febuary.
 
Manny Calavera said:
X2 prices will have to take a good sized tumble,to compete with Intels Q1 offerings,and the rumor (likelyhood) that AMD will further cut Phenom X4 prices.
Click to expand...

Do they really need to take a tumble? X2s can be had for less than half the price of a C2D. I just don't see Intel competing on price anytime soon. I hope the price of Quads get cut, as that would benefit me (and others in the market for a quad-core), but it seems to me that AMD is the only one really lowering their prices (granted Intel doesn't *need* to as it owns the market, but thats not the point).
 
kllrnohj said:
Do they really need to take a tumble? X2s can be had for less than half the price of a C2D. I just don't see Intel competing on price anytime soon. I hope the price of Quads get cut, as that would benefit me (and others in the market for a quad-core), but it seems to me that AMD is the only one really lowering their prices (granted Intel doesn't *need* to as it owns the market, but thats not the point).
Click to expand...

Not sure where you get X2's are half the price of a C2D: $65 X2-4000 vs $75 E2160 or $65 E2140.

The one biggest advantage to tri-core, IMO, is less power draw than a Quad-core, which will mean a higher speed grade. For most conventional benchmarks, the difference will be negligible due to poor multi-threaded optimizations for the majority of today's applications.
 
Here is an interesting article, it contains Phenom dual/tri core results as well as ganged/unganged memory mode. It is also a good reference point for comparing clock for clock performance between K8 -> K10 -> Core 2.

It's in French but benchmark scores are universally understood. ;)

http://www.erenumerique.fr/test_processeur_amd_phenom_x4_9600_drole_de_rel_ve_-art-1804-11.html

In summary, the Phenom X3 @ 2.3GHz roughly equals an E6750 or E6850 in multithreaded performance, with much lower single threaded performance as expected.

The Phenom X2 @ 2.3GHz is roughly equal to an E6400.
 
[QUOTE=harpoon;1031710379]The Phenom X2 @ 2.3GHz is roughly equal to an E6400.[/QUOTE]

That's an improvement, considering it took K8 2.8GHz to match an E6400. :)

Personally, I think I'll hold off on a quad, and wait for the faster Phenom X2s to roll out. I don't want to sacrifice single thread performance for four threads I'll hardly ever use...
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
[QUOTE=harpoon;1031710379]The Phenom X2 @ 2.3GHz is roughly equal to an E6400.
That's an improvement, considering it took K8 2.8GHz to match an E6400. :)

Personally, I think I'll hold off on a quad, and wait for the faster Phenom X2s to roll out. I don't want to sacrifice single thread performance for four threads I'll hardly ever use...
Click to expand...


Eh? The 2.8GHz K8 looks faster than both the 2.3GHz Phenom / E6400 to me. I think you are giving the E6400 too much credit, it was fast but not THAT fast. If you look at the benches in detail you will see K10 is only 5 - 10% faster than K8 per clock, in many cases the 2.3GHz K8 is right on it's heels.

I think Phenom X2 needs to be clocked at 3.0GHz before it truly beats an Athlon X2 in all benchmarks.
 
pxc said:
Built into that pricing was the hype that AMD *expected* "across a wide variety of workloads for Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent" (a laughable claim now) and the previously higher price of the 6400+ (which is now $180).
Click to expand...

I though that they claimed the phenom is 40% faster in floating point which is quite true
 
hopefully they will preform slightly better than intel duo 2 and cost less. I know on black friday Fry's was offering the Q6600 with a motherboard for $198................
 
harpoon said:
Here is an interesting article, it contains Phenom dual/tri core results as well as ganged/unganged memory mode. It is also a good reference point for comparing clock for clock performance between K8 -> K10 -> Core 2.

It's in French but benchmark scores are universally understood. ;)

http://www.erenumerique.fr/test_processeur_amd_phenom_x4_9600_drole_de_rel_ve_-art-1804-11.html

In summary, the Phenom X3 @ 2.3GHz roughly equals an E6750 or E6850 in multithreaded performance, with much lower single threaded performance as expected.

The Phenom X2 @ 2.3GHz is roughly equal to an E6400.
Click to expand...

LOL and the E6400 came out two years ago. Come on AMD pick up the pace, tri-core quad-core I'll still pick up a 45nm chip before either.
 
Killa_2327 said:
So, whats so good about the tri core?
Click to expand...

Its got one more core than a dual-core but with a lower price than a quad... So in terms of performance it should slot nicely between the X2 and X4 in multi threaded apps and in terms of price it should again slot nicely between the X2 and X4 - at least thats my guess :)
 
kllrnohj said:
Its got one more core than a dual-core but with a lower price than a quad... So in terms of performance it should slot nicely between the X2 and X4 in multi threaded apps and in terms of price it should again slot nicely between the X2 and X4 - at least thats my guess :)
Click to expand...

Ah.

The price between 2 core and 4 core really isn't that much. :confused:
 
basically its a quad with 1 disabled, probably one with a defective or low yielding 4th core, so clock a 3 core to 3ghz instead of a quad to 2.2 :p?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top