Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD Unleashed: Four CPUs, Two GPUs, All Overclocked

Tags:
  • GPUs
  • AMD
  • CPUs
  • Product
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 6:10:32 AM

Our recent SBM series featured three Intel/Nvidia-based builds, independently chosen by each of our authors. Understandably, AMD fans felt a little left out. Paul is here with a literal compendium of benchmark results for those of you with AMD hardware.

AMD Unleashed: Four CPUs, Two GPUs, All Overclocked : Read more

More about : amd unleashed cpus gpus overclocked

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 6:57:46 AM

setting aside 1366 and AM3

In 2 or 3 years when QX9770 chips start showing up for $250-$300.

Will AMD have a cheaper socket AM2+ compatible chip on the market that will outperform it?

If so, AMD would be a nice alternative.
Score
-21
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 7:00:10 AM

setting aside 1366 and AM3

In 2 or 3 years when QX9770 chips start showing up for $250-$300.

Will AMD have a cheaper socket AM2+ compatible chip on the market that will outperform it?

If so, AMD would be a nice alternative.
Score
-24
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 7:05:51 AM

In 2 or 3 years Intel will have 16 cores on a single cpu, and amd tech will, as always, be useless, outdated, and worthless... Just like they are now.
Score
-31
June 1, 2009 7:14:19 AM

So did I miss somthing or where does it say what each of these processors is overclocked to. I get that the p2 x3 720be is at 3.67 but what about the rest of them. Am I missing it somewhere (very possible) or do I have to look back at your previous articles to figure it out? shouldn't that be on the test systems and configuration page. I am trying to sort through the data.
Score
5
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 7:30:03 AM

Nice article Paul and some exhaustive work! Don't overlook the 780G/SB710 that also feature ACC for a price of $72
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
making the Phenom2 x3 720 a viable option in the SBM budget category. I'm also going to be curious about the new Phenom2 x2 and Athlon2 x2 processors that are coming out June 2nd.
Score
2
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 7:35:36 AM

Has anyone noticed the benchmarks for the i5's on anandtech yet?
Score
0
June 1, 2009 8:32:52 AM

Great article guys - love the comparisons to the SBM machines - really gives some insight into CPU and GPU scaling and how much to spend on your processor versus your graphics for gaming builds. Thanks!
Score
1
June 1, 2009 8:37:35 AM

apache_livesHas anyone noticed the benchmarks for the i5's on anandtech yet?


I did. Considering the pricing scheme of the i5 (so close to AMD) and it's high performance numbers (so close to the i7) AMD is in big trouble.

Intel will shift all the processors that are now under the i7 (even if the 920 is rumored to become EOL, one step down on it's portfolio, which means high end Intel dual cores, will go into or under the mainstream, where AMD already has a hard time.

This doesn't make me very happy, even if I am an Intel fanboy. Aggressive pricing schemes are overrated. AMD needs something new. Now.
Score
8
June 1, 2009 8:52:10 AM

... BIG THX to the Tom's crew... was not so hard after all? ... now, thx to YOU, we have a info about intel, nVidia and AMD/ATi solutions... how they stack up in price/performance/cost of ownership... NICELY DONE!!!
Score
1
June 1, 2009 9:30:32 AM

Yes thanks, many people complained in the system builder marathon and you listened to the complaints... great.
Score
5
June 1, 2009 9:35:25 AM

The E5200 seems to hold up a bit better than I previously thought, an incredible value for
Score
3
June 1, 2009 10:52:22 AM

sihastruI did. Considering the pricing scheme of the i5 (so close to AMD) and it's high performance numbers (so close to the i7) AMD is in big trouble.Intel will shift all the processors that are now under the i7 (even if the 920 is rumored to become EOL, one step down on it's portfolio, which means high end Intel dual cores, will go into or under the mainstream, where AMD already has a hard time.This doesn't make me very happy, even if I am an Intel fanboy. Aggressive pricing schemes are overrated. AMD needs something new. Now.


AMD doesn't need something new now, they are going to flood the market with low to mid range processor (see computex in a couple of days) that will cater to the masses. On the high end side of things the PII remains an options since it's direct competitor, the intel penryn quads will fade out to be replaced by the new kid on the block, the i5. As for the enthusiast (lots of money, no jaw dropping performance increase)segment the i7 will rule them all. So the battle between blue and green will continue as is, for almost 3 years now AMD has lost the crown, another year isn't going to hurt them much. Things will get heated this time next year when more and more bulldozer and fusion rumors will start spreading.

As of now, nothing new, in this review or the ones that will follow.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 11:19:12 AM

radguySo did I miss somthing or where does it say what each of these processors is overclocked to. I get that the p2 x3 720be is at 3.67 but what about the rest of them.

Thanks for pointing this out. No you didn't miss anything, the CPU-Z screenshots should have been put up in pairs CPU Tab / Memory Tab.

Phenom II X4 940 BE - 3.793 GHz (18.5* 205) 1.5375V
Phenom II X3 720 BE - 3.672 GHz (18.0* 204) 1.500V
Phenom X4 9950 BE - 3.400 GHz (16.5*206) 1.425V
Athlon 7750 BE - 3.383 GHz (16.5*205) 1.425V

Score
6
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 11:37:28 AM

All I can say is Thank you. What a great article! I can't see anyone not considering the PhII X3 720 for a budget build.

I'm glad to see my X4 940 is holding up so well. Prolly be another 2 months before I feel obsolete again!
Score
5
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 11:39:01 AM

O, BTW isn't 1.5V extremely high for a PhII? I've never taken mine beyond 1.45V. I'm chicken
Score
3
a c 105 à CPUs
June 1, 2009 11:41:24 AM

never understood why IDIOTS type in ALL caps EVERY other WORD.

if you have a simple understanding of the english language and can type, the reader will know what words are emphasized.
Score
-4
a c 105 à CPUs
June 1, 2009 11:42:00 AM

DjEaZy... BIG THX to the Tom's crew... was not so hard after all? ... now, thx to YOU, we have a info about intel, nVidia and AMD/ATi solutions... how they stack up in price/performance/cost of ownership... NICELY DONE!!!


never understood why IDIOTS type in ALL caps EVERY other WORD.

if you have a simple understanding of the english language and can type, the reader will know what words are emphasized.
Score
-5
June 1, 2009 12:02:15 PM

These benchmarks are obsolete and shouldn't be compared to anything. Firstly cat 9.2 is from february, now its june and cat 9.5. AMD also has had 7850 and 955 processors available quite awhile for better performance.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 12:04:50 PM

radguySo did I miss somthing or where does it say what each of these processors is overclocked to. I get that the p2 x3 720be is at 3.67 but what about the rest of them. Am I missing it somewhere (very possible) or do I have to look back at your previous articles to figure it out? shouldn't that be on the test systems and configuration page. I am trying to sort through the data.


Check out screens from CPU-Z. Good article.. i say: FINALLY!

How about using AMD and Intel CPUs in GPU tests in the future? I'm not gonna buy Intel no matter what, so furter articles with AMD processors i would gladly welcome
Score
0
June 1, 2009 12:21:01 PM

That's odd, most of my previous post is no displaying... Maybe that's why it has a negative score? I noticed, I hunted for a post I submitted last last week on a different article and it looks like it never posted.
Score
0
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 12:35:28 PM

Nice article, plz include more AMD cpus in normal reviews in the future.

on another note...

That i5 article is some biased Anandtech fanboy crap, they start it off with this:

"Note: This article was not condoned or supported in any way by Intel. We obtained all pre-release hardware on our own. Enjoy."

Surely, it's some Intel marketing BS, and they actually did give them the silicon, but look at the benchmarks they did. They cherry picked every single benchmark so that the i5/i7s would do well. Video encoding, rendering, that bull-shlt excel Monte Carlo benchmark, and then a few select games. Never were video encoding and cpu-based rendering such 'important' benchmarks until the i7 came out, now they must comprise 50%+ of the total benchmarks for an Anandtech review.
Score
3
June 1, 2009 12:57:38 PM

Great article with both AMD and ATI which helps me alot. Last year I bought the top of the range AMD cpu X2 3.2 ghz & motherboard k9a2 platinum with cheeper ATI 4850 1ghz and 4ghz DDR2 1066 on a nice budget and this year I have already bought one more HIS HD4850 1ghz and towards the end of the year I will get the Phenom II x4 to drop in with one more HIS HD4850 1ghz ( in the long run I am paying more but this is over a 2 too 3 year period
So the results you have given me in this article will give me an Idear of what I might be able to get from my computer thanks heeps
Gazz
Score
6
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 1:11:59 PM

No Phenom II X4 955 BE? I was hoping to see what that one can do.
Score
4
June 1, 2009 1:33:54 PM

cinergyThese benchmarks are obsolete and shouldn't be compared to anything. Firstly cat 9.2 is from february, now its june and cat 9.5. AMD also has had 7850 and 955 processors available quite awhile for better performance.


There is some truth in this
Score
2
June 1, 2009 1:50:51 PM

Thanks for doing an AMD comparison to compliment the Intel/NVidia one. Although the results aren't the greatest, it's important to know how green or not both sides of the fence really are. Thanks again! :-)

-- MaSoP
Score
5
June 1, 2009 2:14:58 PM

Great comparison. Really liked seeing the X3 720 and the X4 940 against the Q9550. The only thing that was missing was the X4 955. Would have been nice to see that as well. The x4 9950 was really only a stop-loss product and I don't think it really deserves consideration any more except where people already own one and want to see what an upgrade would look like in comparison.

Also, where is that SBM contest?
Score
4
June 1, 2009 2:21:59 PM

Even in an article about only AMD/ATI I can still see the Intel/Nvidia love.

Intidiashardware.com is available for purchase.
Score
-6
a b À AMD
a c 150 à CPUs
June 1, 2009 3:06:50 PM

Very interesting and informative.
I'm surprised the e5200 held up so well, but it does require a very high OC to do it; it's still a mutt at stock. Also, it doesn't support virtual winXP in Windows 7, another thing to consider for some people.
The 720BE looks remarkable for the price, compared to other AMD chips as well as to Intel.
The 7750 however, was disappointing all around. How much better is the 7850?
Score
2
June 1, 2009 3:33:03 PM

I don't understand, why all the overclocking if you're not unlocking? Seems to me if we're looking at this from the SBM viewpoint, 60$ for a quad 3.3Ghz chip is a great value? Sure it's variable, so is overclocking.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 3:38:56 PM

"Notice how the lone dual-core processor trails significantly in every game."

Great point it's amazing how many people still say dual core cpus are better for gaming, that's ridiculous with current games, they are only saying that because they don't have a quad. Going from a amd x5200 2.7 dual core to a 2.83 q9550 was night and day for everything i played as well as overall responsiveness. (o ya 12mb total L2 cache instead of 1mb L2 cache might be a factor too)
Score
1
June 1, 2009 3:45:03 PM

Thanks for this article! It's a pity that 7850BE is left out.
Anyway, You listen to your reader and that's a big pro!
Score
1
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 4:14:02 PM

The AMD 7850 Kuma is such a recent release i'm sure it wasn't available when Paul gathered the components to start this article. I doubt it would be much of an improvement over the 7750.
Score
2
June 1, 2009 4:31:02 PM

This article makes me depressed for owning a 9950 BE. :( 
Im seriously considering getting an Intel for my next build in the coming year.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 4:54:36 PM

The charts are a little jumbled, but tolerable. However, the comparison to the System Builder rigs is really awesome. I like that a lot, it gives you an Idea of what kind of performance a reference box gets compared to a pricepoint.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 5:11:49 PM

dirtmountainThe AMD 7850 Kuma is such a recent release i'm sure it wasn't available when Paul gathered the components to start this article. I doubt it would be much of an improvement over the 7750.


How long does it take Paul to gather components then? 7850 was released in April 28. I consider Tom's to be one of the biggest hardware sites (or at least it used to be) and I find it very hard to believe there is hw availability problems. True, its not a big difference from 7750 but an improvement none the less. Same goes for X4 955 vs 940. Why review yesterdays products today?
Score
2
June 1, 2009 5:26:41 PM

I'm glad the guys at Tom's finally did this. It was especially nice to see the comparisons to the SBM machines. But most of all, I'm glad you did benches not only on the CPUs overclocked, but at stock speeds as well, as I'm not one to overclock.(It is not that I don't see the benefit of overclocking, it is just that I don't have the time nor the inclination to overclock anymore as I get older).

I think that the budget AMD CPUs, while not having the best performance, did not do to bad at stock speeds. I like the comparisons between the E5200 and the 7750 BE the most. The E5200 clearly came out ahead, but it was close with the 7750 BE coming in at 97% average overall. That, for stock users, is not that big of a spread and I think that it would be a toss up. Going by that, the 7850 BE would be the same or slightly better then the E5200 (stock). But clearly, when you introduce overclocking into the equation, the E5200 leaps ahead, which will definitively answer the question of which to get if the person buying is an overclocker.

I'm one of the people who responded to the $600 SBM article that wanted to see AMD and I'm glad that this article came out.

Thanks again for listening to your readers!
Score
3
June 1, 2009 6:04:19 PM

Awesome article. Makes me feel even better about my PhII X3 720 and the $120 I still have in my pocket.

Your overclocking results are exactly what I found on mine. 1.45v for 3.6 ghz stable.
Score
2
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
June 1, 2009 6:11:53 PM

It might also be important to notice that the Corei7 might have heat issues being installed in the smaller case.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 7:55:09 PM

cinergyHow long does it take Paul to gather components then? 7850 was released in April 28. I consider Tom's to be one of the biggest hardware sites (or at least it used to be) and I find it very hard to believe there is hw availability problems. True, its not a big difference from 7750 but an improvement none the less. Same goes for X4 955 vs 940. Why review yesterdays products today?


It's not a matter of gathering the hardware--it's much harder to run the sheer volume of tests that Paul ran. If you want scores for the 955, you can always refer to my review of the processor and how it fared against competing CPUs. However, for this piece, Paul wanted to use some of the hardware on-hand from the How To: Overclocking Your AMD CPU guide and really put the rubber to the road in a meaningful way, rather than just rattle off some recommendations. I think he did a great job in this regard!
Score
0
June 1, 2009 8:59:52 PM

Why not use the AMD PII 955 BE and DDR3-memory?
Score
2
June 1, 2009 9:32:41 PM

Am I the only one wondering what is going on with the SBM giveaway????
Score
1
June 1, 2009 10:47:18 PM

Nice review, good to finally see some AMD cpu's being put to the test. The only complaint I have is that you didn't run that many games. What about FarCry2 and Left4Dead. Also the charts are kinda busy. Good thing I am not color blind or I would be in trouble.

I will piggy back on what a lot of the other people here have been saying. AMD better pull that rabbit out of their hat pretty soon or their top end cpu's will be in the sub $100.00 range when i5 comes out. Good for us bad for them.
Score
0
June 1, 2009 10:56:34 PM

coopchennickAm I the only one wondering what is going on with the SBM giveaway????


Should have more info on it tomorrow. One little correction needed to be made to the $600 system spec list (it was called a Core 2 instead of a Pentium). Keep an eye out tomorrow! The contest will involve answering one question about each build and it'll run until the end of the month, at which point all three boxes will be shipped out from each of our authors. ;-)
Score
0
June 2, 2009 12:09:53 AM

buzznutO, BTW isn't 1.5V extremely high for a PhII? I've never taken mine beyond 1.45V. I'm chicken

That will vary chip to chip as some do not tolerate higher voltages. Tips from AMD targeted 1.4V-1.55V on air cooling. Take note how many Phenom II launch reviews were pushing 1.55V. One constant is the need to keep them cool. Aim here was to not exceed 50C as much above that always seemed to fail stability testing.

As stated in the article, these chips were pushed high to see just what they could do. 3.6GHz and a bit less voltage looks like a nice 24/7 target: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/phenom-ii-overclock...
Score
0
June 2, 2009 12:43:07 AM

dirtmountainThe AMD 7850 Kuma is such a recent release i'm sure it wasn't available when Paul gathered the components to start this article. I doubt it would be much of an improvement over the 7750.

Yes, Exactly...something this size doesn't happen overnight. This was intended to be a follow-up exploring the performance achieved with hardware from the OC Guide. The PII X3 720BE added for obvious bang/buck reasons. The Athlon X2 5600+ BE was then left out to save a substantial amount of time.

Besides, I'm yet to see an Athlon 7850 BE top 3.3GHz in a review. Anything above that on air is icing on the cake with a 65nm Kuma or Phenom. We were quite fortunate to push 3.4GHz with these two.

100MHz more stock clocks is pretty insignificant and IMO not even worth $10 for an overclocker, especially considering the unlock multiplier anyway. The stock 7850 would have basically been as unimpressive as the stock 7750 and E5200.
Score
0
June 2, 2009 12:59:28 AM

avericia"Notice how the lone dual-core processor trails significantly in every game."Great point it's amazing how many people still say dual core cpus are better for gaming, that's ridiculous with current games, they are only saying that because they don't have a quad. Going from a amd x5200 2.7 dual core to a 2.83 q9550 was night and day for everything i played as well as overall responsiveness. (o ya 12mb total L2 cache instead of 1mb L2 cache might be a factor too)


Having both the Athlon 7750 BE and the Phenom 9950 BE made for some nice dual/quad comparisons. Here is another nice look at the value of more than two cores: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/multi-core-cpu,2280...

Keep in mind though architecture and clocks speed differences could easily change the outcome. (Just look at the E5200 vs X4 9950 BE) Most people who point to a killer dual-core gaming processor are referring to a E8x00 Wolfdale. I have little doubt a 4.4GHz E8400 would have still topped this comparison in any of the CPU limited gaming situations.
Score
0
June 2, 2009 3:59:31 AM

bah, Windows 7 doesn't like overclocked cpus very much. I had my X3 720 at 3.7GHz (100% stable) for a month in XP and in Windows 7 3.6GHz is barely stable.
Score
1
June 2, 2009 4:31:22 AM

yes!!!! finally!!!!! AMD gets a little attention :) 

so many numbers... guhh
Score
2
June 2, 2009 11:37:21 AM

volks1470bah, Windows 7 doesn't like overclocked cpus very much. I had my X3 720 at 3.7GHz (100% stable) for a month in XP and in Windows 7 3.6GHz is barely stable.

Are you running the 64-bit RC? In general Phenom II OC's have been slightly higher with a 32-bit OS.
Score
-1
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!