Yes folks, my prayers have been answered. And AMD has an answer to Intel's single threaded prowess, sort of. What's he babbling about you say? Well, a few months ago I thought that with the split planes and individual core voltage it would be possible for AMD or an OEM to create a utility that would allow you to adjust the frequency of a single core while turning the others down.
Well, according to the folks over at Expreview, they have such a utility being readied for the Phenom launch. Here is a pic of the utility.
[img]
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/ [...] rdrive.jpg[/img]
So that means you don't have to run all four cores at 3.2GHz, you can just run on ethat high and keep the others at their default or lower speed. Tis will increase single-threaded performance and keep power down. I guess this is what they were talking about in the article a few days ago.
I was oping they'd say they got a retail chip and it's 10-15% faster than the ES. Still good news for AMD enthusiasts though.
Yes folks, my prayers have been answered. And AMD has an answer to Intel's single threaded prowess, sort of. What's he babbling about you say? Well, a few months ago I thought that with the split planes and individual core voltage it would be possible for AMD or an OEM to create a utility that would allow you to adjust the frequency of a single core while turning the others down.
Well, according to the folks over at Expreview, they have such a utility being readied for the Phenom launch. Here is a pic of the utility.
[img]
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/ [...] rdrive.jpg[/img]
So that means you don't have to run all four cores at 3.2GHz, you can just run on ethat high and keep the others at their default or lower speed. Tis will increase single-threaded performance and keep power down. I guess this is what they were talking about in the article a few days ago.
I was oping they'd say they got a retail chip and it's 10-15% faster than the ES. Still good news for AMD enthusiasts though.
That is one possibility but it also allows for tweaking of each core so all the cores can be pushed to their max. IE no 2 cores run at the same temperature if all have the same multiplier and fsb. Now if 1 core is holding you back you can lower its multiplier and increase the other 3.
This may save a small percentage of quads which other wise would be tri core. IE a 2.2GHz Phenom running 3 cores at about 2.3GHz an the fourth at only 1.8~1.9.
I think thats mainly meant to be an overclocking feature, all cores will probably be running at the same speed when leaving the factory, so to speak...
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,6995.html
What benchmarks? I haven't seen a RELIABLE benchmark for Agena as of yet. Until THG, Ananatech, or a reputable site does benchmarks, everything is speculation about its performance at this point.
Aw, fer cryin' out loud. Give it up. Stick a fork in AMD and just walk away. Some of you guys (mostly Baron) belong in the Flat Earth Society. Phenom is an embarrassment, a failure, a joke, and the most uncompetitive product since the Edsel... Wake up and smell the benchys!
It's always nice to hear from the peanut gallery. The last thing this thread needs is to turn into an Intel-fanboy-flame-the-Baron-fest. Here's $.25, now go post in another forum.
---------------
You got your cozy little corner
All night you're jammin' on your feet
Hangin' out just like a street sign
And put a twenty dollar trick
That's my point, bright eyes. Benches talk and B.S. (as well as B.M.) walks. I don't give a good damn about power draw or clock for clock. What does Phenom/Barcelona do? Is there any sane person on this earth (and we know who I'm excluding) who thinks that Phenom is going to beat a Q9650 in the next 18 months?
Phenom has more to worry about from the Q6850 in the short term as the penry has to run dangerously high 1.45 volts to get 4GHz. Penry while can do this risks burning out in as short at a few months at 45nm. The Phenom has to hit dangerously high 1.5 volts to get 3GHz but at 65nm its a little less risky. The 65nm Q6850 also runs high voltage for 4GHz but not much higher than the penry. Point is the penry may be forced to run at only 3.8GHz for a reasonably long life and the 7% clock for clock advantage over the Q6850 want hold verses a OC'ed 4GHz Q6850.
Most information was taken from tomshardware review of the Q9650.
Message edited by turpit on 11-02-2007 at 03:40:18 AM
---------------
You got your cozy little corner
All night you're jammin' on your feet
Hangin' out just like a street sign
And put a twenty dollar trick
I cannot remember, but this guy really sounds like someone who has posted under another name. CaptRobertApril? Maybe it was someone else, I cannot remember.
Are you trying to say bit me in french? Cause you failed at that to. I'm going to have to agree with the members here, this is impressive, if ti comes to be true.
Till the product is released I'm staying neutral, not jumping on either bandwagon till I see some number, and features?
James
I think the utility is an excellent idea, and should enable overclocking of the best core for single threaded applications as Baron states. Despite the initially unimpressive showing of AMD's Barcelona, one feature I found envious over Intel's current implementation was the individual clock/vcore adjustments put into practice. It's ingenious, and it just might save the day for AMD. I look forward to seeing the experiments carried out with this tool.
Hey, Chunk, so it's ok for Baron to spam this forum for years with his B.S. and it's not alright for someone to come in and say the Emperor has no clothes? Who died and left you King... or Emperor... or Baron?
Do you know me from somewhere? I don't spam. I post relevant CPU news. Phenom was right behind Yorkfield with an engineering sample in the CrySis tests so what are you talking about. And in that test, the Intel dual cores were just as fast.
The last thing this thread needs is to turn into an Intel-fanboy-flame-the-Baron-fest. 
Here's $.25, now go post in another forum.
