Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Just got The Phenom 9850Be today!!!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 10, 2008 6:58:09 PM

Just got the Phenom 9850BE from ups today. I updated the bios from 1402 to 1802 on my Asus M2N32-Sli deluxe last night and Installed the new Phenom today. Everything booted right up and no problems yet. It did let me know that I have a new CPU and to go into the bios and save settings. I find it very interesting that when I upgraded windows score that my old blacks ed. 6400+ dual core got a stock rating of 5.6 out of the box. The Phenom 9850Be ed. got a 5.3 out of the box. I have not over clocked it yet but I am getting ready to see what this baby can do!!! One thing that I did find interesting is that AMD over clocking drivers are not found on AMD's site for vista 64bit OS. Only xp and 2003 are there. So I guess I will have to try Asus onboard overclocking. Hope it works! Anyone else with info on there upgrade with my board please feel free to comment on your finding and results.

More about : phenom 9850be today

April 10, 2008 7:19:23 PM

I don't think that phenom will ever match the speed of your 6400+ in most applications. It will only beat it in mult-threaded applications, which are few and far between atm.
a c 126 à CPUs
April 10, 2008 7:24:08 PM

medjohnson77 said:
Just got the Phenom 9850BE from ups today. I updated the bios from 1402 to 1802 on my Asus M2N32-Sli deluxe last night and Installed the new Phenom today. Everything booted right up and no problems yet. It did let me know that I have a new CPU and to go into the bios and save settings. I find it very interesting that when I upgraded windows score that my old blacks ed. 6400+ dual core got a stock rating of 5.6 out of the box. The Phenom 9850Be ed. got a 5.3 out of the box. I have not over clocked it yet but I am getting ready to see what this baby can do!!! One thing that I did find interesting is that AMD over clocking drivers are not found on AMD's site for vista 64bit OS. Only xp and 2003 are there. So I guess I will have to try Asus onboard overclocking. Hope it works! Anyone else with info on there upgrade with my board please feel free to comment on your finding and results.


Good luck and remember that there is still no guarantee that your Phenom will OC much at all. You might get a cherry that OC's like crazy or get a lemon that OC's by 2MHz.
Related resources
April 10, 2008 7:38:04 PM

Is it just me... or is the 9850BE a very misleading model number?
a c 126 à CPUs
April 10, 2008 7:40:52 PM

Well for a Black Edition the CPU looks silver w/green and random colors.....

And a BE is supposed to be like a Intel EE chip. Unlocked multi = better easier OC's. But thats not true w/the Phenoms.
April 10, 2008 7:42:09 PM

Anyone heard of any other chipset manufacturers that are using HyperTransport 3.0? I've only seen AMD - not a complaint, just an inquiry.

I was baffled as to why your CPU got a vista rating of 5.3, but then I saw that you're still using AM2. Even the stock Phenom 9500s at Best Buy get a 5.9 CPU rating. Unleash the true power behind that beast with a new AM2+ motherboard unless you're planning on waiting til AM3.
April 10, 2008 7:49:42 PM

Does anyone disagree that HyperTransport 3.0 is the best feature behind the Phenoms? Sure, 3 or 4 cores is nice, but doubling the HT from 2GHz to 3.6GHz or 4GHz is huge. I just wish the CPUs were able to max out the boards at 5.2GHz, AMD must be saving that til AM3/45nm.
April 10, 2008 8:36:41 PM

Hey guys,

I have got this up to 2.8 stable at the moment. I am working on getting more, and at 2.8 it is now rating in Vista what my 6400+ did. I haven't started benching yet but i am working on it. Temps are pretty high on air and I have a custom sink and cooler with alot of fans in this case. It came with a very nice cooler btw, but i believe it blows air onto the cpu instead of drawing it away. So I put my custom one on. With this sink and 92mm fan my 6400+ even over clocked only ran at around 32C at Idle 42 at max. This Phenom is running at around 45c at Idle and in the 50's with a mild overclock.
April 10, 2008 8:38:43 PM

BTW when I adjust the multi on the CPU it freeze's up, I have the hz at about 229 right now and working on it. Not that Vista rating means much but it is at 5.6 at 2.8ghz oc.
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2008 8:41:58 PM

medjohnson77 said:
BTW when I adjust the multi on the CPU it freeze's up, I have the hz at about 229 right now and working on it. Not that Vista rating means much but it is at 5.6 at 2.8ghz oc.




mmmm

I have had an over the year old Q6600 running at 3Ghz with a Vista rating of 5.9.

Now im not boasting, but for the Phenoms first main release hi end chip, doesnt sound to promising...

Lets hope you get to 5.9 soon...
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2008 9:00:03 PM

Yeah, I wish they had just saved time and released an Athlon with a faster Hypertransport. What ever happened to the Phenom Dual cores, BTW?
April 10, 2008 9:02:45 PM

My vista cpu rating is only 5.5 :( . . .

Guess I'll have to O/C if I want a straigth 5.9 score in Vista that way I'll be able to tell everyone my Vista experience is UBER.
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2008 9:09:11 PM

@OP: Mind running some real benches instead of the Vista score? (imo, Vista rating is just BS marketing, no offense to you OP). Please run 3DMark 06,PCMark, Sandra CPU,etc.
April 10, 2008 10:01:41 PM

Screw benchmarking, play games.
April 10, 2008 10:07:28 PM

LOL

Amd are not doing well...
April 10, 2008 10:24:30 PM

Yes Vista scores are just bs at best but it is a reference to judge by. Just finished some benchmarks and I am very unhappy.

Hellboy, I am running this on a AM2 board with only a 1000HT-2000 so trying to say this chip is not impressive is kinda a fan boy statement. It also has the 1802 bios update so there is a pretty good chance since this is a B2 stepping bios flash that it has the performance knock down cuz it is judging this as a Phenom 9600 with B2 stepping.

I have the CPU over clocked at 235FSB and at 2.935Ghz and it is running stable. Voltage is up to 1.45 or 1.435 not sure which. Temps are High compared to my 6400+ but I just installed it so Artic silver 5 hasn't had time to set in yet, but I don't see it making a huge drop in degrees.

Anyways like I said I am very unhappy with the benchmark06 resaults even with it being a AM2 board.

My new 9850BE on a MN232-sli deluxe AM2 socket scores Over clocked to 2.935ghz at 1.45 volts/ no overclock on the BFG 8800GTS 512MB (G92)

7379/ what a Joke!

BFG 8800GTS maxed out on overclock

7789/ still a joke!

6400+ with bios version 1402 @ 3.4Ghz stock/ no over clock on card

11,660

With over clocked to 3.4 and BFG 8800GTS maxed out

12,568

Something has to be wrong here, and I am guessing that it is a couple of things including the B2 stepping bios flash that happens to work with the Phenom 9850's. I just can't believe that the AM2 M2n32-sli deluxe could perform this **** with this processor. I will be getting a new ASus of the egg for about $219 but I am starting to wonder if it was worth upgrading from what I have. Tony on the extrems forum is only getting around 14000 on benchmarks with his set up. That really doesn't seem like a big jump to me. Anyone else upgraded their AM2 board with this processor just for **** and gigles to see what it would do until your AM2+ gets here? Let me know.
April 10, 2008 10:55:16 PM

My stock 6000+,8800GTS 512 G92 with the M2N32-SLI Deluxe is just under 12K in 3Dmark06 running all tests and with all 4 of my security programs running...2GB RAM and XP 32 bit w/SP2.
Useing whatever bios it was shipped with (bios date 12-17-07)

Revert back to an early bios and retest.
April 10, 2008 11:50:32 PM

OP you vista ratings are all wrong. that board is not right for phenom. sure it runs it but at what cost? at stock my 9500 gets a 5.9 in the vista index on an m3a32 mvp deluxe bios 0801. dont even continue benchmarking with that board you are only going o get more and more disappointed with the results. Solid oc to by the way should be fun on my watercooling when i get a 9850.

dam shame bout the board killing the phenom's performance
April 11, 2008 12:04:09 AM

Its all good, but just disappointing that the AM2 with the 9850 just can't even begin to compete with the 6400+Be. I just built the rig I have about 3 months ago and new that I would want to build one with the Phenom's once the B3 stepping were out. I just got it up to 3Ghz with about a 1.475 volt increase. I also added/took my OCZ gold ram DDR2 6400 up to 1.85 volts for 1.8 volts. I haven't benchmarked it but I think it will be a waste of time to cuz something is just not right here.

Also I can not update the bios to a older version and run this chip, so if I am going to do anything I will have to back flash it to 1402 and reinstall my 6400+ BE, but then I will not get to play with this new quad core, LOL. I was just really hoping for better benchmarks but, I have to admit, I am impressed with hitting 3ghz with air cooling, and I have a lot of fans believe me. Heres some pics of my rig guys.
http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii230/medjohnson77/n...
http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii230/medjohnson77/n...
April 11, 2008 12:09:06 AM

this thing is Idleing at 54C and my mother board is at 38C at the moment. when I push it in testing it has hit 66C do you guys think it is a good Idea to get it this hot??
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 12:26:11 AM

If you stated the 6400+ correctly at 3.4ghz (not the standard 3.2ghz), the 9850 would have to overclock to 3.2ghz at least to match or possibly beat it. Benchmarks should be a little closer though....

Edit: does that board happen to have the option to turn on/off the Phenom fix in the bios?
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 12:31:23 AM

Those scores are still incredibly bad. My FX-60 (which has the same HT limitations AND DDR1 ram) coupled with a 2900XT score a hair under 10k. This is not because you are running a AM2 board, something is seriously wrong.
April 11, 2008 12:38:33 AM

any Ideas on what it could be. The Bios version 1802 updated right. could part of it be the 1802 is for the B2 and has the limitor on it??
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 12:55:27 AM

:lol:  on AMD's so called backward compatibility.
April 11, 2008 1:08:02 AM

Yes Shadow on its so called backward compatibility, and a Rosewill RX-750 PSU, LOL. Anyways, Asus has yet to release a Bios version for the 9850 B3 stepping so i would say that might have a big part of whats going on. I really wish that their was more people that took the plunge and had my motherboard and see what resaults they get. Let me know guys. This Phenom is running hot at 3Ghz oc but it does seem to be running smooth and does not seem slower then my 6400+BE. Just getting **** benchmarks in 06
April 11, 2008 1:15:47 AM

Shadow703793 said:
:lol:  on AMD's so called backward compatibility.

Hey, it fits, so it's compatible.
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 2:14:39 AM

Evilonigiri said:
Hey, it fits, so it's compatible.

Naaahhh..... I consider compatibility to be when they actually run correctly with out motherboard upgrade. ;) 
April 11, 2008 2:44:56 AM

Well I believe its the 1802 bios update. I just pulled my phenom out and put my 6400+ back in. With bois 1402 which is what my board came with, I got 12,665 with the cpu over clocked as high as i could get it, around 3.5mhz I think and the 8800GTS at 798 and 1080.

I just ran bench marks and all i am getting with bios 1802 with the same settings is 10,110. So there has to be something there. I can't find bios 1402 and I believe my board came with the CD that has 1201 on it. So Not sure how to downgrade the bios, but it seems like it might be a good Idea. I also put the stock sink and fan from the Phenom so I am trying it out for a while. Appears to be Idling at around 40C. but just dropped it in so the Artic 5 might not have kicked in yet. My Rosewill cpu cooler kept my cpu at around 32-34 idle.

And shadow it seems to run smooth at 3mhz but just benchs bad. I really could not tell much difference in it from the 6400+Be. But I will be getting a AM2+ board very soon. I was hoping to hold out until the 700 south bridge sets were around. I will also be looking to water cool this Phenom cuz I can't get anymore fans into my case to cool this thing.
April 11, 2008 2:50:10 AM

to computertech,

I didn't see anyway to turn off the fix in the bios and if I remember right from what I have read in a few forums on some boards you can't turn it off. So not sure but it would have to be the bios update 1802 cuz nothing else has changed.
April 11, 2008 5:07:05 AM

im running a 6400+ BE on my am2+ mb and it runs well. If you really want to see how your 9850BE does, sent it to me and i will let you know :D 

i do consider going quadcore someday. the 6400+ BE is more than enough for now, but I suspect things will change in a year or so. I hope the 45nm phenoms will be compatible with AM2+ boards.
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 7:05:15 AM

medjohnson77 said:
Yes Vista scores are just bs at best but it is a reference to judge by. Just finished some benchmarks and I am very unhappy.

Hellboy, I am running this on a AM2 board with only a 1000HT-2000 so trying to say this chip is not impressive is kinda a fan boy statement. It also has the 1802 bios update so there is a pretty good chance since this is a B2 stepping bios flash that it has the performance knock down cuz it is judging this as a Phenom 9600 with B2 stepping.

I have the CPU over clocked at 235FSB and at 2.935Ghz and it is running stable. Voltage is up to 1.45 or 1.435 not sure which. Temps are High compared to my 6400+ but I just installed it so Artic silver 5 hasn't had time to set in yet, but I don't see it making a huge drop in degrees.

Anyways like I said I am very unhappy with the benchmark06 resaults even with it being a AM2 board.

My new 9850BE on a MN232-sli deluxe AM2 socket scores Over clocked to 2.935ghz at 1.45 volts/ no overclock on the BFG 8800GTS 512MB (G92)

7379/ what a Joke!


Its not a fanboy statement, its a factual statement...

Most people will go by the Windows Vista

BFG 8800GTS maxed out on overclock

7789/ still a joke!

6400+ with bios version 1402 @ 3.4Ghz stock/ no over clock on card

11,660

With over clocked to 3.4 and BFG 8800GTS maxed out

12,568

Something has to be wrong here, and I am guessing that it is a couple of things including the B2 stepping bios flash that happens to work with the Phenom 9850's. I just can't believe that the AM2 M2n32-sli deluxe could perform this **** with this processor. I will be getting a new ASus of the egg for about $219 but I am starting to wonder if it was worth upgrading from what I have. Tony on the extrems forum is only getting around 14000 on benchmarks with his set up. That really doesn't seem like a big jump to me. Anyone else upgraded their AM2 board with this processor just for **** and gigles to see what it would do until your AM2+ gets here? Let me know.



Let me just say repeat after repeat after repeat to every one self endulged person I am not a fanboy...

Gedit

Ok

all im saying is a year old chip out of the box reaches 5.9 in the windows Vista Experience Index (we'll cal it VEI shall we) speed test, all though this is not ideal, it does give some sort of indication on how applications - mostly games will run...

Now there may be bios issues causing this, but if there are some... Shouldn't of AMD spoke to the motherboard manufacturers first... I mean its a logical step isn't it. AMD's managment team is almost as incompetent as Britains labour party...

Only in denial AMD fanboys which you obviously are, and the rest of you AMD fans are by being on the deffensive in such away, that they can not see that this processor although not slow will not reach 5.9 on the VEI scale at stock speads which when AMD first demo'ed or showed it off there was a screen shot of it and 5.9 was the score...

Wether or not this was last years April Fool, someone making this up or a AMD lie - who knows.

But the 9850BE is supposed to be the fastest chip that AMD have... And I would atleast expected a 5.9 score on it after a simple bios update on a motherboard which should work with it... Wouldnt have you !!!!!!

I would love to offer Hi-End AMD Systems, I remember companies supplying machines on the AMD 64 front giving them the Higher spec marketting than the crappy Prescott... Which Intel deserved to be flamed on.

Over the next few weeks, I will be buying a Phenom to see how they run, with a socket AM2 790 AMD Chipset..

I just built a AMDx2 6000 machine, which is a good machine for office work and moderate gaming...

So dont start giving me that FANBOY crap... Im only stateing as I see it. I couldnt give a turd how Intel or AMD get to speed up their processors, as long as they work and fit in the hole in the motherboard...

I have been upgrading pcs and buiding pcs since the first clones came out about 20 years ago...

I remember switching dip switches or jumpers to set the processor at the right speed.
April 11, 2008 9:27:29 AM

medjohnson77 said:
Just got the Phenom 9850BE from ups today. I find it very interesting that when I upgraded windows score that my old blacks ed. 6400+ dual core got a stock rating of 5.6 out of the box.


I wouldn't have upgraded from a 6400+, unless you spend most of your time doing Photoshop and 3DS Max. I was going to get a 9850BE in May but I think I'm going to wait until Deneb, as the 690V board doesn't support Phenom. That's the kind of Black Edition I want, a native 3.0 gigahertz 45nm 65 watt Deneb. I'm guessing on the wattage, maybe it will be 89 or 95, but I can't see it being 125 because the process improvements should bring thermals down a bit.

My wife's ASUS 690G does support B2's and she's interested, but if they don't put out a B3 bios, then I'm not going to put a B2 in either. Then again, it might be fun to see if she runs into the errata. I don't think she will and she does use graphics programs that utilize 4 cores.

If you mostly play games, you won't see much improvement because you won't get past 2.8 without fiddling around with voltage, or so the reviews say. Just saw that you did fiddle with voltage. 2.93 isn't bad, but with Deneb coming out at an expected 3.0, I can predict you'll be upgrading in December once again.

medjohnson77 said:
any Ideas on what it could be. The Bios version 1802 updated right. could part of it be the 1802 is for the B2 and has the limitor on it??


I do know this from reviews. The B2 limiter in a bios does not affect the B3's. The bios ignores the limiter when a B3 is installed, as long as the bios supports a B3. If you're using a bios that doesn't support a B3, then that could lead to weird results.

Some 780G boards had voltage setups that did not support a 125 watt processor, but since you had a 6400+, your motherboard might be okay, but I read on another thread that the 125 watt X2's still only pulled 89 amps whereas the 125 watt Phenom's 9750's and 9850's pulled 100 amps, which can still be a problem.

Correct me if I'm wrong people but the info above is what I remember from the thread on the 780G, explaining what was happening. I've not had an Nvidia board beyond a cheap 405 chipset, so I'm not familiar with his SLI board's CPU support list.

Hellboy said:
all im saying is a year old chip out of the box reaches 5.9 in the windows Vista Experience Index (we'll cal it VEI shall we) speed test, all though this is not ideal, it does give some sort of indication on how applications - mostly games will run...


Call me a fanboy if you want, and I'll admit the Q6600 is better in some respects, but not in all. I happen to like ATI/AMD chipsets and GPU's so I go for a total platform and am willing to take a bit of a hit on CPU performance (but read above, I'm not willing to commit to a 9850BE on a 790 board with Deneb so close).

The fact that a CPU is a year old is irrelevant. The relevant fact is that the Q6600 is based on a better C2D processor packaged as "non-native". Intel obviously knew what they were talking about when they said it wasn't a good idea to go native quad core at 65nm and AMD made a big mistake. One that's haunted them longer than the 31 stage pipeline Netburst CPU's haunted Intel. Maybe it's just that the little guy gets picked on when falling down and the big guy gets a pass when he's bullying? (i.e. the Intel OEM rebate mishegoss that is thankfully past, such that AMD can rely on that mainstream market to survive).

Ignore the Windows Experience. That's worse than 3DMark 06 as a benchmark of quality. In real world tests, I expect his experience with the 9850 will equal that of testing sites, that showed it equalled a Q6600 on some benchmarks utilizing 4 cores, but fell behind in others, especially if the benchmarks did not use 4 cores.

IMHO, we won't see most games and applications using 4 cores until sometime between December 2008 and December 2009. We probably won't see games and most applications benefiting from 64 bit until 2010. When Deneb comes out, AMD will have the native quad core all us AMD fans have waited for and it might be too late for top spot (but not for company survival -- which Intel admits is in their best interest too).

Deneb will stock at 3.0 and might overclock to 3.6 Nehalem should reach 4.0 and will have hyperthreading at the high end for 8 virtual cores. I expect that Deneb will be the budget quad core solution 2 45nm, especially the first SOI itineration. Maybe AMD will be back on top at 32nm with IBM's newest process?

Me, I'll stay an AMD fan who wants the company to survive for a total platform that I like instead of AMD plus Nvidia or Intel plus AMD/ATI. I'll want AMD to survive, and not to just lower the prices of Intel CPU's. I don't work for AMD and really wish they hadn't laid anyone off (I hated Intel for layoffs when they're on top, jobs for loyal competent employees should be for life -- call me old fashioned-- well, I am old; in my days sonny, we walked to the Computation Center in a snowstorm just to play Advent when we didn't feel like doing our BASIC homework).

Can't wait for Deneb. I hope then it beats a Q6600 and Q6700. I hope it equals or beats a Penryn. I won't expect it to beat a Nehalem. So, I'm a realist fanboy and I laud Intel for coming back from a lousy processor design to a good one that wins overall. I just haven't seen Intel come back from their business practices much yet. Maybe they'll direct them at Nvidia next time around, that seems to be a fight gearing up considering Huang's comments at Nvidia's analyst day. He even supported AMD with his comments that Intel's "Laughabee" (his words) would not match the quality of the two GPU companies.
April 11, 2008 11:46:30 AM

Clam down Hell boy!

All I was trying to say is that my mother board is holding this processsor back. It is a AM2 board and the best you could get at the time with the 590 chipset for the AMD x2. When I upgrade the motherboard to the AM2+ 790FX chipset I am sure this quad core will get a vista of 5.9 with no problems. The bios update is Asus fault not AMD's fault. Asus should update there Bios to the new b3 stepping on these chips. And I am not a fan boy at anything. I just don't like Intel's high priced chips, believe If I had 1,100 dollar to burn I would be buying a Intel Quad, but I do not.
April 11, 2008 11:53:32 AM

And getting a oc on air of 3Ghz stable on this AM2 Board with a Bios version that doesn't support B3 stepping is not bad at all. It felt just as smooth as my 6400+ just not as good on benchs. Something just doesn't click with the bios update.
April 11, 2008 12:17:05 PM

Relative to your performance gains, that was a relatively expensive "upgrade" don't you think? I'm not saying that no one should buy 'em... just don't think people who are currently running X2 6400s are good candidates.

Btw, nice OC.
a c 126 à CPUs
April 11, 2008 2:16:01 PM

To the OP, It might not be just the BIOS version. It might be that that board just sucks for Phenom. Sure its backward compatable but at the cost of the performance. Try your 6400+ with the latest BIOS and see what happens.
April 11, 2008 3:05:09 PM

the 10000 score with the new bios flash 1802 and I can not find the 1402 my board came with. So the bios flash dropped my bench mark06 score by 2500 points from the 1402 bios score of 12556. was it worth it, i ll let you know when I get the new Asus am2+ board and hit 14000 on benchmark06. lol.
April 11, 2008 3:09:33 PM

Try a rollback to 1701 .
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 3:41:11 PM

yipsl said:
I wouldn't have upgraded from a 6400+, unless you spend most of your time doing Photoshop and 3DS Max. I was going to get a 9850BE in May but I think I'm going to wait until Deneb, as the 690V board doesn't support Phenom. That's the kind of Black Edition I want, a native 3.0 gigahertz 45nm 65 watt Deneb. I'm guessing on the wattage, maybe it will be 89 or 95, but I can't see it being 125 because the process improvements should bring thermals down a bit.

My wife's ASUS 690G does support B2's and she's interested, but if they don't put out a B3 bios, then I'm not going to put a B2 in either. Then again, it might be fun to see if she runs into the errata. I don't think she will and she does use graphics programs that utilize 4 cores.

If you mostly play games, you won't see much improvement because you won't get past 2.8 without fiddling around with voltage, or so the reviews say. Just saw that you did fiddle with voltage. 2.93 isn't bad, but with Deneb coming out at an expected 3.0, I can predict you'll be upgrading in December once again.



I do know this from reviews. The B2 limiter in a bios does not affect the B3's. The bios ignores the limiter when a B3 is installed, as long as the bios supports a B3. If you're using a bios that doesn't support a B3, then that could lead to weird results.

Some 780G boards had voltage setups that did not support a 125 watt processor, but since you had a 6400+, your motherboard might be okay, but I read on another thread that the 125 watt X2's still only pulled 89 amps whereas the 125 watt Phenom's 9750's and 9850's pulled 100 amps, which can still be a problem.

Correct me if I'm wrong people but the info above is what I remember from the thread on the 780G, explaining what was happening. I've not had an Nvidia board beyond a cheap 405 chipset, so I'm not familiar with his SLI board's CPU support list.



Call me a fanboy if you want, and I'll admit the Q6600 is better in some respects, but not in all. I happen to like ATI/AMD chipsets and GPU's so I go for a total platform and am willing to take a bit of a hit on CPU performance (but read above, I'm not willing to commit to a 9850BE on a 790 board with Deneb so close).

The fact that a CPU is a year old is irrelevant. The relevant fact is that the Q6600 is based on a better C2D processor packaged as "non-native". Intel obviously knew what they were talking about when they said it wasn't a good idea to go native quad core at 65nm and AMD made a big mistake. One that's haunted them longer than the 31 stage pipeline Netburst CPU's haunted Intel. Maybe it's just that the little guy gets picked on when falling down and the big guy gets a pass when he's bullying? (i.e. the Intel OEM rebate mishegoss that is thankfully past, such that AMD can rely on that mainstream market to survive).

Ignore the Windows Experience. That's worse than 3DMark 06 as a benchmark of quality. In real world tests, I expect his experience with the 9850 will equal that of testing sites, that showed it equalled a Q6600 on some benchmarks utilizing 4 cores, but fell behind in others, especially if the benchmarks did not use 4 cores.

IMHO, we won't see most games and applications using 4 cores until sometime between December 2008 and December 2009. We probably won't see games and most applications benefiting from 64 bit until 2010. When Deneb comes out, AMD will have the native quad core all us AMD fans have waited for and it might be too late for top spot (but not for company survival -- which Intel admits is in their best interest too).

Deneb will stock at 3.0 and might overclock to 3.6 Nehalem should reach 4.0 and will have hyperthreading at the high end for 8 virtual cores. I expect that Deneb will be the budget quad core solution 2 45nm, especially the first SOI itineration. Maybe AMD will be back on top at 32nm with IBM's newest process?

Me, I'll stay an AMD fan who wants the company to survive for a total platform that I like instead of AMD plus Nvidia or Intel plus AMD/ATI. I'll want AMD to survive, and not to just lower the prices of Intel CPU's. I don't work for AMD and really wish they hadn't laid anyone off (I hated Intel for layoffs when they're on top, jobs for loyal competent employees should be for life -- call me old fashioned-- well, I am old; in my days sonny, we walked to the Computation Center in a snowstorm just to play Advent when we didn't feel like doing our BASIC homework).

Can't wait for Deneb. I hope then it beats a Q6600 and Q6700. I hope it equals or beats a Penryn. I won't expect it to beat a Nehalem. So, I'm a realist fanboy and I laud Intel for coming back from a lousy processor design to a good one that wins overall. I just haven't seen Intel come back from their business practices much yet. Maybe they'll direct them at Nvidia next time around, that seems to be a fight gearing up considering Huang's comments at Nvidia's analyst day. He even supported AMD with his comments that Intel's "Laughabee" (his words) would not match the quality of the two GPU companies.


The trouble is Yipsl,

As I said VEI is not ideal, but it does give an indication......

The trouble is, most users will see this as black and white or the mecca of speed on pcs due to the fact it comes from the trusted source which is Microsoft , and it comes built in with the OS...

Most people out there believe what is written with in windows, unfortunately they also believe in the approximate time it takes to copy files which jumps from hours to minutes in a second...

I understand why Microsoft did this, and to some respects it may have worked against them as some machines ranked at 2.9 make people feel inadequate and the game ratings has still to be shown on the game boxes...

For example Frontlines - fuels of war does not give its requirements to a VEI rating... How odd !!! but it does give the specs whats needed to play it old fashioned way. Thats what I thought VEI was for !!!!


All I am saying for what ever the reasons are and to be honest I dont care about the technical issues down to how thick the gates are and how not thick the logic gates are... leave this to the hi end electronic engineers..
This doesnt affect us in general operation of the machine... What it does tho, is it results in either getting the product we want, or not if the case may be...

Its just a shame that AMD have had these issues and will still have overclocking issues for the next forciable future...

Even AMD is entitled to its version of the Prescott and this maybe it, although Prescotts sold by the buckets..AMD is yet to really supply the channel which integrates them into pc's.

Im still waiting to get hold of boxed ones from my suppliers as apposed to a web site order...

Its just a shame they werent a bit financially stronger when they did it...

April 11, 2008 4:06:35 PM

Hellboy said:
Only in denial AMD fanboys which you obviously are, and the rest of you AMD fans are by being on the deffensive in such away, that they can not see that this processor although not slow will not reach 5.9 on the VEI scale at stock speads which when AMD first demo'ed or showed it off there was a screen shot of it and 5.9 was the score...

Wether or not this was last years April Fool, someone making this up or a AMD lie - who knows.


No someone is just plain dumb, even the lowest Phenom scores 5.9 - if you don't have any idea what you're talking about, go back to direct-depositing your paycheck to Intel and let the rest of us talk with our big boy (and AMDfangirl) voices
April 11, 2008 5:27:49 PM

Hi all. Is there a chance, even a tiny little itty bitty chance the you downloaded the wrong bios? Asus has a lot of m2n mb choices.

Is this your board? http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=101&l3=300&l4...


Then this page contains all of the authorized BIOS updates:

http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=101&l3=300&l4...

If I didn't get the right model mb for you then check this link, it contains the listing of all m2 boards.

http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=101

Try reflashing the most current bios. The AM2 boards will work very well with the phenoms but will not allow the full potential of the Phenoms. You will need a AM2+ MB. I have a M3A32-MVP Deluxe wifi which is a AM2+ and I like it very much. Best of luck.

Jumpers Hellboy, I had a Tandy 1000 that didn't have a hard drive that ran at a blistering 8mhz. LOL
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 6:18:18 PM

MrManO1 said:
No someone is just plain dumb, even the lowest Phenom scores 5.9 - if you don't have any idea what you're talking about, go back to direct-depositing your paycheck to Intel and let the rest of us talk with our big boy (and AMDfangirl) voices


Yo FANBOI !

Hey if they score 5.9 why not in this Asus board...

So Asus are one of the best manufacturers out there out there........are they not....

Why hasn't AMD spoken to Asus to sort out their issues, or set guide lines .... Maybe they were sorting out their own issues with the Phenom, they didnt bother to or didnt have time to
include the vital component to make it work .. er the motherboard...

No I dont have and idea , and clearly I must be depositing my cheque and will donate the money to the intelligent dis advantage fund...

Where shale I send your obviously well deserved allowance.... :ouch:  :ouch:  :sarcastic: 
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 7:26:18 PM

Be extremely CAREFUL with flashing bios, as MANY motherboard makers WARN you, do NOT excessively flash the bios, it only takes one screw up/powerdrop/mishap to take it out.
a c 99 à CPUs
April 11, 2008 8:05:26 PM

MrManO1 said:
Does anyone disagree that HyperTransport 3.0 is the best feature behind the Phenoms? Sure, 3 or 4 cores is nice, but doubling the HT from 2GHz to 3.6GHz or 4GHz is huge. I just wish the CPUs were able to max out the boards at 5.2GHz, AMD must be saving that til AM3/45nm.


Yes, I disagree. The only thing that HyperTransport does on a desktop-only AMD CPU like the Phenom is allow for SB → NB communication. That didn't even saturate the 1600 MT/sec HT links in the 754 and S1 chips, so bumping the HT speed up a lot makes no difference in performance for the Phenom. Probably the best feature in the Phenom IMO is that AMD was able to pull it off and sell them at competitive prices. It was a very ambitious project that had a lot of new features added and was also done with less-than-optimal resources (such as the 65 nm process node rather than the 45 nm one.)

Now if you are talking about the HT speed boost benefiting AMD K10 chips as a whole, you have a bigger point as the K10 Opterons use HT to do CPU-to-CPU data transfers and the increased bandwidth IS a big deal.
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2008 8:22:43 PM

@hellboy and others:

STOP FLAMING!
April 11, 2008 8:40:54 PM

ZOldDude said:
My stock 6000+,8800GTS 512 G92 with the M2N32-SLI Deluxe is just under 12K in 3Dmark06 running all tests and with all 4 of my security programs running...2GB RAM and XP 32 bit w/SP2.
Useing whatever bios it was shipped with (bios date 12-17-07)

Revert back to an early bios and retest.



I smell some BS here..... I am running a stock 6400+, eVGA 8800GTS G92, XP SP2 and 4GB of ram without any programs running and I am sitting around 11600. it takes a lot more to just get under 12k.
    • 1 / 8
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!