Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Where is Budapest?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 3, 2008 7:49:53 PM

Hey,
I've been thinking about this for months now but I'm just getting around to it. I'm really wondering now why when Opteron 1P chips have always OCd MUCH higher than Athlon chips and they are all over Newegg has no one done one review of it. It's bad enough that very few sites actually benchmark OCd Phenoms, but how can review sites just skip the choice of Budapest.

I remember Opteron 180 being the best OCer from AMD. I would think that a 75W quad at 2.1GHz should clock to around 2.7GHz, maybe even 3GHz.

More about : budapest

October 3, 2008 8:21:03 PM

oh that
i thought you meant the country.

October 3, 2008 8:31:50 PM

Yea, I wish that they would review them as well. I built a system for a friend built on the 180 and we were able to high 2.8ghz pretty easily. He has been runnin it for quite a while now and its still rock solid with now issues.

Hopefully they will make another jem like the 180 with the server version of shanghi. I am planning on building a 2nd system based on shanghi once it releases if I can find the extra funds. Just for kicks and to be able to make personal comparisons.

I remember buying the Xeon 3040 in hopes that it would be similar to the OC'ing that the 180 had, but alas...it did not. It took me 1.4625v to stabilize it @ 2.8ghz, which granted was a good OC, but that was the max OC when the Core 2 6300's (desktop equivalent) were hitting 3+ghz with less voltage and heat...I wasnt to happy with the 3040 results and thus switched to the 6420. lol

Best,

3Ball
Related resources
October 3, 2008 8:56:10 PM

unfortunately it seems the sites stick with the popular choices for gaming CPU's these days and Intel seems to be the top these days. and i am not surprised that Phenom's are not mentioned sense they couldn't recover from there buggy CPU mess when they first came out
October 3, 2008 11:19:08 PM

captaincharisma said:
unfortunately it seems the sites stick with the popular choices for gaming CPU's these days and Intel seems to be the top these days. and i am not surprised that Phenom's are not mentioned sense they couldn't recover from there buggy CPU mess when they first came out



That's BS. Intel had to recall C2D. Phenom\Barcelona are faster than Athlon. And when AMD was eating Intel's lunch, every site still reviewed HeatBurst, so what's the difference?
October 4, 2008 12:35:33 AM

BaronMatrix said:
That's BS. Intel had to recall C2D. Phenom\Barcelona are faster than Athlon. And when AMD was eating Intel's lunch, every site still reviewed HeatBurst, so what's the difference?


Really? When did this happen? I remember something about some microcode update being needed for certain systems, but never a recall, and I've had a Core 2 (E6600) when they first released, with no recall.

So, what recall are you talking about?
October 4, 2008 2:14:08 AM

BaronMatrix said:
That's BS. Intel had to recall C2D. Phenom\Barcelona are faster than Athlon. And when AMD was eating Intel's lunch, every site still reviewed HeatBurst, so what's the difference?


Proof?

none

I had one of the very first C2Ds, and when I say very first, I mean very first. Only because the AMD X25000s were going for $550 while the E6600 I am still using was $359. There were no recalls. You are pulling BS out of your arse, yet again. If not, then ante up the link. Once more you try to boost the reputation of your 'precious' by denigrating the competition. Pathetic

Oh, you can skip any BS links from inq amdzone or fud
October 4, 2008 2:43:23 AM

I think he was referring to some delay in the C2D launch that I seem to vaguely remember, atleast that is all I can think of.
a c 141 à CPUs
October 4, 2008 2:54:13 AM

If I remember correctly, Budapest is a city in Hungary, not a country.
October 4, 2008 3:09:45 AM

No, I think he was refering to an microcode update MS released for certain C2Ds, as reported by the inq.

October 4, 2008 3:13:33 AM

Ah yes I had totally forgotten about that one, good thinking turpit.
October 4, 2008 5:07:57 AM

I recall benches being evenly done in those days as well, not like today tho. I agree, we need more benches on AMD cpus than were currently getting, but it was even back in the K8 days, tho maybe it should have majorly favored K8 benches like we see today with Intel since the C2D?
a c 127 à CPUs
October 4, 2008 5:27:21 PM

BaronMatrix said:
That's BS. Intel had to recall C2D. Phenom\Barcelona are faster than Athlon. And when AMD was eating Intel's lunch, every site still reviewed HeatBurst, so what's the difference?


Yea there was no recall. But AMD did recal their Opteron based K10 chips from the places that the TLB bug would have effected them.

Yes every site reviewd Netburst chips. Thats what they do. They get a chip and they test it.

If I remember back in the Athlon X2 days the systems were running Athlon X2s when it came to testing GPUs and the such.

As for the Opterons, I have yet to see any sites test them. And I don't think they will because very few people even use K10 based Opterons in a desktop enviroment. That and the fact that they are on a different socket than Phenom.

As for AMD CPU benches, how many do you want? I see one with every new CPU AMD throws out or at least every CPU AMD sends out to the sites. Ya think it could be AMD not delivering ES chips?
October 5, 2008 2:49:23 AM

turpit said:
Proof?

none

I had one of the very first C2Ds, and when I say very first, I mean very first. Only because the AMD X25000s were going for $550 while the E6600 I am still using was $359. There were no recalls. You are pulling BS out of your arse, yet again. If not, then ante up the link. Once more you try to boost the reputation of your 'precious' by denigrating the competition. Pathetic

Oh, you can skip any BS links from inq amdzone or fud



I'm sorry you were offended by my saying that both Intel and AMD have supply, manufacture and very rarely process problems. I guess what you could call it was a respin. I guess if they were AMD suffering with the lower prices mentioned they may have had a Barcelona - which, btw, is overhyped nonsense.

Anyway it wasn't to say Intel sucks, it was to say that stuff happens with complex designs.

And wow, you actually told me not to post links you say aren't "good enough." Because it was 2006, even Google is choking. Hey maybe they should send me money for mentioning them.
It wasn't an insurmountable problem but it did happen.
October 5, 2008 2:50:46 AM

The_Blood_Raven said:
Ah yes I had totally forgotten about that one, good thinking turpit.



No you are correct. It didn't kill supply it just required changing the line.
a c 127 à CPUs
October 5, 2008 3:06:14 AM

BaronMatrix said:
No you are correct. It didn't kill supply it just required changing the line.


Actually he is right. It didn't kill supply or have a recall. It had either a BIOS update or this:

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=936357

A update from MS that fixed it. It turns out it was something that would rarely ever be seen if at all, just like the TLB bug in Phenoms that only affected virtualization.

Seriously BM, do the research. There was no recall just a stupid post by some guy back in June of 07 (funny thing is this happened in early April of 07 too) stating it could possibly be a recall when there was no possibility.
October 5, 2008 3:15:23 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Yea there was no recall. But AMD did recal their Opteron based K10 chips from the places that the TLB bug would have effected them.

Yes every site reviewd Netburst chips. Thats what they do. They get a chip and they test it.

If I remember back in the Athlon X2 days the systems were running Athlon X2s when it came to testing GPUs and the such.

As for the Opterons, I have yet to see any sites test them. And I don't think they will because very few people even use K10 based Opterons in a desktop enviroment. That and the fact that they are on a different socket than Phenom.

As for AMD CPU benches, how many do you want? I see one with every new CPU AMD throws out or at least every CPU AMD sends out to the sites. Ya think it could be AMD not delivering ES chips?



First, Budapest is AM2+. Would you accept a Newegg link? Second 1xx and 2xxx Opterons were known to OC better in 1P configs. And if you're saying that no reviewers can get them versus just getting them I can't say. Aren't you interested to see how they OC?
October 5, 2008 3:21:53 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Actually he is right. It didn't kill supply or have a recall. It had either a BIOS update or this:

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=936357

A update from MS that fixed it. It turns out it was something that would rarely ever be seen if at all, just like the TLB bug in Phenoms that only affected virtualization.

Seriously BM, do the research. There was no recall just a stupid post by some guy back in June of 07 (funny thing is this happened in early April of 07 too) stating it could possibly be a recall when there was no possibility.



Core 2 was released in Jun 2006 not 2007. Why are you assuming I'm saying Intel sucks at releasing chips? If you want the truth Google returned a scathing Linux thread about Intel errata. I just would like to see if Budapest is as good as the dual core Opteron 1Ps.
October 5, 2008 3:24:12 AM

On a totally separate note the SNAP(double underline hover) feature actually returns Opteron 180 with the keyword Opteron. But then maybe it'll be different for another user. Can someone verify that.
October 5, 2008 3:43:12 AM

BaronMatrix said:
I'm sorry you were offended by my saying that both Intel and AMD have supply, manufacture and very rarely process problems. I guess what you could call it was a respin. I guess if they were AMD suffering with the lower prices mentioned they may have had a Barcelona - which, btw, is overhyped nonsense.

Anyway it wasn't to say Intel sucks, it was to say that stuff happens with complex designs.

And wow, you actually told me not to post links you say aren't "good enough." Because it was 2006, even Google is choking. Hey maybe they should send me money for mentioning them.
It wasn't an insurmountable problem but it did happen.


Offended that you lied? Of course I am. You know I despise liars.

Now you can add offended at yet another of your ineffectual attempts to cover your tracks.

You did not say:
Quote:
both Intel and AMD have supply, manufacture and very rarely process problems

You said:
BaronMatrix said:
That's BS. Intel had to recall C2D


Intel never recalled C2D. You know it, and you knew it when you wrote it.

You lied, as you so frequently do. You did not respin. You lied.
October 5, 2008 3:59:20 AM

BaronMatrix said:
No you are correct. It didn't kill supply it just required changing the line.


Coming from a person who *knows* if they changed the line... they most assuredly did NOT. At least because of any critical bug.

1. Changing the line implies they changed the process. They did not.
2. If you meant taping out a new reticle set, yes, I'm sure they did. Do you know how many different NPIs of C2D existed? I'm not a design engineer, so I do not know the nature of each revision.
3. Just like AMD, Intel *does* do incremental process improvement. There is no such thing as a process freeze... new and improved ideas are always welcome, but as the technology matures, the barrier to said adoption gets higher and higher. No ROI, no insertion. Check out the defect density AND transistor performance metric curves of the intel process. They never stop getting better.
4. And, just like AMD, they also keep making design improvements.

Show me a CPU which is not buggy and/or a process which is perfect.
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2008 4:17:28 AM

I read this when he 1st put up that lie. But I couldnt even think of anything to say except for him a lying tool.
And I just didnt want to reply with that. I dont want to name call or anything but man, what a tool.
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2008 6:10:54 AM

If Intel recalled C2D I wouldn't be stuck with this pile of melting B2 silicon. Damn you Intel for making most of your CPUs good, but not mine!
a c 127 à CPUs
October 5, 2008 7:21:01 AM

BaronMatrix said:
First, Budapest is AM2+. Would you accept a Newegg link? Second 1xx and 2xxx Opterons were known to OC better in 1P configs. And if you're saying that no reviewers can get them versus just getting them I can't say. Aren't you interested to see how they OC?


I never said anything about Budapest, but Opteron overall. What I am saying is maybe AMD is not sending the review sites samples to review and I doubt they are going to spend money just to review it unless its a new chip. Or do you not remember how hard it was for a site like THG to get a Phenom in launch? Hell they didn't get one until after the launch and after half a dozen in house shows with cherry picked 3GHz Phenoms. Maybe AMD doesn't want to see how well they OC.

Besides the Opty 180 was K8 based. These are K10 based, correct? What makes you think they will OC just as good or better than K8 based Optys?

BaronMatrix said:
Core 2 was released in Jun 2006 not 2007. Why are you assuming I'm saying Intel sucks at releasing chips? If you want the truth Google returned a scathing Linux thread about Intel errata. I just would like to see if Budapest is as good as the dual core Opteron 1Ps.


I wasn't talking about that and never said that. I was talking about the fact that the OP was posted about 3 months after the update from MS and BIOS vendors was put out. Its a easy way to prove that you lied. There never was a recall on C2D. Just a errata that MS and Intel found and had two ways to fix quite fast.

randomizer said:
If Intel recalled C2D I wouldn't be stuck with this pile of melting B2 silicon. Damn you Intel for making most of your CPUs good, but not mine!


Thats too bad. How did you kill it? OC attempt gone wrong? Sad to say but there will always be duds no matter what. Both AMD and Intel will have them.
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2008 7:26:42 AM

Kill it? Ha! I wish I could. It just won't die, I can't even kill it with no heatsink. Intel is good at making fail-proof chips. It just runs hot and isn't a very good overclocker, that's all.
October 5, 2008 8:10:31 AM

Seriously, why is a joker like BM still around? Turpit, why can't you just ban him for "spreading knowingly misinformation"?

I'm really tired of seeing this guy running around, and writing blank checks with his mouth (or fingers :sarcastic: ) as if there's no consequences.
a c 127 à CPUs
October 5, 2008 9:33:37 AM

randomizer said:
Kill it? Ha! I wish I could. It just won't die, I can't even kill it with no heatsink. Intel is good at making fail-proof chips. It just runs hot and isn't a very good overclocker, that's all.


Ahhh well that sucks. Maybe you should go peltier cooling. That or move to the middle of Alaska and have it water cooled with a pipe that drains off an iceberg.

:kaola: 
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2008 10:12:34 AM

Or... I could get turpit to hurry up and get LN2 piped to my house. He's so slow with these sorts of things. Come on turpit! If they can do it with natural gas, you can do it with LN2. You da man!
October 5, 2008 1:56:53 PM

turpit said:
Offended that you lied? Of course I am. You know I despise liars.

Now you can add offended at yet another of your ineffectual attempts to cover your tracks.

You did not say:
Quote:
both Intel and AMD have supply, manufacture and very rarely process problems

You said:

Intel never recalled C2D. You know it, and you knew it when you wrote it.

You lied, as you so frequently do. You did not respin. You lied.



I remember now. It was a respin because the initial chips were overheating. I don't lie. You just hate for anyone to besmirch your precious Intel. They make mistakes too. It still doesn't change the fact that I would like to see what Budapest can do. I'm actually thinking about making a deal with someone so I can do the reviews I want to see. Most review sites use a chip that no one has: QX9650.
October 5, 2008 1:59:53 PM

yomamafor1 said:
Seriously, why is a joker like BM still around? Turpit, why can't you just ban him for "spreading knowingly misinformation"?

I'm really tired of seeing this guy running around, and writing blank checks with his mouth (or fingers :sarcastic: ) as if there's no consequences.



I still want to see Budapest tested. That was the purpose of the thread. Someone else went off on a tangent. And the initial C2D chips were overheating. They had to do to do a new spin.
October 5, 2008 3:17:46 PM

Hey Baronmatrix, good to see u back, i always enjoy your posts and and expertise.
October 5, 2008 4:25:23 PM

Anyway, to be honest I really would love to see some non-Phenom AMD benchmarks on the web. No one does them anymore, it is really frustrating.
October 5, 2008 4:35:26 PM

BaronMatrix said:
I remember now. It was a respin because the initial chips were overheating. I don't lie. You just hate for anyone to besmirch your precious Intel. They make mistakes too. It still doesn't change the fact that I would like to see what Budapest can do. I'm actually thinking about making a deal with someone so I can do the reviews I want to see. Most review sites use a chip that no one has: QX9650.


Oh, really?

I have an ES of the E6700, and it never once overheated. I used a retail E6600, as well, with no overheating issues. So, whatever "respin" you are talking about for overheating, is pure...BS.

If you would've said, there was issues with the stock heatsink, then you would be right. Just claiming that the CPUs were overheating is a lie. It's not about besmirching Intel, it's calling out someone making up stuff that never happened, ie. lies.

Also, one has a QX9650? Really? Are you sure? At Newegg's review secton for the QX9650, there are people there who have purchased this CPU. You see under their username "This user purchased this item from Newegg". Seems like people have purchased and own this CPU, contrary to your claim that "no one has". Hell, look at my CPUZ link...still believe "no one has" one?

You want to know how Budapest would do, that's fine. But you had to take jabs at Core 2, which weren't true, then you get all upset when people call you out on it. Too bad. I'm sure I'd get called out if I said the same crap you are saying about Phenom.
October 5, 2008 4:58:48 PM

BaronMatrix said:
I still want to see Budapest tested. That was the purpose of the thread. Someone else went off on a tangent. And the initial C2D chips were overheating. They had to do to do a new spin.


Again, proof? I have two initial C2Ds, E6700 and E6300, both ran fine at 60C load w/ stock cooling. I still have the chips now.

Where is your source?
October 5, 2008 5:02:34 PM

BaronMatrix said:
I remember now. It was a respin because the initial chips were overheating. I don't lie. You just hate for anyone to besmirch your precious Intel. They make mistakes too. It still doesn't change the fact that I would like to see what Budapest can do. I'm actually thinking about making a deal with someone so I can do the reviews I want to see. Most review sites use a chip that no one has: QX9650.


You said:
BaronMatrix said:
That's BS. Intel had to recall C2D

You did not say:
Quote:
both Intel and AMD have supply, manufacture and very rarely process problems

nor did you say
BaronMatrix said:
I remember now. It was a respin because the initial chips were overheating.


Intel never recalled C2D. The initial chips did not overheat. I have one and it never overheated. You know it, and you knew it when you wrote it.
Thats twice youve lied in one thread. The first a bold faced lie, the second another inefectual attempt to cover your tracks.

You will not violate TOS again. Do you understand?


Oh, and dont lie about "taking a break" any more either.
October 5, 2008 5:33:35 PM

I like BM. He's a vital part of the ecosystem.

Most folks don't like cockroaches, but the world would really suck without them.
October 5, 2008 5:42:00 PM

I locked this thread before people write checks with their mouths ... that their arses can't cash.
!