Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dragon Architecture Build

Last response: in Systems
Share
April 14, 2009 7:38:20 AM

Dragon Architecture is no joke.

I just completed a new gaming system build. I decided to try a 100% AMD build, despite the fact that AMD is known for having driver issues. Everyone knows that Intel dominates the cpu chip industry 95% of the time. Currently Intel dominates with the Core I7. As far as video cards Nvidia usually dominates, however AMD has held the top spot for good amounts of time. As far as chip sets go most people agree that Intel and Nvidia are top dog.

I heard about "Dragon Architecture" and of course anything with the word dragon just sounds cool. At first I figured it was just a marketing tactic. I asked a friend of mine and he confirmed what I first thought (which was wrong) that it was simply a marketing tool. I decided to do some research, basicly just google searches, magazine articles.

What I found is that there is really something to "Dragon Architecture" By combining three core AMD products, AMD claims you will receive a performance boost for gaming. Because the products are designed to work together to gain a performance boost.

A Nutshel description: If the GPU can perform task faster than the CPU and the GPU and the has enough resources it will perform that task. If the CPU can perform a task faster than the GPU and the resources are available it will perform that task.

The minimum requirements are:
1. AMD 790GX Chipset.
2. AMD Phenom II Processor.
3. AMD Radeon 4800 Series Graphics Processing Unit.

I built the following system.
OS: Vista Ultimate 64-Bit.
MB: MSI 790GX-G65.
CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 810 2.6GHz Socket AM3.
GPU: Single Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5.
RAM: Mushkin 4GB DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800).
HD: Two Seagate Barracuda 250GB 7200 RPM Raid 0 Striping.
PSU: OCZ StealthXStream OCZ600SXS 600W.
Case: Antec Nine hundred.
Audio: Creative SB X-Fi.

It was the build from hell for 3 days. I had several problems all of which were fixed by performing a CHKDSK, lesson learned don't alway use Quick Format LOL.

Once the system was up and running I benched it with no overclocking using 3DMARK Vantage. I was shocked to see a pathetic score that was really no better than my previous gaming rig, a AMD64X2 Build, nvidia chipset, nvidia card, etc..

The MSI board has a two switches when you turn them on it will overclock your rig by 20%. So I turned the switches and ran 3DMARK again and my score still sucked. I was @#%^@%#$ pissed off.

I was screaming and thought I had wasted my money. So I decided to give it the "Crysis Test".

I ran Crysis with 8 anti alias, and every option set to ultra high. My dissapointment quickly faded once I started playing, The game looked Stunning! I had absolutely no lag, no screen tearing, no blur when I turned my camera view. The game runs Perfect!

It appears that 3DMark does not give a proper bench score with this setup, because this gaming rig runs Crysis just as well as my roomates Core I7 setup (2.6), 8 gigs memory, 260GTX, etc..

I would not say that I have become a AMD fanboy but Dragon Architecure is the real deal.










April 14, 2009 8:03:03 AM

thats because the phenom does better in gaming and your gfx cards are essentially the same.
April 14, 2009 4:43:43 PM

First off there is no Dragon Architecture. It remained unchanged from the original phenoms, which i believe still have the same architecture as the athlon 64x2's. All they did was shrink the die and add more l3 cache. Second the use of the GPU in conjunction with the CPU is called Parallel processing, a feature expected to be built into Windows 7 and OSX Snow Leopard. It provides a huge jump as far as video encoding/decoding because of the huge numbers of stream processors found on modern graphics cards. Third, yes. Benches seldom give real world performance. Fourth, no you wont see a significant difference between your rig and your friends. assuming his is running at nearly the same frequency the cpus have similar amounts of cache and the same physical number of cores. Beyond 4gb has no performance advantage in gaming. That and the 4870 and gtx 260 are similar as mentioned above. plz dont clutter the forums with your bragging about things you dont understand.
Related resources
April 15, 2009 12:01:10 AM

Quote:
It remained unchanged from the original phenoms, which i believe still have the same architecture as the athlon 64x2's

Not completely. The Phenom was designed with partly from scratch as a true Quad core, unlike Intel with two Dual Cores glued to make the quad. Sadly, AMD failed with the Phenom vs the C2D/C2Q.
April 15, 2009 2:30:10 AM

There's nothing going on here that's different than any other rig.

The combination of hardware isn't making some special alchemical combo +4 modifier with the inclusion of specific hardware.

While the Phenom II is quite powerful, citing numerous processor enhancements and the inclusion of L3 cache, it's at the end of it's development cycle. The AM3 platform is a dying legacy of technology, easily outpaced by the i7. Sad thing is, it wouldn't have seen the light of day if AMD hadn't lit the candle under Intel's ass back during the Northwood days of the worthless P4.

Forget "Dragon" architecture. While some platforms like yours will utilize the built in GPU of the 780 and save $$ on energy used to drive video, nothing magical is going on when it comes to the direct x 9 functions it performing.
April 15, 2009 6:12:47 AM

Trolls......

I will continue to make posts on these forums unless a forum moderator asks me to or bans me, LOL that won't happen.

wait let me guess your friend is a forum moderator.....

Also...

Don't just take any post of these forums as being the absolute truth! I encourage you to do the research for yourself. Of course if you go to AMD website they will say that it's the best thing since sliced bread!

I suggest you do your research, read reviews from lots of magazines, and read forum posts like this one.

The fact is this.

My rig cost less than $1000 to build and my roomates cost over $1500. Both of them perform equal for gaming except for bench scores.

oh and by the way my roomates rig is overclocked to 3.4 ghz. and my rig is overclocked at 3.2 ghz.

have a nice day.
April 15, 2009 6:56:24 AM

dothamar said:
Trolls......

I will continue to make posts on these forums unless a forum moderator asks me to or bans me, LOL that won't happen.

wait let me guess your friend is a forum moderator.....

Also...

Don't just take any post of these forums as being the absolute truth! I encourage you to do the research for yourself. Of course if you go to AMD website they will say that it's the best thing since sliced bread!

I suggest you do your research, read reviews from lots of magazines, and read forum posts like this one.

The fact is this.

My rig cost less than $1000 to build and my roomates cost over $1500. Both of them perform equal for gaming except for bench scores.

oh and by the way my roomates rig is overclocked to 3.4 ghz. and my rig is overclocked at 3.2 ghz.

have a nice day.


You've used one app to define 'equal'? and a game at that? How about a comparison of PSCS4, or any good video encoding app. How about Autocad, rendering a re-draw of a ten layer, 3D view that goes to 700MB in total?

And what were the comparitive FRAPS scores of the two machines in Crysis? Ooh... Your machine is 'just as 'snappy' as your buddies'... Well good for you. I want benchmarks, be it FRAPS, seconds from POST to final system load, etc. Anything else is just touchy-feely fluff.

Let me guess... You bought your case because it 'looks cool' and there are lots of little winky-blinky lights inside...
April 15, 2009 7:29:14 AM

Nerd rage from a bunch of overweight guys who live in there mothers basements.

Did'nt your mother tell you to take that trash out?
April 15, 2009 8:01:32 AM

So I was right? You bought your case because it looks cool, and has lots of little winky-blinky lights inside?

17 minutes 34.5 seconds to do a re-draw of a 10 layer, 3d ACad file that is over 700MB's... Same file on a Phenom 2 was taking 45 minutes and a bit.
April 15, 2009 12:30:50 PM

croc said:
You've used one app to define 'equal'? and a game at that? How about a comparison of PSCS4, or any good video encoding app. How about Autocad, rendering a re-draw of a ten layer, 3D view that goes to 700MB in total?

And what were the comparitive FRAPS scores of the two machines in Crysis? Ooh... Your machine is 'just as 'snappy' as your buddies'... Well good for you. I want benchmarks, be it FRAPS, seconds from POST to final system load, etc. Anything else is just touchy-feely fluff.

Let me guess... You bought your case because it 'looks cool' and there are lots of little winky-blinky lights inside...


+1 for that post. :) 
April 15, 2009 12:42:42 PM

he can define them as equal, as long as he mentions 'in gaming'.

but he hasn't he mentioned crysis which isn't a game it's the world's no.1 unconquerable benchmark.

so flame on.

I will say that the phenom architecture is still better than Nehalem though but amd's "lets wait until they've done it and copy them" attitude has put them behind. They need to introduce QPI @ 5ghz and hyperthreading fast along with 40nm or below die shrink.

Otherwise not many people are going have high end pc's anymore.
June 23, 2009 3:25:52 PM

First off, ill try to keep from stooping to your level. Im an 18 year old male, living on my own, with my own car, about to finalize my Comptia A+ and N+ certifications. Ive already got an interview set up with a local hosting company ( Rackspace, google it ) and have been told that barring some natural disaster or my inability to coexist with my fellow employees I have the job. I exercise regularly, wrestled for my High School team ( 3500 students ), and have been involved in boxing, mma, etc for the vast majority of my life as both my father and grandfather were boxers. Ive been very blessed to be where I am, and wouldnt trade it for the world. So please dont assume that becuase someone dares to challenge your ignorance, they must automatically be freaks without actual lives. To the above ( helloworld_98 ) the phenom architecture cant be better than Nehalem for one clear and definitive reason. i7 is simply Intel's "Core 2" architecture with an on die memory controller, L3 cache, and no FSB. The Core 2 was the chip that put AMD behind as it used less power than the Athlon 64x2, and would beat it soundly at the same frequency in any benchmark. The phenom is similarly based on its predecessor in that it has an adapted version of the 64x2 architecture modified to support four cores and L3 cache. Intel copied AMD in its implementation of QPI ( or Hyper-Transport for AMD ) not the other way around, whatsmore "Hyper-Threading" is proprietary Intel code built into Intel CPUs that allows the OS to interface with four physical cores as if they were 8 ( 8 threads ) so AMD would have to develop their own version which may very well infringe on Intel's patent. I dont recall offhand when it was implemented, but it was fairly recent. Both Intel and AMD have new microarchitectures slated for 2010 ( Codenamed Sandybridge and Bulldozer respectively )
a b À AMD
June 23, 2009 3:42:45 PM

First off, its the dragon platform not architecture, and if you only use 2 bench marks well of course you are going to score similarly on one of them. You should never post saying that such and such is similar to this or that based on these two tests, there is a reason Tom's and other sites you a dozen or more different benchmarks.

Have you and your friend run half the benchmark suite that Tom's uses and post the scores, i like AMD for the bang for the buck, but i have no doubt in my mind that his i7 system will beat yours by a good margin in every nongaming benchmark as a 955 is close to a Q9550 but an 810 is thus no where near an i7. Sorry but nice try on the troll.
June 23, 2009 7:30:48 PM

WTF? Please don't bring back dead threads.
!