First, Phenom consumes far more than 95wt when overclocked. Some of figures from overclocks in the range of 3 ghz have been around 235wts. That's a lot of power, which in turn makes a lot of heat and will take a large heatsink to disapate it.
235wts is pretty close to the 2*125=250wts required by a pair of QuadFX processors. This means noise like the QuadFX too.
Message edited by d4NjvRzf on 12-21-2007 at 05:23:00 PM
...They are overclocking so well that AMD has decided not bother releases higher clocked versions because they believe that at 2.6ghz it won't have any issues...
@ coret- Considering that you do all those things, then a quad core is a good purchase for you. Because I do a lot of things at once as well, I am also in the market for a quad core. Just a bit earlier today, for instance, my computer was slowed down to a near standstill as I overloaded its two cores. That doesn't happen often, but when it does, its very annoying. There are legitimate reasons to buy a quad core and I have no argument against those. For the moment, I just don't think Phenom is ready yet. The B3 stepping is supposed to cure its problems. I hope it does.
As to the TLB issue, I don't know how great a problem it is, other then AMD has admitted to it and has withheld shipment of higher clocked Phenoms until it is fixed. In a different thread (AMD giving away engineering samples for retail), Turpit speculated that there may be more problems than just the TLB for AMD to issue the stop shipment on the Barcelona variant and withhold the higher Phenoms. He also included the reasoning that if 98% of the people won't be affected, why the stop shipment? I don't know the answer to this, only see the effects.
For myself, next month I presently plan to buy a DFI 790FX board and a 5000+ BE for it. When the B3 stepping appears, if it is fixed properly, I'll buy one of those. ALternatively, if I see more good reviews involving the 9600 BE, I might give that a try instead of the 5000+ BE. I have a couple weeks to read reviews and think it over, so I'll be patient and let time show me the goods.
Second, I did point out that Phenom has four cores verses X2's two cores and thus would have an advantage with those programs that can use four cores. But that leaves the practical question; how many programs, particularly games, use those four cores?
I was astounded by the DivX and Xvid encoding benchmarks in the Xbit article. They seem to scale about 25% quad over dual (Q6600 and E6850 are neck-and-neck in these benchmarks, the latter being clocked 25% higher), and yet even the 3Ghz Phenom comes in behind the dual-core!
Wattage isn't really an issue with overclocking, OCers don't care how much power it will use, just how fast it will go.
(Of course power is a consideration when picking a power supply, but you know what I mean)
Well, I'm an OC'er and I greatly care about Power Usage while OC'd.
That means more noise and more heat.
I currently have 4 systems running in my office and 3 are OC'd as far as I can OC them w/o needing a massive power increase. I want to minimize noise and heat put off by all of these systems while getting the maximum performance possible since I need both horsepower and the "Noise/Heat" savings.
@ coret- Considering that you do all those things, then a quad core is a good purchase for you. Because I do a lot of things at once as well, I am also in the market for a quad core. Just a bit earlier today, for instance, my computer was slowed down to a near standstill as I overloaded its two cores. That doesn't happen often, but when it does, its very annoying. There are legitimate reasons to buy a quad core and I have no argument against those. For the moment, I just don't think Phenom is ready yet. The B3 stepping is supposed to cure its problems. I hope it does.
As to the TLB issue, I don't know how great a problem it is, other then AMD has admitted to it and has withheld shipment of higher clocked Phenoms until it is fixed. In a different thread (AMD giving away engineering samples for retail), Turpit speculated that there may be more problems than just the TLB for AMD to issue the stop shipment on the Barcelona variant and withhold the higher Phenoms. He also included the reasoning that if 98% of the people won't be affected, why the stop shipment? I don't know the answer to this, only see the effects.
For myself, next month I presently plan to buy a DFI 790FX board and a 5000+ BE for it. When the B3 stepping appears, if it is fixed properly, I'll buy one of those. ALternatively, if I see more good reviews involving the 9600 BE, I might give that a try instead of the 5000+ BE. I have a couple weeks to read reviews and think it over, so I'll be patient and let time show me the goods.
sailer: Is the AMD Over Drive shipped with the 9600 BE or the DFI 790FX (or 790X) ?
There's no reason to buy a Phenom without the AOD.
Well, I'm an OC'er and I greatly care about Power Usage while OC'd.
That means more noise and more heat.
I currently have 4 systems running in my office and 3 are OC'd as far as I can OC them w/o needing a massive power increase. I want to minimize noise and heat put off by all of these systems while getting the maximum performance possible since I need both horsepower and the "Noise/Heat" savings.
I have to agree with Zen on this one TC. Your talking more about extreme overclocking rather than your average overclock.
I overclock to the limit of my hardware just to find its limits. I then back down to stock because in general the increased performance isn't really needed. Obviously depending on the cpu at stock anyway. To get my hardware to its limit means increasing all the fan speeds just to keep the heat down which is noisy and increases the system power consumption. If I start to find my hardware lagging then I can increase knowing were the limit is. Even then I will still try to keep the overclock as low as I think is necassary to keep noise/heat down.
For myself, next month I presently plan to buy a DFI 790FX board and a 5000+ BE for it. When the B3 stepping appears, if it is fixed properly, I'll buy one of those. ALternatively, if I see more good reviews involving the 9600 BE, I might give that a try instead of the 5000+ BE. I have a couple weeks to read reviews and think it over, so I'll be patient and let time show me the goods.
I would still like to see a review using an AM2 cpu in an AM2+ board with ddr2 1066 compared to ddr2 800. K8's are notoriously sensitive to memory speed. For people looking to upgrade to an AM2 cpu it might give a nice performance boost.
Ummm, With all due respect... you're linking a Phenom Black Edition review (overclocking Multiplier unlocked Phemom 9600) and discussing it's overclocking capabilities and then praising it. That's fine. But when someone points out the Q6600 (which overclocks far higher and is cheaper then even a regular Phenom 9600) you revert to talking about a standard Phenom 9500 as proof of a price perfomance lead by AMD. Honestly you're not being logical there. Face it, AMD doesn't currently have an answer to even the lowly Q6600 processor from Intel. Sure they have some Quads now and can now claim "Me too!" status and that's great and I applaud them. Technologically speaking, not process but rather core technology wise, Phenom (K10) is more advanced then Core2. I applaud AMD for their efforts and respect them quite a lot, but in my mind and the minds of most enthusiasts, overclockers and Gamers... Phenom, in it's current form, just plain sucks.
Ummm, With all due respect... you're linking a Phenom Black Edition review (overclocking Multiplier unlocked Phemom 9600) and discussing it's overclocking capabilities and then praising it. That's fine. But when someone points out the Q6600 (which overclocks far higher and is cheaper then even a regular Phenom 9600) you revert to talking about a standard Phenom 9500 as proof of a price perfomance lead by AMD. Honestly you're not being logical there. Face it, AMD doesn't currently have an answer to even the lowly Q6600 processor from Intel. Sure they have some Quads now and can now claim "Me too!" status and that's great and I applaud them. Technologically speaking, not process but rather core technology wise, Phenom (K10) is more advanced then Core2. I applaud AMD for their efforts and respect them quite a lot, but in my mind and the minds of most enthusiasts, overclockers and Gamers... Phenom, in it's current form, just plain sucks.
Or you could read what I said properly, along with the comment I was countering at the time. I was responding to someone calling the q6600 more affordable over the phenoms - I then showed that phenoms were cheaper. I was NOT comparing performance - but price. I know very well that phenom's performance isn't up to the same standards of Intels ... but then, they're not priced the same as Intel's offerings either.
No, AMD has slashed the price of the Phenoms since the release.
Initially, the Low-End Phenoms were less than the Q6600 but the non-bottem end (can't call them high-end) were actually more expensive.
However, most of the talk here is of the Phenom 9600 Black Edition which will be priced very close to the price of the Q6600. On top of that, to OC the Phenom's well, it will require a 790 board which has all of the various MB voltage options. This will run you close to $200 for a board that can OC the Phenom. Compare that to a simple mobo like the DS3L which usually runs $80-$90, a good Phenom System still costs more.
Additionally, the I've read the Phenom Black Edition will not ship with a cooler, which will add even more to the cost. While the Intel Stock Cooler is not great for super OCs, it will allow some OCs and even at stock the Q6600 will beat a 3.0Ghz Phenom.
So, you could "technically" get a 4core processor into a system for a couple dollars less with AMD than Intel, it would be pointless from a performance or cost point of view. Far cheaper dual-cores which are faster in most tasks are available from both Intel and AMD, so somebody concerned over a couple dollars will go that way.
The X2 duals will be faster than the Phenom in the cheap AM2 boards since the Phenom will not OC but the X2 will hit 3.0+ Ghz and win most benchmarks. (Except the silly ones where the X2 is underclocked.)
If you want to try getting a fast and powerful Phenom which can beat the Duals, you will need the 790 motherboard. This brings the price to $$$, which means it is more expensive.
Therefore, with Phenom you will always pay more money and get less performance than you will with other options from AMD and Intel.
No, AMD has slashed the price of the Phenoms since the release.
Initially, the Low-End Phenoms were less than the Q6600 but the non-bottem end (can't call them high-end) were actually more expensive.
However, most of the talk here is of the Phenom 9600 Black Edition...
I realise this ... i started the thread. The point being discussed was the mention of affordability in the article where it said "There will be many Phenoms finding their way into enthusiast cases simply due to the fact that Phenoms can be found inexpensively". The section of the article in question was disputed by qpippas who said the Q6600 could be found more inexpensively. The article said "Phenoms" ... plural ... thus implying that it was talking about all of the phenoms, and not just the single BE phenom. Because of this, I counterred using information on all phenoms currently available, and even (in a follow up post) included the xeon 3210 since it is currently the cheapest quad core intel.
...which will be priced very close to the price of the Q6600. On top of that, to OC the Phenom's well, it will require a 790 board which has all of the various MB voltage options. This will run you close to $200 for a board that can OC the Phenom. Compare that to a simple mobo like the DS3L which usually runs $80-$90, a good Phenom System still costs more.
The BE is overclocked via the multiplier, which means the entire of the extra stress caused by an overclock is on the CPU - you're not adjusting the motherboard in any way. This means that it will overclock in existing AM2 boards (and even cheap AM2 boards). True, you won't be able to clock individual cores - but you can still overclock everything at once.
Additionally, the I've read the Phenom Black Edition will not ship with a cooler, which will add even more to the cost. While the Intel Stock Cooler is not great for super OCs, it will allow some OCs and even at stock the Q6600 will beat a 3.0Ghz Phenom.
There's some question about this actually ... Kyle Bennett, when talking to his source for his BE in malaysia found out that it may actually have a stock cooler with it. I don't think we're going to know for certain if it will or not until release.
So, you could "technically" get a 4core processor into a system for a couple dollars less with AMD than Intel, it would be pointless from a performance or cost point of view. Far cheaper dual-cores which are faster in most tasks are available from both Intel and AMD, so somebody concerned over a couple dollars will go that way.
Or John Smith could take a phenom and drop it into an AM2 board he already has - saving the cost of the brand new motherboard and putting that money to better use ... maybe putting it towards a graphics or RAM upgrade, which would give him better performance overall. Afterall ... a 2.2GHz phenom with an 8800gts 512mb (the new one) vs. a Q6600@3.xGHz with a 8800gts 320mb (the old one). Which is going to give better performance at the resolutions people play at?
The X2 duals will be faster than the Phenom in the cheap AM2 boards since the Phenom will not OC but the X2 will hit 3.0+ Ghz and win most benchmarks. (Except the silly ones where the X2 is underclocked.)
Unless you often run multithreaded applications which can take advantage of the extra 2 cores ... or if you multi-task ... or if you play supreme commander (my 6000+ doesn't like 81km maps much). In these situations it's viable, even in an AM2 board.
If you want to try getting a fast and powerful Phenom which can beat the Duals, you will need the 790 motherboard. This brings the price to $$$, which means it is more expensive.
Therefore, with Phenom you will always pay more money and get less performance than you will with other options from AMD and Intel.
Wrong, due to the reasons I've mentioned earlier in this post.
