Slashdot Mirror
3.0GHz Phenom and 3-Way CrossFire Spotted
MojoKid writes "AMD revealed the clock speed of the Agena-based processor they showed to the press today yesterday in conference, and clocks in at 3.0GHz. There has been a lot of speculation that AMD wasn't able to push early Phenom samples to frequencies this high, but here is proof that at least some Phenoms clocked at 3.0GHz do exist. You may also notice that the system hit a Windows Experience index score of 5.9, which is the highest score possible. It should be noted that AMD talked about 4-way CrossFire as well (a 3-way CrossFire is shown online), and that the company has continued plans to produce discreet GPUs at all performance levels (mainstream — enthusiast), even after Fusion arrives."
I, for one, miss our AMD performance overlords. I'm hoping that they climb back on top, especially since that would mean beating out the core 2 duo in performance.
Because we automatically subtract 4.1 for being on Windows?
Too bad they've taken a backseat to intel :(
Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
Intel's $266 Q6600 also gets a 5.9: http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/07/16/cpu_charts_ 2007/page39.html#cpu_index
What kind of nerd index ends in 5.9?
Discreet or discrete? I believe the summary needs the latter in reference to the GPUs.
Well, in the harddrive rankings, mine scored 5.9, this was a 160gb IDE drive I have had for roughly 3 years, I think it was 5400RPM. Personally I think the ratings in windows are crap and irrelevant because no one runs vista.
I think you must mean "discrete" GPUs, unless these new chips have features I haven't heard of.
pcmag.com
.]Rick Berman, SVP, GM, Graphics Product Group said the technologies [3GHz Phenom + 2900XT] would be available this fall.
[. .
While I didn't hear this directly when listening to the Tech Day presentation, PC-Mag claims to have heard this. While it is true that Barcelona will launch at 2GHz, Phenom will be launched a good few months later. Further, Phenom is simpler, it only has one HT link instead of three, and qualification for desktop chips is much more forgiving than for server processors. I wouldn't be surprised to this by years end. It should compete well with the 3.2GHz Penryn Intel is expected to launch in the same timeframe. See this slide for the only halfway decent becnhmark AMD has posted for the K10-based cores:
Slide45
I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
Looking at the picture in the beginning of the article, I don't think I want any system that requires a minimum of 5 case fans and a chipset fan.
If that's what they need to hit 3.0 GHz, they're better off going with watercooling.
Alright, that's it. Money's been tight and my wife's after me to unload our house and get some place smaller and more affordable. I imagine that trading in my dual opteron for one of these new super AMD chips is just the ticket.
I just have to have it.
This is my sig.
Now, if AMD/ATI can get open source drivers out that support the card's features reliably, this will be a big gain.
4.1 is a gross approximation. The exact number is actually closer to elevendy billion.
If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
It reminds me of an old SNL clip, the mcmacilin group.
...."
"on a scale of 22-46 rate
The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
I heard they couldn't get it to work exactly right, so they'll have to push an alternate Agena.
(wah wah wah)
"They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
Shouldn't it go to eleven?
:)
Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to eleven.
Had to say it
Although I lean towards Intel, it's good to hear some more positive news about AMD/ATI. Lately it seems that everyone is making AMD/ATI sound like a company that is falling behind and failing to deliver any product that compares to Intel's latest offerings. Some have even suggested that AMD could drop out of certain portions of the consumer market to focus on things such as low-power server chips. I, for one, hope that AMD/ATI's upcoming Phenom and other offerings blow Intel out of the water. Why? Cause competition is always good, for consumers that is.
Having been a dedicated AMD fanboy for many years running, I'm finding this news exciting. Also, having been a critical character, I just don't like that AMD picked that benchmark and flogging it like a dead horse. Whoop-dee-doo, your triple-Crossfire quadcore can run Vista well. Honestly, AMD need to buck up and demonstrate, directly or otherwise (ie. by reviews): 1) Server performance 2) Performance of Barcelona/Phenom vs. Kentsfield/Conroe 3) Some monumental overclockability. The halcyon days of Toledo Opteron overclocking is completely shadowed by Allensdale and Conroe now. Still, Brisbane 65nm shows promise in the overclocking stakes. And for crying out loud AMDATI, fix your drivers!
No, no, you're completely wrong. That number is actually a percentage.
AMD needs to hit a homerun to take a lead in this inning, but they just bunted for first base.
The Vista Experience index only goes from 1-5.9 at the moment to compensate for the release of new hardware. When the newer and faster components roll out next year we will see the index adjust and ostensibly 6.9 will be the highest possible score. If windows '7' comes out on time - which m$ has projected to be three years - the highest possible score would be '9.9'.
Now if history shows anything, we'll probably end up with experience indexs of something absurd like say 9.9x10^14 when windows '7' and Duke Nukem Forever both come out in the year 2069.
But will it play Crysis at 60fps?
I guess I'll just have to wait for the Opteron 2xxx H version ... pockets aren't deep enough for the 8xxx series
On the other hand, I do accept PayPal donations at URL removed.
is it ready for Doom 3?
Dude it's a feature, not a bug. maybe 4.1 is reserved for eyecandy and spyware? I bet there is some completely relevant reason for this. For instance, the next version of windows is going to go to 6.9 just so some dipshit sales turd at Bestbuy can tell you the new OS performs better. Even on the same hardware you may have...
This one should get them up to speed.
So what is it that makes hardward beautiful?
this isn't some case AMD dreamed up to test their 3-way Crossfire in it... it's a case used quite regular on the air cooling overclock scene.
So there!
a number that purports to tell how well the OS I don't run will perform with applications I will never buy here rendered more meaningless by assuming CPU performance is the dominating component of such a number, just fucking great for a so-called tech site
But I want to have that rig with some nice nVidia cards, like in the old good times.
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
And the fact that a majority of the world still uses XP and/or Vista.. that little fact just *whoosh*.. right past ya. You should have just run it rhough the "/. article filter" that removes all references to Windows, and makes repetitive jokes about "5.9 should be enough for anyone".. you know, that ever paraphrased quote that was never actually made by Bill or anyone at Microsoft but is continually attributed to them for cheap shots that have no substance that typically get modded funny.
Of course, someone was foolish enough to mention anything about Windows in a tech article, so it goes reason that 90% of the comments would be about the Windows Experience score, rather than the substance of the article. Vista sucks. Ok, agreed. But seriously, humor aside, slashdot sounds more and more like tech savvy ditto-heads every day.
A Windows Index of 5.9 is probably 5.9% of Linux performance.
of course it is, I'm 5,9" you insensitive clod..
cualquier vaina hagase el muerto
I use Linux for choice not because it's faster, but because it's more customisable, works better with my hardware, and has more software choice available, and these things more than compensate for the flaky GUI performance.
Clock speed should be irrelevant now. Better architecture methods such as pipelining and super scaling should take higher priority when it comes to performance benchmarks. The more cores that are on a processor die should also be a indicator of performance. If people programmed with parallel architecture in mind we wouldn't need a 3GHZ quad core.
5.9 isn't THAT hard to get. With the recent intel price drops, a $300 core 2 quad CPU, paired with a $300 (say an 8800GTS (320MB) graphics card can get a 5.9.
Now I realize that even $500 on cpu + graphics alone is more than most people spend, but the point is 5.9 'vista's highest possible score' *is* trivially achievable in a $1500 budget using parts from the upper-end of 'mainstream'. It might even be possible at the $1000 price point.
At any rate, you emphatically do NOT need an overclocked bleeding edge CPU with a 1000 Watt P/S and 3 video cards working in tandem.
I would buy AMD/ATI/whatever it's called now exclusively if they got open source drivers out for their gpus.
I already buy their cpus exclusively because I like their ethos better.
I also don't buy Microsoft products - nor use them illegally, and I only buy meat from companies that actually treat the animals humanely in real life. This may seem like a small deal but it's much more expensive.
The truth is there are people out there that will only use their (limited) dollars to support companies that are morally upright or at least less evil.
I did buy an Intel mac once, and I don't believe Apple is any less evil than MS: just smaller right now. I'm willing to feed the smaller evil until it's big enough to take the larger evil down a few pegs.
The Windows Experience Index value is computed independently on five characteristics: Hard Drive Speed, CPU speed (real speed via a benchmark test, not just clock rate), RAM (not sure if it's performance, quantity, or some of both), Video hardware capabilities (not sure how they test this, though GPU speed is presumably a factor), and video RAM. After each category is rated, the computer's overall score is the LOWEST such rating. If the entire computer scored 5.9 (by the way, MS plans to extend the index as hardware reaches the point where it would be meaningful to do so) then every single component tested went off the scale, not just the CPU. I can imagine both the CPU and GPU(s) hitting that high, plus most likely the VRAM, but the system RAM and hard drive I don't know about. It's also worth noting that these values are really only intended for gamers and other people running hardware-intensive apps; I ran Vista (well, betas of it) on a machine that scored 1.0 overall because that's the highest rating Vista will give to a video card without pixel shader 2.0 acceleration. None of the other attributes scored too well either, but it certainly ran both the OS and DirectX 8.x games well enough. The only portion of the OS that didn't work was Aero, which the video card had no chance of handling in software (I tried).
Moral of the story: Just because you don't give a fsck doesn't mean that it isn't interesting, even useful info - after all, a complete setup that rates that well (for perspective, my current laptop's core 2 duo 1.83GHz CPU gets a 4.4) will perform quite fantastically whether or not you put Vista on it.
Oh, and I have no idea what qualifies this as funny; while I wouldn't have wasted a modpoint on it it reads more like a troll - certainly YOU didn't add anything to the discussion.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
So, if someone tried to sell you a 100MHz processor, with awesome pipelining and superscaling and 8 cores, would you buy it? Clock speed is far from irrelevant, its just not as relevant as it used to be.
Certain computational problems aren't easily decomposed into parallelizeable chunks. Deriding faster clock speeds as a waste of time in light of additional cores is extremely naive. We need multi-cores for problems that can be broken down into chunks and faster clocks for tearing through those chunks.
IBM's POWER6 is an acknowledgment that parallelism only goes so far. It's around 4.5GHz per core. I'll be interested to see the benchmarks.
people that say "largely" are fat
interesting!!
You're right about the repetitive comments - but didn't we just see a study on here showing that 81% of (web-browsing) users are still on XP, and only 4% are on Vista?
The experience index still means no more to an XP user than it does to (for example) a Linux user, so the GP had a point.
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1