AMDs Bounce Back

[-0MEGA-];1140604 said:
If they made them "AMD like", then how come the Intel processors outperform the AMD's?
Click to expand...

Intel chose the better tech route the last time around, there's no question. AMD was busy trying to innovate so much ("true quad core" and hyper-threading, for example) that they fell behind to Intel's die shrink and being able to fit more cache. Of course, this is a gross oversimplification.

Now that Intel is ahead of the die shrink wars, they can just copy AMD's right ideas, as you see in the i7 (no more slapping two duals together, gone with the ancient FSB). It's arguably easier for Intel to catch up with their massive size and funding advantage.

AMD pushes Intel to innovate (or copy), while Intel pushes AMD to catch up in other ways. It's great competition, and if one of them falters (more likely AMD), we'll get stuck with higher prices and one-headed tech progress.

Wait, what was this thread about again? :D
 
What I would like to see test/benchmarks between the Core 2/Q and the Phenom or even the X2 Athlon with all the cache disabled, L1/L2 and L3 on the Phenom. Core against Core same ghz. Not taking sides but I believe the Intel benefits alot more from the cache then AMD does. It would not surprise me if the AMD core is faster.
 
Last edited:
StrangleHold said:
What I would like to see test/benchmarks between the Core 2/Q and the Phenom or even the X2 Athlon with all the cache disabled, L1/L2 and L3 on the Phenom. Core against Core same ghz. Not taking sides but I believe the Intel benefits alot more from the cache then AMD does. It would not surprise me if the AMD core is faster.
Click to expand...

I've heard that, too. That was one of the reasons why I bought the 1mb L2 cache version of this processor instead of the 2mb Windsor (in addition to wanting the low TDP, 65nm, and slightly higher clock).
 
Well big cache is always a good thing, still alot faster than having to access the memory even if one AMD/Intel benefits more than the other. One reason is AMD onboard memory controller, takes up some slack on having a smaller L2. Like this 8750 I have at 3.0 ghz, I know it has a extra core, but without running a benchmarks I can tell its alot faster than my X2 was at 3.3ghz and I even had the 2mb. L2 model. But some of that is Core differences.

To compete with the Core 2 alittle better, the 65nm. brisbane should have had alot a bigger L2 then the 90nm. Windsor had. They should have slapped the brisbane with 4mb. of faster L2. AMD has a advantage in the L1, two times as much. And the Phenom II has twice the L1 and L2 that the i7 has.
 
StrangleHold said:
Well big cache is always a good thing, still alot faster than having to access the memory even if one AMD/Intel benefits more than the other. One reason is AMD onboard memory controller, takes up some slack on having a smaller L2. Like this 8750 I have at 3.0 ghz, I know it has a extra core, but without running a benchmarks I can tell its alot faster than my X2 was at 3.3ghz and I even had the 2mb. L2 model. But some of that is Core differences.

To compete with the Core 2 alittle better, the 65nm. brisbane should have had alot a bigger L2 then the 90nm. Windsor had. They should have slapped the brisbane with 4mb. of faster L2. AMD has a advantage in the L1, two times as much. And the Phenom II has twice the L1 and L2 that the i7 has.
Click to expand...

Thanks PC Eye...:D
 
scooter said:
Thanks PC Eye...:D
Click to expand...

I dont know how to really take that:mad::D. But if you add a extra wide IDE cable connected by a adaptor to the parallel port then just maybe the cache would have a wider data path to travel back to the core, but might still get hung up by the harddrive.
 
Last edited:
StrangleHold said:
I dont know how to really take that:mad::D. But if you add a extra wide IDE cable connected by a adaptor to the parallel port then just maybe the cache would have a wider data path to travel back to the core, but might still get hung up by the harddrive.
Click to expand...

No, you're getting it all wrong. If you have cache going into your monitor, you need to pixelize the added VRAM into more CPU processing power. Just google it :D. My 4mb soundcard runs Crysis with 200fpm under water blocks in my mobo stand.

[Insert more PC Eye-ish nonsensical mumbo jumbo.]
 
I still say the harddrive is the biggest problem. But the bypass of the northbridge with hypertransport to the PCIe X1 slot the sound card is in could definitely speed things up. But the slow L3 cache still lingers around.
 
LOL. You're a lot better at this than me. Then again, you have a lot more experience arguing with him haha. Mine was over-the-top. Yours sounds like something he'd actually say.
 
scooter said:
Whahahahahahahahaha calm down PC ey....I mean stranglehold.. geez you guys are so similar these days...
Click to expand...

Yea, except Stranglehold actually knows what he's talking about. ;) And I think comparing him to PC Eye is going to totally make his weekend.
 
smoothjk said:
Yea, except Stranglehold actually knows what he's talking about. ;) And I think comparing him to PC Eye is going to totally make his weekend.
Click to expand...

I,m so depressed now, just going to wander around the house totally confused.

Flar0n said:
Are they going to discontinue the normal Phenoms when Phenom II comes out?
Click to expand...

No, they should still make them for awhile, think they are even coming out with a few different models.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top