• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

AMD posts Barcelona benchmark numbers

pxc said:
Ditto.

I'm sticking to the subject, not trying to justify AMD's deception. You don't seem to have anything to say, so bye!
Click to expand...

I am not justifying anything I have clearly showed how deceptive Geroge Ous post and your posts are, and the unfair comparison being made. All I am saying is the ad in question is severely out of date. However the ad was accurate as it was an estimation, of performance with (at the time) current Xeons Spec results. You are comparing old estimated Barcelona spec results with Xeons scores using an updated and optimized compiler, which in all regards is highly un scientific and introduces a variable in the results.
 
quadnad said:
has not and may not become available? so what you're saying is that Barcelona may never become available?

It's too extreme.
Click to expand...



The exact chip is not on the road map as far as I know,a 2.5Ghz chip yes.Second,until its available at a retail near me its vapourware to me.Either way,AMDati needs to stop spouting garbage and start producing.I believe Ed has hit the nail on the head
 
UPTO 15% means it may be able to perform UPTO current Core 2's, nevermind Penryn. Which means AMD is going to be out of the highend market for both CPU's and GPU's.
 
savantu said:
Is up to 15% enough ? ;)
Click to expand...
I don't even care about these performance "estimates" anymore. I don't care to see another photo or glowing fluff article from people sent on an expenses paid island junket.

Until AMD starts putting samples into reviewers' hands, the chip pretty much doesn't exist to me. :mad:
 
Now now, how about you guys reserve your judgments until the chip is actually out hmm? :)
 
pxc said:
I don't even care about these performance "estimates" anymore. I don't care to see another photo or glowing fluff article from people sent on an expenses paid island junket.

Until AMD starts putting samples into reviewers' hands, the chip pretty much doesn't exist to me. :mad:
Click to expand...

morfinx said:
Now now, how about you guys reserve your judgments until the chip is actually out hmm? :)
Click to expand...
agreed and agreed

SPECint and POVRay and all this BS is becoming the 3dmark of CPUs :mad:
 
savantu said:
-K10 has up to 15% better IPC than K8
-HPC applications projected to have significant performance gains due to 128-bit FPU (200%)
-2MB L3 cache helps cache sensitive commercial applications
-Nested page tables help reduce compile time of applications (43%).

http://www.realworldtech.com/forums/index.cfm?action=detail&id=81038&threadid=81038&roomid=2

Is up to 15% enough ? ;)

I like the "up to" part...damn reassuring.
Click to expand...

Talk about reaching :rolleyes: Give it a rest already, AMD has yet to release anything about Barcelona worth linking to or talking about in a positive light.

Like most people on these boards, I'll believe it when I see it. Until then its just more amd pr marketing fluff that we've all gotten used to by now.
 
DemonDiablo said:
Like most people on these boards, I'll believe it when I see it. Until then its just more amd pr marketing fluff that we've all gotten used to by now.
Click to expand...


Same then with Penryn and Nethlam right? Just PR marketing fluff.. the old wise saying of, "Don't tell me, Show ME!"
 
Tetrahedron said:
Same then with Penryn and Nethlam right? Just PR marketing fluff.. the old wise saying of, "Don't tell me, Show ME!"
Click to expand...

Your kidding right? Unlike AMD, its pretty easy to find "leaked" benchmarks on Intel processors from 3rd party sites before the processors actually hit the street.
 
DemonDiablo said:
Your kidding right? Unlike AMD, its pretty easy to find "leaked" benchmarks on Intel processors from 3rd party sites before the processors actually hit the street.
Click to expand...

With no information on what chip was used, or board or memory..... No steppings, no timings, no clocks.... No information at all.... Just benches....

Sorry but that's not really information. It's worthless, and means nothing at all.... Intel is just as bad as AMD, and worse for releasing benches with no data to go with it.
 
It cracks me up with otherwise intelligent people get downright stupid when they let their fanboyism take over. It's like they can't even think coherently anymore. Ignorance is bliss I suppose.
 
duby229 said:
With no information on what chip was used, or board or memory..... No steppings, no timings, no clocks.... No information at all.... Just benches....

Sorry but that's not really information. It's worthless, and means nothing at all.... Intel is just as bad as AMD, and worse for releasing benches with no data to go with it.
Click to expand...

Legit Reviews Penryn at 3.33GHz, there is some system information for you to look at.
 
Tetrahedron said:
Big deal.. do you have one? Can I buy one? No.. Like I said, Do NOT tell me, Show Me :)
Click to expand...

It is showing you... These are real benchmarks with real chips and real motherboards... Just because YOU can't get one does not mean that you aren't being shown... You ARE being shown.... Now if these were ESTIMATES then you'd have a legit argument, but they're not, they are REAL numbers... Get a clue.
 
RamonGTP said:
It is showing you... These are real benchmarks with real chips and real motherboards... Just because YOU can't get one does not mean that you aren't being shown... You ARE being shown.... Now if these were ESTIMATES then you'd have a legit argument, but they're not, they are REAL numbers... Get a clue.
Click to expand...

man dont get all distraught yo!

Proof is in the eye of the beholder, I aint holding anything to verify with empirical evidence. See what I am trying to get at is, I actually do agree and am not disputing the claims of Intel chips.. but like all things, anyone can produce data and benchmarks, unless I myself am able to re-produce the claims to some similar degree of accuracy it is all hearsay as far as I am concerned, on both sides (AMD and Intel).
 
That's like saying unless you can personally drive a Ferrari Enzo, then any claim and review on it's performance characteristics are bogus unless you're the one that reviewd it... If that's the case, why read any reviews for anything... Simply go buy everything you may be even remotly interested in and review it yourself. Doesn't seem too practical to me, but that's basically what you are saying.
 
RamonGTP said:
That's like saying unless you can personally drive a Ferrari Enzo, then any claim and review on it's performance characteristics are bogus unless you're the one that reviewd it... If that's the case, why read any reviews for anything... Simply go buy everything you may be even remotly interested in and review it yourself. Doesn't seem too practical to me, but that's basically what you are saying.
Click to expand...

yes sorta it is, just like the K10, reviews are mixed right? propaganda/perspective depends who you ask you get different opinions, just like I am sure Lamborghini would say they have something better than the Enzo and probably would dis the Enzo too.

the run around is endless
 
No, Barcelona is quite different. AMD is releasing PROJECTED ESTIMATES of Barcelona's performance IF it is running at 2.66GHz, assuming a 2.66GHz Barcelona actually exists, which it does not...

Intel's numbers are ACTUAL benchmarks being run on the ACTUAL chip that ACTUALLY exists. It may not be available to the public, but the chip exists. That is a huge difference. Trying to say that Intel is doing the same thing is ludicrous because it's not remotely the same.

To sum it all up...

AMD: "Well, if we had a K10 running at 2.66GHz, we think it will perofrm like this"

INTEL: "We have this chip here, and here is how it performs. We're just not letting you buy one quite yet"
 
getting tired of AMD being called names for putting out information..... what do you want them to say? That they're products are late, inferior, and limited? Why don't they just shutdown completely and hand the keys over to Intel already?

Theyre trying to sell a product and if they need to bend some numbers.... they gotta do wat they gotta do
 
enumae said:
Legit Reviews Penryn at 3.33GHz, there is some system information for you to look at.
Click to expand...

This is what I see.....

Final Thoughts: The performance numbers on Wolfdale and Yorkfield look great, but as always remember these numbers are done on a production motherboard with slight voltage modifications and on software applications that Intel picked out. .
Click to expand...

Like I said..... Worthless..... On a modified board Intel provided, using benches Intel picked out, with binaries Intel provided...

Come on man, get real. If those numbers are real then my ass really does talk, and I can prove it too...
 
duby229 said:
..

Like I said..... Worthless..... On a modified board Intel provided, using benches Intel picked out, with binaries Intel provided...

Come on man, get real. If those numbers are real then my ass really does talk, and I can prove it too...
Click to expand...

You're pathetic as always.

How does a perfectly normal board with pre-production BIOS and modified VRMs help Intel gain an unfair advantage ?

And secondly , suggesting that Intel somehow tweaks the source code of popular games and multimedia programs is beyond absurdity , it simply shows the level of your bias.
 
duby229 said:
Like I said..... Worthless..... On a modified board Intel provided, using benches Intel picked out, with binaries Intel provided...

Come on man, get real. If those numbers are real then my ass really does talk, and I can prove it too...
Click to expand...
Did you not have the misfortune of saying similar things before the Conroe launch as well?

I'll admit the opportunity for dishonesty is there, but this is a rather reproducable set of benchmarks. In several months anybody will have the opportunity to prove Intel a liar, so why take the chance?

By the way, the article you're so rabidly picking apart is from April. Here's one from June.
 
duby229 said:
With no information on what chip was used, or board or memory..... No steppings, no timings, no clocks.... No information at all.... Just benches....

Sorry but that's not really information. It's worthless, and means nothing at all.... Intel is just as bad as AMD, and worse for releasing benches with no data to go with it.
Click to expand...

I was talking more along the lines of the Conroe launch. Prior to its launch there was information about it months in advance. Seriously how can anyone expect concrete information about nehtalem, right now, today, when its not going to hit the selves untill well over a year from now. And penryn isnt exactly a month away either.

Even still theres more information on penryn than there is on barcenlona, which honestly isnt saying much given how little information there is on barcelona.
 
osalcido said:
getting tired of AMD being called names for putting out information..... what do you want them to say?
Click to expand...

I don't want them to "say" anything. I want to see real benchmarks done on real processors. That's the whole point of this thread.
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
Did you not have the misfortune of saying similar things before the Conroe launch as well?

I'll admit the opportunity for dishonesty is there, but this is a rather reproducable set of benchmarks. In several months anybody will have the opportunity to prove Intel a liar, so why take the chance?

By the way, the article you're so rabidly picking apart is from April. Here's one from June.
Click to expand...

Sorry if you misunderstand. I was wrong about Conroe. In that case I flat out called Intel a liar. I said there benches were BS. I was wrong. I'll not make that mistake again. In this case I'm simply saying that those benches are worthless. I cant reproduce those results. You cant reproduce those results. [H]ardOCP cant reproduce those results. Nobody can reproduce those results. On launch day results close to or similar to those resyults may be possible to obtain, but those results cant be.

The reason is simple. We dont have the hardware. We dont have the chips. We dont have the boards. We dont have the BIOS. We dont have the compiler. We dont even have the same binaries. Those numbers are just as made up as AMD's numbers are.

The question is..... Are they accurate? Are they? Maybe so, maybe no....
 
DemonDiablo said:
I was talking more along the lines of the Conroe launch. Prior to its launch there was information about it months in advance. Seriously how can anyone expect concrete information about nehtalem, right now, today, when its not going to hit the selves untill well over a year from now. And penryn isnt exactly a month away either.

Even still theres more information on penryn than there is on barcenlona, which honestly isnt saying much given how little information there is on barcelona.
Click to expand...

I see where your coming from. But it all goes back to history. When did AMD ever release a ton of information about there chips? Not with K8, or K7, or K6, or K5, not even the 386.... Never.....

There is not a single shred of precedence none... Expecting it now is a little weird....
 
duby229 said:
I see where your coming from. But it all goes back to history. When did AMD ever release a ton of information about there chips? Not with K8, or K7, or K6, or K5, not even the 386.... Never.....

There is not a single shred of precedence none... Expecting it now is a little weird....
Click to expand...

I'll give you that one. AMD has the worse policy possible when it comes to marketing. They release more products out of the blue without warning than probably any company has in the past, present, and the future.

One would think though that when you are down for the count and the opposition is beating the crap out of you that you might consider revising your usual policy just a tad bit. AMD is in no position to hold back punches.

I mean seriously name one industry where its normal policy to start advertising and "hyping" up the product AFTER it comes out? How long in advance did we we know about this summers blockbuster hits? The console systems, how far in advance did we see working models of those? Any industry any market, the shit gets advertised before it hits the market. However the genious over there at AMD think that this is one issue where its wise to be the odd one in the pack.
 
Why is everyone being such critical asshats? None of this shit means anything until processors start shipping and we can test them out for ourselves so we don't get bias bullshit whether it be from one side or another.
 
Ahhh you see that is the kicker..... And its genius if you ask me....

More people are talking about AMD now then have in the recent past. Even when AMD was on top they didnt have this much conversation. now the real kicker is when the product comes out. If it does well, everyone, and I do mean everyone will mention it. The news will be plastered everywhere...

But you see this is exactly the same tactic AMD has been using since about the K6 days. When AMD bought NexGen everyone predicted AMD would die, and K6 would suck. Then when it was released and Compaq signed that deal.... Everyone was surprised. Then when AMD bought up some Alpha engineers and everyone thought AMD was going to die becouse they couldnt scale the architecture , they released the K7 and everyone was surprized. . Then came the K8 and evryone thought that it couldnt clock high enough, then AMD released the K8 and again everyone was surprized....

I think it is in AMD's best interest to keep its mouth shut. They have been doing it like this for years and it always worked best. If it aint broke then dont fix it.
 
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people manage to stick their heads up their asses.
 
RamonGTP said:
It never ceases to amaze me just how far people manage to stick their heads up their asses.
Click to expand...

Yep becouse that certainly adds to the conversation and definitely helps prove your point. I only wish I would have thought of it first. Theres an old saying my ma once told me..... But I cant remember what it was.... It goes something like, if you aint got nothing nice to say......

Meanwhile your still talking about it....
 
The truth must be told, and it isn't always nice. The fact that you recognized yourself in my post proves my point... When someone manages to convince himself that this is actually "good" for AMD... Well, like I said, you managed to recognize yourself in my post. All you need to do is review your post history to see that my opinion of you is shared by many.

I am an active members on MANY forums for many years, and not just PC/Tech forums, but car club forums and console forums and every forum has their biases, especially car forums where everyone in there generally things their type of car is better than the competitor, so I have seen a LOT of fanboyism, but you take it to a COMPLETELY different level that I have never seen or even heard of before. What's worse is that you actually believe your own rhetoric. You should be a politician.
 
Except that you are the only one that takes it to personal attacks.... Your the one that cant except that others have a different view. I dont see things the way you do and I'm wrong?

The only bias I see is yours.
 
dont get me wrong im really pulling for amd to come back. but if it doesnt scale atm well then it probably doesnt overclock too well either for the time being. which will prob turn people off about it right?
 
tvdang7 said:
dont get me wrong im really pulling for amd to come back. but if it doesnt scale atm well then it probably doesnt overclock too well either for the time being. which will prob turn people off about it right?
Click to expand...

People who overclock and build their own computers are the minority, even if they seem to think that they are the majority on forums. HP, Dell, Gateway, IBM and Toshiba determine if the chips are a success or not.
 
duby229 said:
Except that you are the only one that takes it to personal attacks.... Your the one that cant except that others have a different view. I dont see things the way you do and I'm wrong?

The only bias I see is yours.
Click to expand...

Your view changes with the weather. When your view is no longer conducive to supporting AMD, it changes. That's the problem. If AMD was in Intel's position, meaning having real benchmarks available that shows their product kicked ass, you would be ALL over it, talking about how much better they are than the bogus Intel benchmarks. However, it's the other way around, but somehow, now it's a good thing becuase AMD is the one with the bogus news.

As far as personal attacks, again, I didn't call you out specifically. I made a general comment and you recognized yourself in it. If you take that as a personal attack that is your problem. I did not call you names or make fun of your mom or curse your heritage. I did not attack you personally, I attacked your view point, which IMO is of one who's head is up their ass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top