RiverRicer
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 102
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Whoop! Here it is!
- Thread starter RiverRicer
- Start date
while that's good and all the real question is...why didn't they do that in the first place? don't they test their own architecture on their own chipsets and other venders chipsets before they're released? if I remember right there was another issue with the phenoms that regarded corruption of some kind. (although it was rare) if they spent enough time testing their product as Intel did they wouldn't of released them as how they are now.. and until they step up on their quality/fail safe crap I don't think they will be taking the throne back anytime soon ether... 
however.. don't get me wrong a 3.4ghz clock on a phenom is kind of cool its nothing compared how Intel can OC... this is funny amd and Intel are reversing roles the phenom is what the P4 was.. it kept having to increase its clock-speed to compete to the point of threshold for the architecture... and Intel is now sitting on the throne... hah... although a 3.4+ghz Phenom might compare to a core 2 quad @ 2.8-3.0 there is no such thing as a 3.4ghz Phenom that you can get off the shelf yet.. so in the long run this does nothing for amd besides make the people bitching about OCing shut up... hell on top of that the majority of people that run Phenom in brand name computers..i.e dell..gateway etc. don't even OC(if there's such thing as a dell/gateway that runs a Phenom but that's just case and point) maybe this here is a hint at what is to come out of the 45nm chips? a 4.0ghz Phenom might even give Nehalem a run for its money. (if its even possible) although a 65nm Phenom can run 3.4 to 3.5GHZ in the right hands, that's not a big jump if you look at it....so we shall wait and see,...
however.. don't get me wrong a 3.4ghz clock on a phenom is kind of cool its nothing compared how Intel can OC... this is funny amd and Intel are reversing roles the phenom is what the P4 was.. it kept having to increase its clock-speed to compete to the point of threshold for the architecture... and Intel is now sitting on the throne... hah... although a 3.4+ghz Phenom might compare to a core 2 quad @ 2.8-3.0 there is no such thing as a 3.4ghz Phenom that you can get off the shelf yet.. so in the long run this does nothing for amd besides make the people bitching about OCing shut up... hell on top of that the majority of people that run Phenom in brand name computers..i.e dell..gateway etc. don't even OC(if there's such thing as a dell/gateway that runs a Phenom but that's just case and point) maybe this here is a hint at what is to come out of the 45nm chips? a 4.0ghz Phenom might even give Nehalem a run for its money. (if its even possible) although a 65nm Phenom can run 3.4 to 3.5GHZ in the right hands, that's not a big jump if you look at it....so we shall wait and see,...Ummm, 3.4Ghz would be a fairly good OC on an Intel as well, quad anyways. Not every single C2Q reaches 4.5Ghz on 1.0v like you would suspect from reading threads in forums. I know my best friend would be very happy if he could get his Q6600 to 3.4 with any voltage. If the SB750 makes breaking 3Ghz fairly commonplace on Phenoms, then AMD suddenly jumps into a much much better position IMO. To the point even people who care about their ePeen's could at least glance at them.
you do have a point there...but...i was simply stating how well C2Ds OC compared to a phenom most E6300s (stock 1.86) can reach 3.4 atlest all the ones ive seen unless you don't know what your doing....i bet if he brought me his Q6600 i could OC it to 3.4 easy it all comes down to the board really an second the yeild of the chip
I wonder how the B2s react. If they gain a similar 300 or 400mhz then the 9600BE, when they run another deal with it, would be a pretty good value buy. Hell, at $100 it was a good value buy, but if a SB750 allows it to clock to 3.0 (or higher?) reliably with a reasonable vcore then it's even better.
I know that's a big if. And AMD should've had this chipset out with the phenom launch. And they should've done a lot of things differently. But better late than never, no?
I know that's a big if. And AMD should've had this chipset out with the phenom launch. And they should've done a lot of things differently. But better late than never, no?
Now we only need to know how good Nehalem cheapest overclocks. If it doesn't, the 45nm Phenom's in.
I don't give a damn- most people can buy a GTX 260 or 9800GTX without any guilt over 10+% performance lost, which is the worst case scenarios on which Phenoms lag the Core 2 Quads. They normally don't, and they scale better with clock. Now that they OC enough impressively, all bets are off.
I don't give a damn- most people can buy a GTX 260 or 9800GTX without any guilt over 10+% performance lost, which is the worst case scenarios on which Phenoms lag the Core 2 Quads. They normally don't, and they scale better with clock. Now that they OC enough impressively, all bets are off.
here here!
And the same applies to Phenoms using this south bridge. Not all of them will reach this kind of overclock.
Plus, the real point for AMD, is not just how it overclocks, but rather how it performs @ stock. They need to be able to reach C2D levels of performance @ stock, so that the good overclockability is a bonus. Otherwise, you'll have a highly overclocked Phenom, trying to catch a stock Penrym, which is what happens now and also why prices are so low for Phenoms. It's not that AMD wants them to be so low, but because they need to keep them low, or they won't appeal to anyone. And Nehalem's coming...
while that's good and all the real question is...why didn't they do that in the first place? don't they test their own architecture on their own chipsets and other venders chipsets before they're released? if I remember right there was another issue with the phenoms that regarded corruption of some kind. (although it was rare) if they spent enough time testing their product as Intel did they wouldn't of released them as how they are now.. and until they step up on their quality/fail safe crap I don't think they will be taking the throne back anytime soon ether...
the trolling is strong in this one. go back to the intel subforum troll
Jakalwarrior
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,189
PCIE 1.1 FTL!!!!
Looks are very, very secondary to me when it comes to PC hardware and DAYUM that Foxcon board is a fugly clown scheme.
It seems like Amd is late to their own party again. Show me a Top Shelf board like the Asus M3A32 Delux with the new 750 chipset and I'll buy it right now.
It seems like Amd is late to their own party again. Show me a Top Shelf board like the Asus M3A32 Delux with the new 750 chipset and I'll buy it right now.
Here is Overclocker's take on the SB750 and Advanced Clock Calibration feature:
http://www.overclockers.com/tips01369/
http://www.overclockers.com/tips01369/
You do know they aren't talking about the PCIe slots right?
Maybe not....................Why would they ship any boards with Pci-E 1.1......lol.
Thanks for the post OlePueblo. Appreciate it. Now I just need a 790fx/750 board already.
Jakalwarrior
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,189
Ahh, the stats say PCIe 2.0 on the first page, then PCIe 1.1 on the last page. Guess the 1.1 is for the accessory slots?
I am still lost with
Ohwell, doesnt matter to me as I'm not in need of a new board.
Why? I don't see the need for that much bandwidth yet. Do you have some ultra-GPU that we don't know about that requires it?
!gOtVolTage!
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2007
- Messages
- 609
Well a Quik run down .. Thier test @3.5ghz should be plauseable with a 750chipset and 9950..
I belive the PCi-E 1.1 there talking about is for the Southbridge interface . The 2.0 will still be used for GPU slots.
As for PCi-E 1.1 and GPU's...we can benifit from having 2.0... Despite what People are saying if your running a Dual GPU card you may actually need the Throughput ...
My max with 9950@3520mhz SB600....I wonder if i will be able to get more with a 750 chipset.
Note: My 3870x2 is @ PCi-E 1.1 16x with stock clocks....My mobo supports 1.1 and 2.0
..My 3870x2 defaults my mobo to run 1.1 because of the 3870x2 BridgeChip and pushes these limits with a single slot Mobo. As cards become faster 2.0 will be needed...PCi-E 1.1 may not be maxed ATM, but 2.0 will prevent a bottleneck once the Limit is reached with 1.1.
Not Fact yet "I believe with the upcoming 4870x2 and a single slot 16x PCi-E 1.1 Mobo this limit may actually get reached".
3Dmark06 could be higher if i used a 2.0 mobo and two 3870's because of PCi-E 1.1..On that note 2.0 is very welcome in my book
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,772
still scaling on the phenom is going to be shit compared to the core 2......
I'll be honest, that article has kind of a "tone." They are talking about the link between the southbridge and the northbridge. It's always been PCIe1.1 as far as I know and unlike video cards it has no reason to be upgraded. But all of the sudden it's not enough and seen as a negative just because PCIe2.0 exists for video cards. Hello, Intel doesn't even have the hypertransport AMD has, so why is it being painted in a negative light? It's almost as if they are trying to make SB750 look as little a deal as possible, and I haven't been one to assume Anandtech is always anti-AMD. It's not something incredibly awesome, but it's nice to get for free.
To be clear, the PCIe1.1 is NOT the video slots, those are PCIe2.0.