|
|
|
The New AMD Building Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. October 2011 @ 11:21 |
Link to this message
|
Russ, mate, relax, Sam has been talking about amd vs amd here. You have been missing the points of same posts and are misinterperating what he says on a constant basis. Then you get all worked up. I'm sorry I'd that was harsh, but whether sams right or wrong about what he says its clear and you muddle the respone making it impossible to follow the thread.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 11:26 |
Link to this message
|
Indeed, the FX-8150 is just as much a sales case for the Phenom II X6 as it is for the Core i5/i7. To anyone who wants an upgrade from an X4, the X6 has been firmly cemented as the route of choice, with the failure of Bulldozer.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. October 2011 @ 11:28
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 12:48 |
Link to this message
|
I won't comment on 8150 further. All cards are on the table. Well.... ok, perhaps one more time. Sometimes we have to take one small step backwards, to move forward. As the future will show. Or at least I firmly believe it to be so :p But! We'll see. I could just be full of sheet!
Sam, which X6 are you speaking of? Remember there's more than one. Fx-6100 or 1090t? The FX-6100 appears to be less power hungry, and updates are probably on the horizon ;) I have an AM3 board, so there's no debate for me. 1090t is the clear option. AM3+ currently holds no options for me, except a power hungry processor, for little gain in X264. Even if AMD/microsoft grace the internet with an update, I really don't know if I'll be upgrading next year. Even if 8150 were to cut my encodes in half, I don't see myself upgrading. Even i7 extreme isn't enough to tempt my hand. Perhaps I'm simply really disappointed. Honestly though, I don't even know if I'm gonna get ALL of my tax return. Time will tell. You know how it goes. Sometimes we get an upgrade itch, and we can't help but scratch it 8)
Once I have 1090t, the only real weak point in my hardware array, is my Graphics card, and a weak point and shoot camera :p I'm currently raising funds for 1090t.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 12:51 |
Link to this message
|
I said the Phenom II X6, so that means specifically the 1055/1090/1100T, and not the FX-6100. The FX-6100 does use less than the X6 1100T, but only 9W less, which isn't a great deal, and given the poorer performance of the FX CPU, they still come out worse off. The FX-6100 is nowhere near as bad a chip as the FX-8150 fortunately, but it's still overpriced at $190, when the superior 1100T is the same price.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 12:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
Superior for now :p
Windows 8! Where are you??? LOL! We really need it, at the very least to shut me up. I'm gonna feel really silly if the performance increase is less than 5% :S
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 12:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
(It will be less than 10%, I can almost guarantee you that)
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 12:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
How do you come to that conclusion?
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 12:56 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
.According to Xbitlabs , the slide shows that the chip, running on the developer’s preview version of Windows 8, shows better performance running games when compared to Windows 7. The slide shows a two percent increase in Windows 8 when playing Deus Ex: Human Revolution, a four percent increase while playing Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty Black Ops, and a significant 10 percent increase while playing Left 4 Dead 2.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 13:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'll say it again. I'm rather disappointed as of late. I won't be upgrading for a while LOL!
I'll watch the guinea pigs for a while ;)
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 13:01 |
Link to this message
|
I'll also point out this isn't an AMD-specific change that's being made in Windows 8, simply that the OS deals with multi-core processors better. It's conceivable that quad core CPUs will receive a smaller increase as well, from both sides - and so too will the Phenom II X6.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 13:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sounds logical. I'll definitely be playing with the windows 8 beta for sure. I just hope that most of the stuff I've heard, is untrue. It sounds like it was aimed at tablet users. But I also heard it can change modes. E.g. look more like windows 7. But who knows, if I ever get a touch screen, I could be into a new design. I heard that windows 8 is even smarter than '7' about memory usage. If that's true, kudos!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 13:09 |
Link to this message
|
There are some worrying reports about Windows 8's interface. It doesn't sound like it's going to be very desktop-friendly. A fair few people have spotted the trend between decent and poor OSes from Microsoft - 98/Me/XP/Vista/7/8 would mean 8 fits in the 'poor' category - a totally baseless comment, but who knows. I suspect a lot of people will be keeping 7 for a while.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 13:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have that feeling as well. I guess we'll see.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 17:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
Having personally tried it myself I can say Windows 8's interface needs some work. You can indeed change modes to make it more like Windows 7, but it still leaves out some basic functionality that actually made Windows 7 NICER to use than previous OS's. Windows 8 will be amazing for mobile devices that much is true, but I can see most hanging onto Windows 7 as it will likely become the next Windows XP in terms of longevity. Windows 8 does perform a bit better, but the the losses of basic functionality and usability will likely overshadow the negligible benefits. Unless they make some major changes to how the OS works, there will be problems. Navigating to basic items like Program Files or start menu folders is preceded by several full screen dialogs and button clicks where you used to simply hit start and click on it. You also lose the basic ability to Search from the start menu, which I personally use every day to find control panel items and start odd programs. Instead it pulls up a full screen dialog you can't avoid, and the only search you can make is a deep scan of every file on the PC. And then you have to tab over to the "applications" search tab instead of simply having separate searches altogether for different things.
In short, it takes all the streamlining that actually sold Windows 7 to power users and throws it out the window. It's dumbed down plain and simple with everything unified into a single interface. This may be great for tablets and mobiles, I'll even go so far to say that it's very nicely set up for those uses. But it takes a lot of the flexibility and power out of the traditional Windows interface and it doesn't offer any real benefits in return.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
19. October 2011 @ 18:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
I eagerly await windows 7 service pack 2 then LOL!
Or at least good updates...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. October 2011 @ 18:40
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
20. October 2011 @ 01:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by shaffaaf:
Russ, mate, relax, Sam has been talking about amd vs amd here. You have been missing the points of same posts and are misinterperating what he says on a constant basis. Then you get all worked up. I'm sorry I'd that was harsh, but whether sams right or wrong about what he says its clear and you muddle the respone making it impossible to follow the thread.
Shaff,
I'm not getting worked up, and I have no problem with constructive criticism. You say I am misinterpret what he says, and I muddle the response? Let's see! You and I are discussing "pears", two different reviews from Bit-Tech, and he come along and starts an argument about "Apples", Socket AM3 and socket AM3+, says we were discussing Bulldozer? Had he posted the page, rather than the Graph, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because the first thing I look at with any processor review is when it was written, especially with a brand new line of processors! I questioned the Bit-Tech article you posted, which was written in Jan. of 2011, and felt it was a very pro Intel, anti AMD review. I decided to take a look at Bit-Tech for some AMD reviews to try and get a clearer picture of how Bit-Tech does things. I found a review of the 1100T, Dated a month before yours, and found some discrepancies between the two reviews. I pointed these out from both sides, and feel that Bit-Tech seems to come across as very Pro Intel. We weren't discussing Bulldozer, we were discussing the article you posted. Sam comes out and slams me for "using such old reviews", and claims we were discussing Bulldozer. He had posted a graph showing power consumption from Bit-Tech that's totally insane and totally disagrees with Bit-Tech's articles from a few months before. You will note that I made sure that the material you and I were discussing was dated, and no accusation of using old articles was mentioned in regards to your first Bit-Tech link, nor was it raised with my post until I pointed out these discrepancies, with the argument being that it wasn't really a fair review because they tested all of the AMDs with 1 and 2 generation old motherboards, and that they should be tested on the newest AM3+ motherboards. Then there was the argument where Sam said that they were tested on AM3+ motherboards, and I provided links to show that they were tested on AM3 Crosshair IV Formula motherboards, which was what I showed in my response and the setup page from both articles. That's when he went on about the "using old reviews, and asking what the 1100T had to do with anything. I chose to make my comparisons using the 1090T because I own one and I also own a great AM3+ motherboard, and Bit-Tech's testing of the 1090T at 4.2GHz didn't come close to my own results at the same speed. Especially since it disagrees with just about every other review in the free world!
All of this could have been avoided had Sam dated the reference chart he posted. Then I would have known that we were not on the same page! We all know that with a major introduction like Bulldozer, that changes in bios and drivers can and do happen day to day, so reviews may differ considerably from day to day as well. It would have been apparent to me had I seen a date shown, after the introduction of the Socket AM3+ motherboards, and I would have pointed it out right away! Like I said I used the 1090T & 1100T power consumption numbers because I have never seen the 17 920 use less wattage than the 1090T before in any review. The whole point is we were making comparisons between your Bit-Tech Review and the one I posted. We were not discussing Bulldozer.
Where I take exception with Sam is with his wise a$$ comments, like "for people who know how to read", or "Bit-tech are also using an AM3+ board (Crosshair 5), not AM3, as you like to keep pretending they use", "Bulldozer has been a complete failure". All BS! I even jumped him (rightfully so) on the building thread for being disrespectful to me.
First, I read quite well, the flap with the AM3 and AM3+ boards was an integral part of the discussion you and I were having about Bit-Tech, and the information I provided was 100% on that conversation, so I wasn't pretending anything. As far as Bulldozer being a complete failure, that's utter nonsense. If it wasn't, I could have claimed the same thing when the 6600 Quads were released and the C2Ds were blowing the doors off of them, in particular the C2D E-8400, which decimated it. Intel worked it out and the 6600 eventually earned it's place, ahead of the Dual cores. What he fails to recognize is that when the criteria is met, where Bulldozer shines, it jumps right in there near the top in benchmarks, a fair number of games and apps, generally splitting the 2600K and the 2500K, although beating both at times.
What it's poor at is obvious, single threading. Multi threading is an entirely different story. Bulldozer can run with the big boys when you throw a lot of threads at it. in short, AMD has proven that their new architecture concept actually works. Not only that, they've demonstrated that their method of Core Boost, is superior to Intel's Turbo boost by a wide margin! Other little things as well, like having a very Intel-like Memory bandwidth, matching the Core i7 920!
I think that AMD has some work to do on the processor and needs to vastly improve single-threaded apps, and the Bios folks need to step up too. They also need to do some more work on power consumption. BTW! If you didn't notice, Intel is using the Core i5 2500K as a loss leader, $95 lower in price than the 2600K, and $80 less than the 2600. When Bulldozer is doing it's thing, it generally slots the FX-8150 right in between the two. Personally, I think the chips with the most potential are the FX-2120 and the FX-6100. They overclock well, and for the most part, consumers like them. Real consumers anyway (lot's of I Trolls)! I'm glad Newegg validates Ownership. :)
One more thing! It's been mentioned that a number of AM3 motherboards can be made ready for Bulldozer with a bios flash. That's true but, they will not run as full AM3+ chips, due to the different design architectures between AM3 and AM3+, particularly the Direct Connect Architecture, so it should be slower and not overclock as well. Something along the lines of the AM2/AM2+ boards supporting AM3 CPUs. They do support them and they do work fine, but it will take a genuine AM3+ motherboard to fully support some features of Bulldozer.
Here you go Shaff, I'll give you your chuckle for the day. I found this in a Newegg review from a verified owner.
"The Zambezi does 3 things extremely well, multitasking, overclocking, and attracting haters." He's right! :)
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
20. October 2011 @ 04:09 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by russ:
One more thing! It's been mentioned that a number of AM3 motherboards can be made ready for Bulldozer with a bios flash. That's true but, they will not run as full AM3+ chips, due to the different design architectures between AM3 and AM3+, particularly the Direct Connect Architecture, so it should be slower and not overclock as well. Something along the lines of the AM2/AM2+ boards supporting AM3 CPUs. They do support them and they do work fine, but it will take a genuine AM3+ motherboard to fully support some features of Bulldozer.
I wouldn't feel comfortable running a newer CPU, on an older board. For exactly that reason. It's different if one wants to run an older cpu on a newer board though. AM2 on AM2+, AM3 on AM3+. In fact, it'd probably run better on the newer board. Revised technology :)
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
24. October 2011 @ 17:35 |
Link to this message
|
I've been doing some more testing with my new 990XA-UD3 motherboard. A while back I had said that I expected my 1090T to get to 90,000+ MIPS at a lower speed than the 4.0GHz it took to reach it on the 790X-UD4H. Here you go!
Processor Arithmetic
Memory Bandwidth
Multi-Media
CPUz
I had to cut the NorthBridge frequency to 2400MHz, which dropped the HT Link frequency to 2400 as well. This cuts the Memory Bandwidth a little bit, but doesn't hurt the performance at all. That's why I generally don't bother with overclocking memory. Don't get me wrong, it can be worth the effort to overclock the memory, but it can take months to do it successfully, as it can be tedious and time consuming work to do it right. It takes far more than just raising the memory speed to get meaningful results, as there's a bunch of trial and error involved.
Oman7,
How come you are running memory timings of 8-8-8-24, when they should be 7-8-7-24? You need to set the timings manually to 7-8-7-24, and you should see an improvement in memory bandwidth.
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
24. October 2011 @ 17:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
I know russ :p Seems like I tried once upon a time, but it wouldn't stabilize. I'll be trying again tonight.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
24. October 2011 @ 19:19 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by omegaman7:
I know russ :p Seems like I tried once upon a time, but it wouldn't stabilize. I'll be trying again tonight.
Oman7,
It seems to me that if the CPU Host frequency is left at 200, the memory should run at stock timings regardless of the overclock.
It runs the same at 3.6, 3.9, 4.0 and 4.2GHz, with timings of 7-7-7-21, and a memory bandwidth of just under 9000MB/s with both the NB and HT Link frequency set to 2600MHz. I was surprised that I had to lower the NB frequency with it at 3.9gHz, but since I was just fooling around, and with the obvious improvement in overall performance, it was just a minor trade-off that cost about 500MB/s in overall memory bandwidth, and left me with 4800MT/s instead of 5200MT/s. Still, the 1090T is only a 4000MT/s chip, so I'm still ahead of the game.
Weird that my R.O.G. version of CPUz was not working before. I removed it and dumped everything in the folder except the .rar file. Ran fine after I unzipped it.
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
25. October 2011 @ 00:49 |
Link to this message
|
I'm currently running Bd Rebuilder a second time(All cores maxed)! I'm loving the obvious speed improvement. But I still can't wait to see BD rebuilder doing the complete job in 30 minutes, Like Dvd rebuilder. Of course we're at least 2 - 3 yrs from that. Not sure how a 16 core CPU would handle it. I'd sure love a board that could take two quads or two 8 core Cpu's. But just for X264? Eh, time will tell LOL!
The job will be finished before too long, and then I'll try the Ram overclock again.
Russ, if it should run stable, then why do most(IF not all) AMD boards underclock Ram? Further, why does it increase the latency?
Well well well! A modest gain with the X264 benchmark. :) Not sure if it's stable at those settings yet, but I trust you ;)
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. October 2011 @ 01:36
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
25. October 2011 @ 03:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by omegaman7:
I'm currently running Bd Rebuilder a second time(All cores maxed)! I'm loving the obvious speed improvement. But I still can't wait to see BD rebuilder doing the complete job in 30 minutes, Like Dvd rebuilder. Of course we're at least 2 - 3 yrs from that. Not sure how a 16 core CPU would handle it. I'd sure love a board that could take two quads or two 8 core Cpu's. But just for X264? Eh, time will tell LOL!
The job will be finished before too long, and then I'll try the Ram overclock again.
Russ, if it should run stable, then why do most(IF not all) AMD boards underclock Ram? Further, why does it increase the latency?
Oman7,
My guess is it's the bios not being able to tell what the memory is, in terms of settings, so the memory timings and speed are reduced to a safe level. It did the same thing when 1066 memory came around on the Intel's. It would see it as 800MHz memory. With my 1333 RipJaws Cas7 memory, it ran noticeably slow. I checked the setup, and it was set to cas9 settings. I put those in manually 7-7-7-21, and it's run beautiful ever since. If you do buy a series 9** motherboard, be sure you have a spare 1.5v DDR3 memory stick. The memory standard for AM3+ motherboards is 1.5v. It won't post with most 1.60v or 1.65v memory in it. That's why you need a 1.5v stick, to get it to post so you can raise the memory voltage. Save the adjustments and shut it down after the restart and install the higher voltage memory. We went through the same thing with the P35 Intel motherboards. That's why I didn't want to get 1600 memory. I could get cas7, but the voltage was 1.65v, and the timings were 7-8-7-34. From what I understand, 1600 memory is not too easy to get running at stock settings on a lot of motherboards. Even up, I don't lose but about 2% of memory performance, with the 1333 at 7-7-7-21, and it's just easy peazzy, set em and forget em! LOL!! The Motherboard is the most user friendly board I've ever seen, and I can google any setting on the board I don't understand, and actually get an answer! It does have one flaw, a delay in the Post where you wait for about 12 seconds as a cursor on the L top flashes, then it says Starting Operating System and the windows screen appears. I'm guessing that an SSD will cure that. I'll see what the Christmas sales offer, but I want the Patriot!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
25. October 2011 @ 13:30 |
Link to this message
|
Yet another BD rebuild accomplished :D I would really like the 1090t. Russ, you should give me your processor LOL! Nah, I'll get one. I'm definitely liking the X264 benchmarks I'm seeing for the 6 core beast. I think it could be worth it. I must admit though, my quad doesn't seem to care, fully maxed, and running small background processes. E.g. browsing the web. Haven't tested much else. CPU's are multitasking freaks though! It's hard drives that don't like it ;) I guess I'm just afraid I'll find an instability :S This is my first time running 4.0Ghz stable! I guess it feels a little too good to be true LOL!
I may just try to get a board, and the CPU. More so for the UEFI bios, and future upgrades.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
N_3_Days
Newbie
|
8. January 2012 @ 17:38 |
Link to this message
|
to ascend above the horizon, as a heavenly body...
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
8. January 2012 @ 17:41 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by N_3_Days:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjGmTKSfQhY&feature=player_embedded
What of it? Bulldozer is old news now. In the opinion of many, not old enough. A lot of AMD fans would wish Bulldozer had never happened...
|
|
