AMD's 3GHz K10 to break 30,000 3DMark06
@ 2007/08/29LAST WEEK in Leipzig my kit was nicked, but before that happened we asked AMD if it would let us run memory benchmark scores on a system there. The reps gave us the company line and declined, so we decided to disclose the benchmark scores of our own K10 benchmarking here and now.
If you were wondering why AMD was hiding the scores of K10 so secretly, there were two reasons. The first might be that the CPU sucks badly and after AMD comes out, Intel's lads can start celebrating the death of AMD. On the other hand, there the was clear and present danger of the K10 significantly beating not just the current Conroe/Kentsfield generation, but easily out besting Wolfdale/Yorkfield. This statement warrants at least three hatemails from Intel's R&D lads, but all that we will disclose here are results we have in our possession. The pics are gone with my stolen laptop, though.
If you were wondering why AMD was hiding the scores of K10 so secretly, there were two reasons. The first might be that the CPU sucks badly and after AMD comes out, Intel's lads can start celebrating the death of AMD. On the other hand, there the was clear and present danger of the K10 significantly beating not just the current Conroe/Kentsfield generation, but easily out besting Wolfdale/Yorkfield. This statement warrants at least three hatemails from Intel's R&D lads, but all that we will disclose here are results we have in our possession. The pics are gone with my stolen laptop, though.
My other 'unofficial' test on P5B Del, CPU @ 3850MHz -> 15644 3D Marks 2006 (http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=620731)
No VGA overclocking with both benchmarks.
No perfect compare, second run is more tweaked for high score, and boards are different too, but with ~ 600MHz higher clocked CPU I got around 1000 extra 3D Marks.
3D Mark 2006 does scale well when you overclock your CPU, though knowing that Conroe allready has a short pipeline I can hardly believe that there is so much more performance left.