It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

 
Go Back [M] > Madshrimps > WebNews
Some very early benchmarks Conroe 2.4ghz vs  2.7Ghz A64 AM2 Some very early benchmarks Conroe 2.4ghz vs 2.7Ghz A64 AM2
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Some very early benchmarks Conroe 2.4ghz vs 2.7Ghz A64 AM2
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 8th April 2006, 14:38   #1
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 79,020
jmke has disabled reputation
Some very early benchmarks Conroe 2.4ghz vs 2.7Ghz A64 AM2

cpu @ 225*12=2700mhz (multiplier cannot be changed in the bios)
AMD's Stock cooler , vcore=1.32v~1.36v varies
ram @ 333mhz 5-5-5-5-15 1T 1GB*2 dualchannel
mobo = nv C51G
OS=xpsp2 with patch + nv 8.252 drivers


pi_1m=39.8sec(conroe 2.4G=21.25sec)
pcmark05 cputest=5510(conroe 2.4G=6101)
3dmark03 cputest=1073(conroe 2.4G=1413)
3Dmark05 cputest=5582(conroe 2.4G=8320)
scienmark2.0=1454(conroe 2.4G=1310)
pi_fast=46.03/58.44(conroe 2.4G=32.55/40.41)
sisoft alu=24220/11022
sisoft multi=51287/55489
sisoft mem=6919/6826
sisoft cache=7432
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 15:21   #2
Member
 
Sidney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,738
Sidney Freshly Registered
Default

Not exciting performance whatsoever
__________________
lazyman

Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II
Sidney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 15:27   #3
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 79,020
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

AM2 won't offer large improvement over S939 so far;
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 15:33   #4
Member
 
Sidney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,738
Sidney Freshly Registered
Default

I have never expected DDR2 latency will produce good result by looking at so many of our reviews.
My Venice @2.7G produces 30" SuperPI and 7600mb in Sandra; Opty 165 @2.6, 32" and ~7000mb.
__________________
lazyman

Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II
Sidney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 15:45   #5
Member
 
The Senile Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
The Senile Doctor Freshly Registered
Default

definitive testing head to head in the holiday season
__________________
OC-2-the-death
Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent
Doom over the world
The Senile Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 17:23   #6
GIBSON
 
Posts: n/a
Default

QUOTE:
"From what I gathered, it seems like Super Pi like a low latency cache/memory subsystem more than anything else, so you could probably argue that combining a small L2 X2 (512kB) with a rather high-latency piece of RAM is the worst case scenario for that software.

Then again, I guess we'll need more datapoints to come to anything definitive. (or at least some latency numbers for the AM2 sample so we can compare with current S939 X2s)"

that might be an explanation
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 17:28   #7
Member
 
Sidney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,738
Sidney Freshly Registered
Default

Explanation we have had read, seen, experienced with A64 regarding latency in the past; doesn't change the result
__________________
lazyman

Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II
Sidney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 17:58   #8
GIBSON
 
Posts: n/a
Default

he did mention he had some problems with the mobo and he did say "funny results", and besides, it's obvious that something is wrong somewhere
quite normal that something is wrong too this early, if it wouldn't have any faults it'd be already in production
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2006, 21:03   #9
Rutar
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I doubt anyone thinks AM2 will not get completly owned by Conroe.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2006, 00:16   #10
wutske
 
Posts: n/a
Default

AM2 cpu's, atm, are nothing more than current S939 cpu's with a new memory controler (and probably some smal tweaks here and there).
So, new technology is being compared with 'older' technology, in fact, we are comparing a cpu with 4 times the amount of L2 cache, wich is an advantage, not ?

I thing there might be a performance gain by using lower latency DDR2-800, on both systems, question is tough, how much of a gain (prolly not enough for AMD, because the Intel system used only DDR2-533, Low latency btw)
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel Core 2 (Conroe) official benchmarks online! jmke WebNews 34 7th September 2006 17:26
Conroe vs. AM2: Memory & Performance jmke WebNews 0 25th July 2006 09:40
Conroe E6700 @ 2.4Ghz beats AMD AM2 FX-62 @ 3Ghz jmke WebNews 2 1st June 2006 11:46
Intel Conroe versus AMD AM2 benchmarked jmke WebNews 17 24th May 2006 12:52
AMD Launches AM2 - Benchmarks Numbers from all over the web jmke WebNews 12 23rd May 2006 21:57
Which one do you think will be faster - Conroe or AM2 ? jmke WebNews 7 14th May 2006 22:59
End user tests Conroe @ 2.4ghz vs Athlon 64 @ 2.8Ghz, result: Conroe not as fast? jmke WebNews 3 28th April 2006 05:56
AMD Socket AM2 vs Socket 939 Benchmarks jmke WebNews 1 20th March 2006 18:49
Spring IDF 2006: Gelsinger Benchmarks Conroe jmke WebNews 0 7th March 2006 23:59
A64 90nm Overclocking - 2.7Ghz on boxed aircooling jmke WebNews 3 19th November 2004 20:38

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO