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 |
Not exciting performance whatsoever:( |
AM2 won't offer large improvement over S939 so far; |
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. |
definitive testing head to head in the holiday season :) |
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 |
Explanation we have had read, seen, experienced with A64 regarding latency in the past; doesn't change the result :) |
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 |
I doubt anyone thinks AM2 will not get completly owned by Conroe. |
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) |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:10. |
Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO