backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 34 comment(s) - last by SavagePotato.. on Jul 3 at 4:29 PM

AMD Phenom X4 9950 Black Edition and 9350e @ Hot Hardware  (Source: Hot Hardware)
DailyTech's roundup of hardware reviews from around the web for Tuesday

AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition, 9350e, and 9150e Edition
@ Hot Hardware
@ MADBOXPC
@ AMD Zone

Notebooks
Dell Vostro Laptop @ SpicyGadget.com

Processors
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Overclocking Guide @ Hardwareoverclock Austria

Motherboards
Super Micro C2SBX+ @ Phoronix

Video
Sapphire Radeon HD 3870 Ultimate @ ASE Labs
XFX GTX 280 XXX Edition @ Metkumods

Cases
Zalman GS1000 @ XSReviews

Cooling
Thermaltake DuOrb CPU Cooler @ Futurelooks
Tuniq Ensemble 1200W @ OCC
SilenX iXtrema IXC-12HA2 CPU Cooler @ ThinkComputers.org
Zalman Reserator XT Liquid Cooling System @ HardwareLogic
SilenX IXTREMA Pro IXC-120HA2 @ Bjorn3D

Power Supplies
Type R II 680W Powe Supply @ Pro-Clockers
OCZ EliteXstream 800w @ DriverHeaven
Coolmax CUG950B 950 Watt Power Supply @ CPU3D
Coolmax CUQ-1350B 1350W Power Supply @ JonnyGURU.com
X-Spice Kira 530w Power Supply @ High Tech Reviews

Storage
Samsung MCBQE32G5MPP 2.5" 32GB SSD @ TweakTown
HighPoint RocketRAID 2640X4 @ TechwareLabs
Kingston Technologies DataTraveler HyperX 4GB @ TechwareLabs
QNAP TS-209 Pro Gigabit SATA NAS @ Benchmark Reviews
Pioneer PDCSO2BK Blu-ray Drive @ bit-tech

Printers
Samsung CLP-610ND Color Laser Printer @ Tweaknews.net

Peripherals
Microsoft Sidewinder @ FPSLabs
ASUS Xonar D2X Soundcard @ Guru3D

Consumer Electronics
Humax LGB-32DST 32in LCD TV @ Trusted Reviews

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
amd rewrites the book on overclocking...
By diablosinc on 7/1/2008 11:34:16 AM , Rating: 5
yeah, you didn't read that wrong. and it seems that most of the reviewers haven't read the phenom oc guide!!

its a different kind of overclock, folks. there are similarities between k8 & k10 oc methodologies, and of course your basic oc rules apply...but there are settings and options and rules that have only recently come to light through very patient enthusiasts figuring out the secret to successful k10 oc's.

i'm not saying that all you have to do is read the guide and magically you'll get your 9550 running @ 4ghz!!! no...that would be insipid. but if you're going to test the overclockability of a processor, would you really test it on a board that you describe as being "lackluster at best for overclocking"???

nor am i saying that "k10 is king", or anything so fanboyish. its clear, amd has no chance of taking any fancy hats away from intel in the performance arena with 65nm...and already there are questions about 45nm. and thats fine, and i'm comfortable with that...but i'm not at all comfortable with journalists who proport themselves to be "enthusiasts" turning in such shoddy, half-baked "reports". aren't "enthusiasts", by definition, supposed to exhibit "enthusiasm"?

there's an article out there about trying to oc the x3...guy got it from 2.4 to 2.7, went through an epic battle to do so, and he doesn't even like amd. THAT...is enthusiasm. he wrote it up as an epic battle, which ultimately he lost, and i swear to you, it was the most evocative, passionate tech review i've ever read. here's a guy admitting defeat at the hands of what he calls "the enemy"...but he's doing so with such zeal, such enthusiasm for the battle and the challenge.

in that light, amd has rewritten the book on overclocking. anyone who can apply thermal paste (and even some who can't!!) can get an intel into high overclocks...but only an enthusiast is going to accept the elegant challenge of what appears to be a losing fight, glowing with the prospect of victory in the face of overwhelming odds.

now if only the people who report on it could show such enthusiasm, or even bother with a little research. if you were writing a paper for school, you'd be expected to research your subject, yes? now...you're writing an article on overclocking intel c2d/q...would you use the same oc method you used for p4, or would you do some research and see if there were any new tips or tricks?

since i'm already up on my trusty crate o' irish spring, i'll close on this....remember always the definition of the word enthusiasm, especially as the word "fanboy" falls off of your fingertips. "fan" is short for "fanatic", and all fanatics are enthusiastic. so lets stop calling one another "fanboy", and start respecting one another's individual enthusiasms, eh?

discuss...




By eye smite on 7/1/2008 1:34:01 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree with you and very well said.


AMD...
By FaceMaster on 7/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: AMD...
By FaceMaster on 7/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: AMD...
By ksherman on 7/1/2008 9:13:15 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm, didn't see Intel go out of buisness when AMD reigned them in for years.


RE: AMD...
By Rev1 on 7/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: AMD...
By Rodney McNaggerton on 7/1/2008 10:20:09 AM , Rating: 5
You're a smelly pirate hooker.


RE: AMD...
By Parhel on 7/1/2008 10:25:23 AM , Rating: 5
With few exceptions, AMD had the performance or price/performance lead from 1999, when they introduced the Athlon, until 2006, when Intel introduced the Core 2.


RE: AMD...
By SavagePotato on 7/3/2008 4:29:23 PM , Rating: 1
You like that core2 duo? How bout those new Yorkfeild quads?

I know I do, and I know I wouldn't be seeing them in existence if AMD hadn't put a smack down on P4 with the athlon64.

Like multicore? that was an AMD innovation as well.

Intel was asleep at the wheel and quite content to keep selling netbust to whoever would buy it. Their friendly to the enthusiast overclocking stance only came along after yet again, AMD trumped them in the enthusiast space so badly in that respect too.

Everyone owes AMD a round of thanks for their contributions to the microprocessor world.

I currently use an intel processor. However I would love to see AMD get competitive again because you know what? I personally don't like the idea of paying $2000 for top level Intel chips, and that's just about what they are at already.

Notice yet how Intel's tic tac toe strategy became tic tac tock tick tack toe with yorkfeild when there was no need to release it on time? and when they did it was enthusiast insane level pricing only? Sadly that will likely be the exact same thing with Nehalem.

Intel needs some competition ore things will be going back to the days of obscene prices and little innovation.


RE: AMD...
By B3an on 7/1/08, Rating: 0
RE: AMD...
By Mitch101 on 7/1/2008 10:39:05 AM , Rating: 5
The performance is actually quite good but you must run multi-threaded applications to see the benefits. Running a single threaded application the procs still do well but that defeats the purpose of a multi cored CPU. In fact a lot of multi threaded server applications run better on a quad AMD over Intel's top of the line. Not all but enough to say that the Phenom is actually a very good CPU depending on the purpose of the box.

Bang for Buck AMD processors are priced very well and for the HTPC paired with a 780G motherboard AMD has a excellent product.

For the record I am running a dual core E8400 Intel as my main machine but I am looking at building a 45watt dual core with a 780G motherboard for a nice under 100 watt HTPC.

Get over being a fanboy its bang for buck and building for your specific application.


RE: AMD...
By B3an on 7/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: AMD...
By B3an on 7/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: AMD...
By Mitch101 on 7/1/2008 11:24:23 AM , Rating: 4
Performance wise the AMD chips within 100mhz perform fairly close to the Intel counter parts on an IPC level.

Price wise the AMD chips are priced well and within reality of their performance.

The phenoms are an improvement over the previous architecture. Maybe not an Intel killer but performance is clock for close pretty close to Intel's current lineup. AMD's just dont clock as well. Why is that?

Without SSE4a, 45nm, and High-K, AMD doesn't get the overclocks/performance Intel chips currently have an advantage with. But I guess your OK with comparing 65nm cpu's to 45nm cpu's as if AMD was pricing CPU's way out of their performance categories.

Sorry I don't take guff from a guy who spells his name with a number because he thinks its l33t.

Go work on your A+ certification.


RE: AMD...
By eye smite on 7/1/2008 2:27:40 PM , Rating: 3
No, because you put your own spin on the facts so they read how you want them to.

My guess is you didn't read the benchmarks very closely. When intel's and amd's are at the same clockspeed, amd holds it's own against intel. Do they beat them? Occasionally. Does it matter? Not really.

The bottom line is, not many people care about which is the faster cpu, they care about how much they can go to the store and spend on an oem system that they'll be happy with. Only 2% of the population in the USA care about which is faster, so what is that.............like 6 million people total. I guarantee you if you ask a salesperson at Circuit City or Best Buy whether people are buying computers based on the cpu or how much it costs, they'll tell you cost everytime. That's only reason intel was able to victimize all us techs with the crappy celerons to begin with, HELLO??????


RE: AMD...
By Accord99 on 7/1/2008 5:20:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For the record I am running a dual core E8400 Intel as my main machine but I am looking at building a 45watt dual core with a 780G motherboard for a nice under 100 watt HTPC.

A ~3GHz Wolfdale has been measured by a number of sites to consume around 30W under full load.


RE: AMD...
By maroon1 on 7/1/2008 10:57:46 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I agree with you about the performance. The Phenoms are bad, even for price/performance. The Intel Q6600 still has better performance than ALL AMD Phenom X4's but is also cheaper than the X4 9850 2.50GHz or 9750 2.4GHz for instance.


I totally agree with you.

I want to add, that Intel quad cores are have lower power consumption, and run cooler than Phenom

Even the 9350e (which have TDP of 65W), consumes more power than Q6600 in the actual tests. Not to mention that Q6600 performs a lot better at same time, so Q6600 is a easy winner in performance per watt battle

http://www.hothardware.com/articleimages/Item1173/...

quote:
These are facts, but fanbois dont like facts and will rate you down anyway.


And yea they will rate down by post as well. Some fanboys don't like to see these facts


RE: AMD...
By maroon1 on 7/1/2008 12:31:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
will rate down by post as well.


I mean my post.

Sorry but I can't edit my comments