backtop


Print 93 comment(s) - last by jazkat.. on Jun 28 at 10:35 PM


Cinebench ran AMD "Barcelona" 1.6 GHz in 27 seconds. (Source: DailyTech, Anh Huynh)

Cinebench ran Xeon X3220 2.4 GHz in 17 seconds. (Source: DailyTech, Anh Huynh)
An early AMD "Barcelona" revision gets its first non-simulated benchmark

Earlier today, AMD announced that it successfully demonstrated Barcelona across the server market.  The company did not publically state how fast the processor was running, the stepping of the processor, the processor thermal envelope or the eventual ship date.

We had the opportunity to benchmark the AMD Barcelona, native quad-core on an early stepping. We only had a few minutes to test the chip, but we were able to run a quick Cinebench before we were instructed to leave.

The AMD benchmark ran on a single-socket, K10 CPU running at 1.6 GHz on NVIDIA's nForce Professional 3400 chipset.  According to the system properties, the AMD system used 4GB of DDR2-667.

The most similar Intel system we could muster up on such short notice was an Intel Xeon 3220.  The Xeon X3220 is clocked at 2.4 GHz, and ran on Intel's Garlow platform (Intel X38).  This system property profile stated the system utilized 4GB of DDR2-800.

Cinebench completed the default benchmark in 27 seconds for the 1.6 GHz K10; 17 seconds for the Intel Xeon X3220.  The Kentsfield Xeon was 58% faster with a 50% higher clock frequency for Cinebench.

Both systems ran Windows 2003 R2, 64-bit.

AMD partner engineers tell DailyTech the chip we tested was the latest revision silicon.  The same engineers claim 2.0 GHz Barcelona chips are making the rounds, with 2.3 GHz already on the desktop and server roadmaps. 

AMD's current guidance suggests a late July announcement for Barcelona.  However, when DailyTech tracked down the individual partners named in AMD's press release, all cited "optimistic September" ship dates for motherboards. 


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Am I understanding the math correctly?
By Awax on 6/6/2007 7:45:39 AM , Rating: 4
You have the choice :
* the K10 is clocked 33% slower than the Xeon and performs 37% slower (here, 100% is the Xeon)
* the Xeon is clocked 50% faster than the K10 and performs 58% faster (here, 100% is the K10)

So, on a clock/performance ratio point of view, the K10 isn't that great : a 100MHz boost on the Xeon is matched by a 117 Mhz boost on the K10.


By Spoelie on 6/8/2007 11:00:54 AM , Rating: 2
You are not taking into account the memory speed differences. The kentsfield was running in its most optimal memory configuration (unreleased x38 enthousiast chipset) with 20% faster memory, while the barcelona adds support for 1066mhz mem but is running only 667mhz. We do not know if the board it was running on was one that provides split power planes (am2/1207 or am2+/1207+?), the latter which should provide the processor a 5-10% boost at the cost of a few watts according to last heard information.

Not the best reference to make any judgments on performance per clock.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki