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: nvidia nforce 3400
By Proteusza on 6/6/2007 8:48:16 AM , Rating: 2
Yes Nforce 3400 is an AM2 board.

And this is budapest, because its a 1P processor.

There probably would be a performance loss associated with using an AM2 board, not sure how much though. In this case, probably a fair bit as it would have been using all 4 cores.

No way to tell until we get more detailed benchmarks with AM2 and AM2+ boards in a variety of different situations. And preferably closer to final silicon.

RE: nvidia nforce 3400
By coldpower27 on 6/6/2007 9:08:47 AM , Rating: 3
Actually, these are effectively what your going to get on Bareclona, albeit this is only 1P, as they are sticking to HT1.x and Socket F Registered DDR2 for the first interation of the server SKU.

The improvements to I/O with HT3.0 won't really affect Single Socket systems, and are more geared toward the multi Socket platforms. So your maybe looking at 2-5% more with DDR2-800 on the desktop.

It was always going to be a close race in the Uni-processor arena, it's only in Multi Socket systems AMD's server based architecture gets to shine.

Though it is a little worrying if they are suppose to be launching in July and they are only demonstrating silicon at 1.6GHZ vs the rumored 2.3GHZ launch speed.

RE: nvidia nforce 3400
By defter on 6/6/2007 9:26:01 AM , Rating: 2
In this case, probably a fair bit as it would have been using all 4 cores.

Some people are still clueless about AMD's platforms.

Please explain to me WHY Socket F board with one populated socket would be faster than Socket AM2 board (as long as CPU and memory run at the same speed)?

RE: nvidia nforce 3400
By raven3x7 on 6/6/2007 3:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
I think he meant AM2 compared to AM2+. Anyway if he meant socket F the opposite would be true as socket F uses registered ram which has a slight performance penalty and therefore an AM2 system would probably use slightly faster memory in most cases. Otherwise both Socket F and AM2 1P systems should perform identical

"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki