Marin

WAIT FOR USER REVIEWS

It's that simple.

__________________
Rampage Torture Rack Build Log|Torture Rack|Antec 300|Antec 1200|Antec 1200 Night Photos|Antec 1200 Inside

50D (Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM | Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 | Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 | Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM | Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM | Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS USM | Crumpler 7MDH | B+W filters)

Images: Flickr

OCN Team Fortress 2 Group

Auld

LOL Hardocp seems to really hate AMD. while it kind of bugs me to read a somewhat biased article his results give him the right to act this way.

The review i read from Guru3d where the phenom II kept up and performed great had only a single GTX280 in the rig. Hardocp used a TRI SLI GTX280 setup that showed what the rigs will do when given huge GPU power, and in this case the phenom II was crushed. did any other site use multiple GPU's like Hardocp?

Stalker

I don't believe that benchmark for one second! Total BS! That's just some AMD hater benchmark. Piss off.

003

Irrelevant. Any old i7 920 will overclock well above 3.2GHz on stock cooling. If a Core i7 920 @ 3.2GHz had been used instead, you would have just found something else to complain about. It's nitpicking, and you and I both know it.
Let me do a quick recap for you.
a. It would be impossible to use DDR2 with the Core i7, and...
b. The Phenom II with DDR2 800 RAM still holds a higher memory bandwidth than the Core 2 Quad with the DDR3 1600 RAM.
Of course I know how a proper testing procedure would work and how to maintain control variables. I would not have conducted the review in the exact manor that it was done on [H]ocp, but, using some basic deductive reasoning skills, we are able to determine that the usage of the DDR3 memory on the Core 2 Quad setup does not put AMD at a disadvantage; in fact, the opposite is true. The Phenom II system with DDR2 memory still maintains a clear lead with regards to memory bandwidth as compared to the Core 2 Quad system. From this we can conclude that the benchmark results are still quite accurate. Furthermore, as I have already stated, it is not AMD's fault that the Core 2 architecture supports DDR3 memory and Deneb currently does not.
MSI motherboards are not bad. It may not have all the advanced features of some of the more expensive boards, but it still is perfectly usable and functional for its intended purpose.
You tell em' chief!

__________________
I called it!

ThePath

The majority of those reviews show Phenom II performing worse that lower clocked Core 2 Q9xxx

003

Watch as this thread dies because the results are not what the AMD fanboys on OCN would like to be reality.

__________________
I called it!

Swiftes

The Hexus review appealed most to me because of the UK prices. It looks like it does have the edge on the 45nm/65nm last gen quads but not the i7. Prices look good, shame I recently upgraded..

__________________

The only real power comes out of a long rifle.

One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

Pao

I don't know how others took it, but to be fair when I looked at the graphs I thought the same thing. You can't say it's losing to a Core2 series processor and that it's a loser when the Core2 used is still over $1,100. I didn't even think about i7 pricing because I don't believe it's meant to rival the i7.

Just my two.

003

Of course you can. The same thing applies in the case of Core 2. The only reason the QX9770 is $1000 is because it has an unlocked multiplier. I shouldn't even have to be saying this though, as it is just common sense.

It uses the same silicon as a Q9450 or Q9550 -- both of which will hit 3.2GHz on stock cooling without batting an eye.

I can't believe I even need to explain this.

__________________
I called it!

Pao

Then use the Q9450 or Q9550 in the graph, that's all I'm saying. If you don't want people to associate the comparison with a 1k cpu then don't use that one as the eye candy in your graph. I understand how they're made, but thank you for attempting to be as aggressive as possible, as you always are. Were you beat as a child? Because I've never seen you not swinging.

ANYHOW

This quote:

"I've heard, through reliable but very quiet channels, that before the end of January Intel will aggressively cut prices on its entire quad-core lineup. Given how Intel historically cuts prices, we could expect the Core 2 Quad Q9550 would take the place of the Q9400 and have the Q9400 move down to the price point of the Q8300, thus creating a price war; and you thought 2008 was the last of that.

If Intel were to push its prices down like that, the Q9550 would compete with the Phenom II X4 940, and the Core 2 Quad Q9400 would go up against the Phenom II X4 920 instead. If this happens, the conclusion I mentioned on the first page changes. The Phenom II X4 940 can't beat the Q9550, and the 920 can't beat the Q9400. Intel has the ability to do this; it's got faster chips that are more expensive and has just enjoyed 2+ years of unchallenged competition. The Intel from the Pentium 4 days may have let AMD launch Phenom II unchecked, but today's Intel is much more...dynamic.

The take away is that today Phenom II competes with the Q9400 and the Q8300, but by the end of this month that may change to the Q9550 and Q9400."

From the AnandTech review is full of win. Price competition is what it's all about, and we're all winning here soon imo.