Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Phenom II beats FX Vishera core for core?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Phenom II beats FX Vishera core for core? - Page 15

post #141 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdoublejj View Post


do they have lower core Opterons with higher core clocks?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Opteron_microprocessors#3300-.2C_4300-_.26_6300-series_Opterons

Sorry, 3.2 all-core turbo, 2.8 base.

Anyway, the;

6328 is a 4P 8-core with 3.2 base, 3.5 all-core, 3.8 half core,
4386 is a 2P 8-core with 3.1 base, 3.4 all-core, 3.8 half-core,
4332 HE is a 2P 6-core with 3.0 base, 3.3 all-core, 3.7 half core,
4340 is a 2P 6-core with 3.5 base, 3.7 all-core, 3.8 half-core,
4334 is a 2P 6-core with 3.1 base, 3.3 all-core, 3.5 half-core

No other 12 or 16-core chip can match the 6386 SE's speed.
Forge
(17 items)
 
Forge-LT
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7-5960X (4.625Ghz) ASUS X99-DELUXE/U3.1 EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
64GB Corsair Dominator Platinum (3000Mhz 8x8GB) Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB EK Predator 240 Windows 10 Enterprise x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Acer XR341CK Corsair Vengeance K70 RGB Corsair AX1200 Corsair Graphite 780T 
MouseAudioAudioAudio
Corsair Vengeance M65 RGB Sennheiser HD700 Sound Blaster AE-5 Audio Technica AT4040 
Audio
30ART Mic Tube Amp 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4720HQ UX501JW-UB71T GTX 960m 16GB 1600 9-9-9-27 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
512GB PCI-e SSD Windows 10 Pro 4k IPS 
  hide details  
Reply
Forge
(17 items)
 
Forge-LT
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7-5960X (4.625Ghz) ASUS X99-DELUXE/U3.1 EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
64GB Corsair Dominator Platinum (3000Mhz 8x8GB) Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB EK Predator 240 Windows 10 Enterprise x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Acer XR341CK Corsair Vengeance K70 RGB Corsair AX1200 Corsair Graphite 780T 
MouseAudioAudioAudio
Corsair Vengeance M65 RGB Sennheiser HD700 Sound Blaster AE-5 Audio Technica AT4040 
Audio
30ART Mic Tube Amp 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4720HQ UX501JW-UB71T GTX 960m 16GB 1600 9-9-9-27 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
512GB PCI-e SSD Windows 10 Pro 4k IPS 
  hide details  
Reply
post #142 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyadCK View Post

Then do it one core vs one core for single-threaded efficiency, and do it again max cores vs max cores for multi-threaded efficiency.

Unless you plan to rattle off a dozen multithreaded programs that only go to 6 cores (good luck with that), in which case by all means. Otherwise limiting yourself to 6 (and only 6) is, again, stupid. And besides that, and 8350 will be better at 6-core applications than a 6300 anyway because it would remove some of the decoder bottleneck, making the 8350 a "5.2 core" and the 6300 a "4.8 core".

Compute efficiency is about far more than per-core capability. If you're testing for single-threaded things, use one core. If you're testing for 3-4 core Xbox ports, use that many cores. If you're testing multi-threaded workloads, use all the cores you've got and if you're testing advancements in technology give it everything you've got.

You have simply added arbitrary limitations to ONE of the architectures you're comparing for no reason. It's just as bad as people who want to compare Vishera and Thuban clock for clock and ignore the fact Vishera can go much faster. It's a completely useless metric because it doesn't even begin to tell the whole story.
Say hello to the Opteron 6386 SE

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-Opteron%206386%20SE%20-%20OS6386YETGGHK.html

At 16 cores and a 3.2Ghz base clock and 3.5Ghz half-core turbo, she's a beaut'. tongue.gif

Ah Opterons..... They somewhat reinforce the compute efficiency argument favoring K10.5 over K15, at least in terms of F@H. Magnycours Opty's win the PPD/$/W comparo over Abu Dhabi in most all circumstances, and shellac Interlagos.
Up in the Air
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 Asus M5a99fx Pro r2.0 PowerColor 7850 2GBD5-2DHE/OC + Arctic Accelero S1 Kingston HyperX 8GB 1866MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM Asus 24x DVD-RW Zalman CNPS14X 
OSOSMonitorPower
Ubuntu 14.04 x64 Windows 8.1 x64 HP w2207 Seasonic SS-660XP2 ATX 
CaseOther
Corsair 540 Air Crucial MX100 256GB 
  hide details  
Reply
Up in the Air
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 Asus M5a99fx Pro r2.0 PowerColor 7850 2GBD5-2DHE/OC + Arctic Accelero S1 Kingston HyperX 8GB 1866MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM Asus 24x DVD-RW Zalman CNPS14X 
OSOSMonitorPower
Ubuntu 14.04 x64 Windows 8.1 x64 HP w2207 Seasonic SS-660XP2 ATX 
CaseOther
Corsair 540 Air Crucial MX100 256GB 
  hide details  
Reply
post #143 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyadCK View Post

Then do it one core vs one core for single-threaded efficiency, and do it again max cores vs max cores for multi-threaded efficiency.

Single threaded workload comparisons are unlikely to create a large enough differential in power consumption to make an accurate judgement from a "home test environment" where we are forced to operate within the confines of something like a "from the wall" measurement. We can only so accurately estimate the losses of other components, so it is important that the CPU be a dominant part of the load in such a test, in order to have any chance of having a result that represents the compute efficiency, and not some other discrepancy. While I would likely try to include some lightly threaded workloads in such a test, I fear they would be very likely to create more questions than answers in the test environment I can operate within. I've already thought this all through very thoroughly. I know the question to which I seek answers to.
Quote:
Unless you plan to rattle off a dozen multithreaded programs that only go to 6 cores (good luck with that), in which case by all means.

ALL REAL TIME workloads scale poorly to ever increasing compute parallelism. This includes any real-time simulation and all games. Even as game engines are built to leverage parallel workloads, they will still have a hard time saturating available compute resources. Almost every piece of software made in the last 10 years has at least SOME parallelism but MOST stop short of scaling beyond 3-6 threads very well. Even mainstream productivity applications like Photoshop are still plagued by filters and adjustments that are limited to 1-4 threads. The list of applications and games that would fall within the scope of "up to 6 threads" is VERY LONG.

Whether or not the software uses 1, 3, or 6 threads doesn't matter. If I answer the compute efficiency question in a 6-core vs 6-core workload, then that will very reasonably encompass ALL workloads UP TO 6 threads. I already know that adding more cores will improve compute efficiency in a workload with unlimited parallelism, I do not need to run tests to answer this question.
Quote:
Otherwise limiting yourself to 6 (and only 6) is, again, stupid. And besides that, and 8350 will be better at 6-core applications than a 6300 anyway because it would remove some of the decoder bottleneck, making the 8350 a "5.2 core" and the 6300 a "4.8 core".

You're looking for answers to different questions than the one I have proposed with all this. The FX-8350 would indeed be able to achieve the same parallel performance in a 6-threaded workload as the FX-6300 with a lower clock due to different CMT scaling characteristics. I already understand this, know this, and can do the math on this. This is a different concern than the one I have proposed. However, it doesn't necessarily ensure better compute efficiency. Remove CMT scaling and you have better saturation (higher dissipation per active core). It's just a trade-off at that point. It would be interesting to explore the differences in compute efficiency for a given performance level between the FX-6300 and FX-8350 under mixed workload conditions and different levels of CMT scaling losses, but that is different question for a different set of tests. If you don't like the question I am asking, or the method required to find answer to it, then I encourage you to ignore me.
Quote:
Compute efficiency is about far more than per-core capability. If you're testing for single-threaded things, use one core. If you're testing for 3-4 core Xbox ports, use that many cores. If you're testing multi-threaded workloads, use all the cores you've got and if you're testing advancements in technology give it everything you've got.

This would demand that I simply "ask different questions." I'm not going to placate to that. If you don't like the premise of the questions I have regarding compute efficiency, or the methods that would be required to get answers to those questions, then there's nothing I can do to satisfy you. I already know that parallelism increases compute efficiency. I don't need to run tests to prove that.
Quote:
You have simply added arbitrary limitations to ONE of the architectures you're comparing for no reason.

If I remove that arbitrary limitation, then I have a test that answers a DIFFERENT question. I already have an answer to that question. I already know that parallelism increases compute efficiency. Why would I test for this if it has no chance of answering the question that I have?
Quote:
It's just as bad as people who want to compare Vishera and Thuban clock for clock and ignore the fact Vishera can go much faster.

If the question is "what is the difference in IPC between Vishera and Thuban?" then the only way to "test" this is at equal clocks (or, to normalize the results to equal clocks with basic math). If you CHANGE the question to "which is faster, period?" Then testing at different clocks is perfectly fine. The only PROBLEM here, is the presumption that there is something "wrong" with asking the question in the first place. Once you have the answer to the IPC question, you can easily scale that result to different clock speeds. It can be a very useful tool to comparing and contrasting hardware. I doubt anyone here is actually ignoring the fact that PD clocks higher, but they are intelligent enough to know that if they have a baseline IPC differential to work from, they can make quick-n-dirty comparisons of theoretical performance at all sorts of clock speeds.
Quote:
It's a completely useless metric because it doesn't even begin to tell the whole story.

We already know "the whole story." The FX-8350 is a great CPU at a reasonable price.
Quote:
Say hello to the Opteron 6386 SE

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-Opteron%206386%20SE%20-%20OS6386YETGGHK.html

At 16 cores and a 3.2Ghz base clock and 3.5Ghz half-core turbo, she's a beaut'. tongue.gif

The 6383 is a great example of how parallelism can be implemented to improve compute efficiency. I don't need to run tests to prove it to myself, I already know that the 6383 can compile faster than an FX-9590 while using less power. However, this does not mean that it has "better performance" on average for a typical desktop machine.
Edited by mdocod - 3/4/14 at 11:42am
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
post #144 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by btupsx View Post

Ah Opterons..... They somewhat reinforce the compute efficiency argument favoring K10.5 over K15, at least in terms of F@H. Magnycours Opty's win the PPD/$/W comparo over Abu Dhabi in most all circumstances, and shellac Interlagos.

Cost of the Opteron itself has nothing to do with compute efficiency of the chip though, how's it look when that isn't factored in?

I mean, no doubt for folding it does matter. You don't burn $3000 on a folding chip I'm sure, but that doesn't really have anything to do with per/watt.
Forge
(17 items)
 
Forge-LT
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7-5960X (4.625Ghz) ASUS X99-DELUXE/U3.1 EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
64GB Corsair Dominator Platinum (3000Mhz 8x8GB) Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB EK Predator 240 Windows 10 Enterprise x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Acer XR341CK Corsair Vengeance K70 RGB Corsair AX1200 Corsair Graphite 780T 
MouseAudioAudioAudio
Corsair Vengeance M65 RGB Sennheiser HD700 Sound Blaster AE-5 Audio Technica AT4040 
Audio
30ART Mic Tube Amp 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4720HQ UX501JW-UB71T GTX 960m 16GB 1600 9-9-9-27 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
512GB PCI-e SSD Windows 10 Pro 4k IPS 
  hide details  
Reply
Forge
(17 items)
 
Forge-LT
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7-5960X (4.625Ghz) ASUS X99-DELUXE/U3.1 EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid EVGA 1080ti SC2 Hybrid 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
64GB Corsair Dominator Platinum (3000Mhz 8x8GB) Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB EK Predator 240 Windows 10 Enterprise x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Acer XR341CK Corsair Vengeance K70 RGB Corsair AX1200 Corsair Graphite 780T 
MouseAudioAudioAudio
Corsair Vengeance M65 RGB Sennheiser HD700 Sound Blaster AE-5 Audio Technica AT4040 
Audio
30ART Mic Tube Amp 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4720HQ UX501JW-UB71T GTX 960m 16GB 1600 9-9-9-27 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
512GB PCI-e SSD Windows 10 Pro 4k IPS 
  hide details  
Reply
post #145 of 242
fx vishera anyday rolleyes.gif
post #146 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyadCK View Post

Cost of the Opteron itself has nothing to do with compute efficiency of the chip though, how's it look when that isn't factored in?

I mean, no doubt for folding it does matter. You don't burn $3000 on a folding chip I'm sure, but that doesn't really have anything to do with per/watt.

Initial capital investment and operating cost weigh very heavily when calculating efficiency valuations for folding CPU's; enterprise server environments demand the same. Even forgoing initial cost, at most Abu Dhabi has perhaps a 10% compute advantage over Magnycours, but this comes at the cost of an even greater percentage of operational energy consumption. Getting off track from the core of this thread, but demonstrates how parallelism efficiencies would scale out.
Up in the Air
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 Asus M5a99fx Pro r2.0 PowerColor 7850 2GBD5-2DHE/OC + Arctic Accelero S1 Kingston HyperX 8GB 1866MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM Asus 24x DVD-RW Zalman CNPS14X 
OSOSMonitorPower
Ubuntu 14.04 x64 Windows 8.1 x64 HP w2207 Seasonic SS-660XP2 ATX 
CaseOther
Corsair 540 Air Crucial MX100 256GB 
  hide details  
Reply
Up in the Air
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 Asus M5a99fx Pro r2.0 PowerColor 7850 2GBD5-2DHE/OC + Arctic Accelero S1 Kingston HyperX 8GB 1866MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM Asus 24x DVD-RW Zalman CNPS14X 
OSOSMonitorPower
Ubuntu 14.04 x64 Windows 8.1 x64 HP w2207 Seasonic SS-660XP2 ATX 
CaseOther
Corsair 540 Air Crucial MX100 256GB 
  hide details  
Reply
post #147 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by ionstorm66 View Post

I tried to replace my 1090t with a 8350, and that lasted like 12 hours. It was noticeable slower, even with all the clock I could get out. I was running the 8350 at a little over 5Ghz, and my 1090t at 4.2 blew it out of the water.

I call bullcrap on this. There is now way a 1090T at 4.2 GHz blows a 8350 at 5 GHz "out of the water". If you even managed to get an 8350 to over 5 GHz stable.
post #148 of 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisjames61 View Post

I call bullcrap on this. There is now way a 1090T at 4.2 GHz blows a 8350 at 5 GHz "out of the water". If you even managed to get an 8350 to over 5 GHz stable.

It more than likely wasn't stable. That would explain poor performance.
The Postoffice
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700x Asus Prime X370-Pro EVGA 1080Ti Founders Edition G. Skill Ripjaws V  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Kingston HyperX 3k WD Black 640 Samsung 850 EVO Sony Optiarc 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H100i Windows 10 64 Vizio VOJ320F1A Corsair K70 Vengance 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
NZXT Hale82 Antec TwelveHundred Logictech G9x Realtek 
  hide details  
Reply
The Postoffice
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700x Asus Prime X370-Pro EVGA 1080Ti Founders Edition G. Skill Ripjaws V  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Kingston HyperX 3k WD Black 640 Samsung 850 EVO Sony Optiarc 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H100i Windows 10 64 Vizio VOJ320F1A Corsair K70 Vengance 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
NZXT Hale82 Antec TwelveHundred Logictech G9x Realtek 
  hide details  
Reply
post #149 of 242
Yeah, PII @ 4.2 doesn't beat PD @ 5ghz+ in any metric whatsoever. Unstable OC can easily lead to big performance penalties.
post #150 of 242
I went from a Phenom 955@4Ghz to a FX 8320 @4.4Ghz. There was pretty much no difference in games which rely of single on threaded performance, BF3 and Arma 2 was pretty much the same in performance as they wont use over 4 cores, Arma 2 only uses 2, But for BF4 and Crysis 3 where was a fairly big difference...
Ma Rig...
(19 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.42Ghz  Gigabyte 990XA-UD3 Rev.3 AM3+ Inno3D HerxuleZ X2 GTX 970 4GB GGDR5 HyperX FURY 16 GB White DDR3 @ 1866Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD  WD 3.5" 1TB Hitachi 3.5" 500GB  WD 3.5" 250GB  
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 18x DVD ROM Sata Cooler Master Hyper Evo 212 (x2 120mm fan P&P) Windows 8.1 Professional 64Bit Samsung S24D300HS 24" 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung S24B150BL 24"  MechanicalEagle Z-77 87 Key OCZ StealthXStream ii 600w Vaporise V9 Blue Mid ATX Case 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitec G302 Daedalus Prime Razer Goliathus Speed Edition Medium Corsair Raptor HS40 7.1  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2600 @ 3.4Ghz Intel DQ67SW LGA 1155 MSI GTX 1070 ARMOR OC 8Gb GGDR5 Corsair XMS 20Gb's DDR3 @ 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD  240GB Kingston UV400 SSD 1TB WD + 500GB WD Zalman CNPS5X Performa 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit LG 29" 29UM58-P IPS 21:9 Ultrawide  LG 22" 22M47VQ IPS MOTOSPEED Inflictor CK104 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Aerocool Integrator 500W AvP Viper Black Mini Tower  Logitech G402 Hyperion Fury Razer Golothus Speed 
Audio
Corsair HS40 + Logitec Z333 Speakers + Sub 
  hide details  
Reply
Ma Rig...
(19 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.42Ghz  Gigabyte 990XA-UD3 Rev.3 AM3+ Inno3D HerxuleZ X2 GTX 970 4GB GGDR5 HyperX FURY 16 GB White DDR3 @ 1866Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD  WD 3.5" 1TB Hitachi 3.5" 500GB  WD 3.5" 250GB  
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 18x DVD ROM Sata Cooler Master Hyper Evo 212 (x2 120mm fan P&P) Windows 8.1 Professional 64Bit Samsung S24D300HS 24" 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung S24B150BL 24"  MechanicalEagle Z-77 87 Key OCZ StealthXStream ii 600w Vaporise V9 Blue Mid ATX Case 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitec G302 Daedalus Prime Razer Goliathus Speed Edition Medium Corsair Raptor HS40 7.1  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2600 @ 3.4Ghz Intel DQ67SW LGA 1155 MSI GTX 1070 ARMOR OC 8Gb GGDR5 Corsair XMS 20Gb's DDR3 @ 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD  240GB Kingston UV400 SSD 1TB WD + 500GB WD Zalman CNPS5X Performa 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit LG 29" 29UM58-P IPS 21:9 Ultrawide  LG 22" 22M47VQ IPS MOTOSPEED Inflictor CK104 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Aerocool Integrator 500W AvP Viper Black Mini Tower  Logitech G402 Hyperion Fury Razer Golothus Speed 
Audio
Corsair HS40 + Logitec Z333 Speakers + Sub 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Phenom II beats FX Vishera core for core?