The New AMD Building Thread

What I would genuinely be interested in here is some 'real world' tests of a proper high-end AMD system like a Phenom 9950, and X2 6000+. Rather than use dubious anandtech-style tests, who knows, we could have been wrong all these months!
<wouldn't that be embarrassing...>

 

sam you know like you said that you would like to see them tested do you like mean benchmarks and stuff like that because i am using a 5000+ and i get low scores on 3dmarks06 that is why i am upgrading my system to this spec

AMD Phenom Quad 9600 2.3GHz (Retail AM2+)
ATI Radion HD4850
ASUS M2N SLI DELUXE (only am2 but no money to spend on it)lol
PSU: Corsair 620W HX V2 Series Modular PSU

a friend told me that would be a good bulid.

so will do some real world testing for you when i get it all next wesnesday.

 

Welcome the The AMD Building Thread. Thanks for coming Sam! I think that AMD has found a market for themselves as a great IGP solution. We also have to accept that we here at AD are the exception to the rule. When you consider that about 90% of all computers sold have OBG and aren't overclocked, it's a big plus for their marketing. When you move up to the higher end motherboards, the OBG has it's own dedicated SidePort GDDR3 memory for the OBG. Lots of folks do the same things with their computers that I do. A lot of Video Encoding. I did notice with the x2 4400+ that it was only about 8 minutes slower than processing the same DVD on my main rig. I also couldn't help but notice that the x2 4800+ on an older tech AM2 MB was the slowest at encoding of the three. I think that bodes well for say, moving up to a 2.6GHz 45w 5050e, or higher processor in the future. Thanks to some pretty dandy electronic wizardry on the 780G chip. I think the best part of that is AMD integrates their Unified Video Decoder 2.0 (UVD 2.0) capabilities into the 780G. UVD 2.0 offers hardware acceleration for decoding VC-1, H.264 (AVC), WMV, and MPEG-2 sources up to 1080p. Just the fact that you can render full HD graphics with a 3200+ Sempron single core, totally boggles my mind!

Oddly enough I was attracted to AMD because of a 2.0gHz Sempron eMachine that I wound up acquiring, which was much faster than a comparable 2.0GHz 440 Celeron. It had a decent Foxconn MB, but I threw all the rest of the junk parts away and replaced them with good stuff. The stock power supply, memory, CPU and CPU cooler all became history. The 250w Bestec PSU was replaced by a Thremaltake TR-2 500w unit, the Sempron with a 64x2 4800+, CPU cooler with a Freezer 64 and 2GB of DDR2 800 G.Skill to replace the single stick of 256MB slow memory it came with. It's become a fine machine, and I enjoy using it. It has a certain smoothness and faster internal functions that the Intel's lack. I think I am finally beginning to understand what people mean when the talk about AMD's real world performance.

I tried a little experiment to find out a few things while I had the new 4400+ here, since I just happen to have 2DVDs of Lost in Space. Russell and I started DVDRB at the same time and timed each computer from the opening of the program till the time DVDRB/CCE was finished on each machine, and while the 4400+ was a little over 8 minutes slower in the encode time in the summary, in total time it was only about 3 to 4 minutes slower from start to finish. I also noticed little things like the lack of any pause when one segment finishes and the next one starts. Little things that the AMD architecture does just a bit faster and better. Again, these comparisons are at stock speeds for the AMD vs a 32% OC with my E6750. I get the impression that if the E6750 was at a stock 2.66GHz speed, the AMD would finish first. I may try it sometime just to find out!

Another big plus is the lack of the need for large multiple fans. The 4400+ only needed a single 80mm fan on the rear to deal with heat, although I did put a 120mm rear fan in since the case could handle both. I do recommend modding the NB heatsink with MX-2 and adding a small fan to it. The NB runs a lot cooler that way, so it makes sense to do it! This opens up possibilities of much lower profile cases that integrate right in with your sound system that will be lower and narrower than the receiver that powers your sound system. There's also the coming AMD Fusion where you can overclock at the click of a button on the desktop. One push of the button does several things depending on your OS. It overclocks both the CPU and the GPU, and if you are running Vista, it turns off all unnecessary vista functions, which will be of great benefit to the casual gamer. It also restores the Vista functions when you turn it off. not ready for production yet, but early reports say it's very promising. Right now 780G motherboards are the best performers for the IGP market at very low end pricing. AMD knows it can't compete for the upper middle to high end market right now, so it's a smart move on their part. As far as sheer performance goes, we will have to wait and see if anyone is interested enough here to do say, a 6000+ and overclock it. If I can get a 5050e to do the job I want, I may play around with overclocking a bit, but I plan to leave it stock in the long run.

Thanks for dropping by,
Russ

 

Thanks for posting navskin. The HD4850s are pretty low performers in 3dmark anyway, but it's not the end of the world, they do well in real games etc.

Thanks for the welcome post as well Russ, I know I've been a bit hard on you regrarding this, and perhaps a little unfair too - it's mostly down to misunderstandings (what isn't on aD... remember the scuffs I've had with BigDK and Mort? )
As far as lack of heat goes, that really comes down to the fact that we build high powered systems, sometimes OC them, and stick in powerful components like multiple HDDs and/or DVD burners, and graphics cards. When I rebuilt a compaq system using an E2180 with only one 92mm case fan (that I swapped for a low speed Xilence one) it ran stone cold, I was very surprised. Basically, you'd be amazed how little cooling you can get away with for modern basic PCs. The newer X2s do seem quite good in the power department, hopefully AMD can put that to use with the Phenoms.

 

i think your right what you about your test that you did with the dvd. my dad runs a c2d @ 2.6ghz stock well i think its that. i have the 5000+ with the 65watt core and i smoked my dad @ doing dvd by 10 mins woth nero. i have had an intel but all have died 2 celerons 3 p4s i would not get an intel because amd are a, better product they dont run as hot and the price has a big impact on that aswell. that fact is that AMD run alot long than an intel. but on the other side intel have change from when they started the old hardware that they use to make worked so well but i think they have gotten lost somewhere along the way and have got gready. they make mac they do the xbox they make 80% of the pc market processors. while amd look after there customers just stick to what they know best.

that just opinon.

graham

 

As it happens, Intel CPUs tend to last a lot longer than AMDs in all the long run tests I've shown, your CPUs are likely to have failed due to faulty motherboards powering them. CPUs very rarely fail by themselves. In any case, this is not the AMD vs Intel thread

 

Boo! You bring war to this peaceful land.

I'm also interested in the performance hit that an AM2+ chip in a AM2 board takes. Can anyone find a ballpark number?

 

Hehe, well, was just tru-ifying a post
As far as I can tell it's about a 10% hit. How noticeable that would be would depend on what you do.

 

any reports on the clocks being achieved with the phenom II?

 

What we need is someone to underclock their Intel quads to the Phenoms speeds to compare them at the same clock speeds. Also no using 3DMark for game performance. Use Far Cry 2 or something.

 

id say use an RTS as they are heavily CPU dependant or use FSX.

 

Crysis Warhead, and whack the resolution down to 800x600. My CPU frame rate cap is 21 for that game, seems a good place to start

 

To underclock any CPU would still be an unfair test. CPU to CPU same MGz, also not games. Can't really see how games can define speed, if it works it works.
I mean really how many things do we really do that define the need for speed

 

They do, as the frame rate in games is not only limited by the graphics card, but also the processor as well.

Single-task apps like video encodes or renders tend to favour certain types of chips so they're not necessarily good tests either.

 

sammorris: Well like I said if it works, it works. Regardless of what CPU U use, I know Vid cards enhance the pic Quality, also they require a certain Speed of CPU to retain the movement in scenes

 

Yes, but that's conditional. A stock E7200 for instance, would render some games unplayable at max settings where they'd be fine with a Q9550.

 

I agree! Most of us here don't care about oveclocking, CPU speeds, Frame rates, or what you can do on an Intel! We are here because we want to learn about the new AMD Technology and use it to do a build that will suit our needs and do the job we want. Here, it's all about our individual needs! as long as it's About building the best AMDs we can to suit our needs! I'm no Mod, but you three getting "Off Topic"!

You all are welcome here any time as long as it's about the thread title. I understand that even I have to say "Intel" sometimes to explain things. So I'm not splitting hairs here. Please Respect what we came here to do and accomplish!

Thank You,
theonejrs

 

The Inquirer reckon up to 4Ghz on air, but the Inquirer reckon a lot of things...

 

godd idea lets check news sites


mmm fudzilla also posts 4Gs (on air)