Comments on: AMD Phenom Gaming Benchmarks

By: Ahmad

Ahmad — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:30:28 +0000

Man i just bought a new pc.Here are the specs.:Procesor:AMD(ADVANCE MICRO DEVICES) Phenom Quad Core 9850 2,5ghz.Video Card:nVidia GeForce 9600gt-1024,2gb of ram ddr2.Yeah…Maybe Intel is better,but if we are talking about gameplaying AMD are better.That is my opinion.Thanks!

By: Chronos

Chronos — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:24:06 +0000

well its not a real test there useing to test the CPU you need min 3d settings like 800×600 and all settings on LOW
not med or high also they dont say what video cards are being used if they used gforce on both not a fair test also
gforce works good in intel for max fps but Ati give max fps
in Amd so witch did they use? what system xp pro or a ver of vista i dont think any of this realy matters tho since japan came out wiht a new micro transistor that will allow computer cpu’s to reach the 50 gig mark probly start seeing them in late 2009 or mid 2010 so whats the point of speing a few k to build a new gameing rig right now if there goign to be more the 99% faster with in 2-3 years? you can find gameing and hardware news at places like tomshardware.com
and megagames.com for some easy to find info saves time thumbing around the web all day

By: Robot

Robot — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:54:26 +0000

When games are programmed to take advantage of a quad, the Phenom should be quite fast.

By: Hotboi

Hotboi — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 22:42:36 +0000

Yea I used to do AMD too. From the very first 64bit processors. I upgraded to Q6600 on Black Friday; only $168 bucks at fry’s. YOU CAN’T BEAT THAT PRICE ! no way no how. I’ve noticed that ATI and AMD are all about hype. They have all the hardware at tip top shape, but their softwares suck. For example; the 2900Xt was suppose to blow the 8800GTX out of the water with its given specs. 512bit mem. interface, gddr4, higher clock, higher core. WHAT HAPPENED; 8800gtx still owned it. Same here with Phenom; true quad core right? 3600mhz HT3. but what happens. Q6600 blows it out of the water. all hardware, but no software support for their stuff. People may be thinking that oh, that’s just a minor setback and software can be updated. It’s half true. hardware architecture is based a lot on the software it produces so in theory, ATI would have to recreate the whole card and AMD would have to recreate the whole processor to use it’s maximum potential. Nvidia and Intel on the other hand use their maximum resources. AND IF BY CHANCE ATI AND AMD THINK OF A WAY TO OUTPERFORM CURRENT INTEL PROCESSORS; intel would have already had a better processor on it’s way. AMD has slowed down and has been one step behind for a while. If intel keeps up their work, AMD is less likely to catch up.

By: Warga

Warga — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 00:47:21 +0000

Uh..what you guys aren’t seeing here is this is next generation even beyond intels dreams right now. The phenom has introduced 128 bit arc, doubling the 64 bit intel is on. Say hello to to the new 128 bit operating systems in the near future, goodbye 64 bit.

If you have an am2 mobo, this is a phenomenal upgrade, to be able to go from 32 bit windows, to 64 bit windows, to the up and coming 128 bit windows all from changing the processor.

Fantastic job you’ve done for upgrade potential here AMD.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:05:19 +0000

Okay… I’m speaking as an Intel fan who converted from AMD after core2duo… but here’s how it works, people. Intel owns, hardcore, the CPU market. AMD isn’t going to take it over anytime in the next two years, period. Intel is working on 8+ core cpu’s [nehalem] which will still be compatable with skulltrail, making a 16-core computer. Skulltrail is also compatable with 4+ graphics processing units. AMD is going to own the mid-range market, however. Why? Because for 3K you can get a 4-GPU machine. For 4K, when the 3870×2’s come out, you can get an 8-gpu machine. That’s so many times more graphical power than anything nvidia/intel can put out. For 3K less.

By: RAven0628

RAven0628 — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:54:13 +0000

Well anyway a do not think that it will be wise to buy a phenom right now there will be some bug still need a revision or two I do not think that therie is any software optimised for quad core any way it did take some time just for sp2 win XP to support it with a ptch or a expensive Win xp sp2 letest vertion if the os is barly made for that imagine a game or any benchmark it will take time faor that to be real trut just take a loock for the differance betwene to cor2 and the quad from intel the perf. the performance only come from the cpu microcode of the differance would be mutch more thane that we have to think that there is 4 cp that is four time the prossesing power the 4 should be twice more than the dual cores or almost. For now I do not think that any software is realy relyable for judging any of itel or amd multicore cpu. not until there is os and software realy otimise for multi cpu proscesing.

By: Dingus

Dingus — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 14:20:07 +0000

Ok, When Vista came out with all of its flaws and everybody got ticked off that they didnt leave it in the oven long enough what did they do? People were flocking back to XP, at least that was my census(sp*). Do you think people were mad that they released Vista early and used the public as a testing ground to fix and optimize it? You bet they were and still are ticked. I am about to by a whole new comp and you know what, Its going to be Intel for me. I was thinking about AMD, and when I heard about the new Spidy System I was intrigued. After I read all I can read about it all I keep hearing is, oh, its ok, there going to eventually optimize it. !#@$ that!! We, as the consumers, need to pee on the junk and force people to make things right or they will Gates us to death and force Vista Protection Spyware software down our throats and not even flinch when we gag. I am getting XP Pro for my new comp with INTEL. Thanks for reading!!

By: mand1as

mand1as — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:03:05 +0000

my computer is 4 years old:

- Pentium 4 3.2 Ghz
- 1Gb ram
- Ati Radeon 9800

since it is Agp based if i wanna buy a new fast Pci Graphics card i need a whole new system,

so 3 weeks ago i spend 170 euros on Radeon X1950 Pro,
the fastest Agp card around,

every game including Crysis runs exceptionaly with their graphics in their full glory,

So my point is that
i gave breath a 4 year old system with just 170 euros so i still can be able to experience all the high-end gaming of today without whining.

By: ReelFiles

ReelFiles — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 01:00:25 +0000

too bad 1stQ of 08 is when Intel’s 45nm chips will be rolling out… Intel has the upper hand right now, deal with it, times change. AMD had the lead for a few years, during NF4 days. Even my $90 E2160 can do 3.36GHz on a simple liquid cooling loop. That’s with a budget Gigabyte board, together my DS3L and E2160 cost me less than $200 bucks… AMD can’t touch that right now. I will definitely be going Q6600 in Q1 ‘08 when they get a bit cheaper.

By: Tristo

Tristo — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:32:41 +0000

Not bad but just remember that this is there first line of phenom’s wait till early 08 when the real stuff comes out then we will see AMD come out on top!

By: who cares?

who cares? — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:54:01 +0000

It’s always back and forward, i loved my old Intel CPU’s (486 66Mhz, Pentium 2 MMX 133Mz and Pentium III 733Mhz) then i changed to AMD and started to use anf love the Thunderbird and XP CPUs till my last AMD wich was an AthlonXP 3200+, then changed again to Intel and now i’am a happy C2D user, is a stupid thing to be a fan boy, stay sticked to 1 brand no matter what is really dumb, just be fan of whatever is better at that time and that’s it. Oh and it’s the same with ATI and nVidia stuff.

Peace

By: Wibble

Wibble — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:43:08 +0000

@ 70

My comment wasn’t supposed to be an in depth analysys.. I’m just commenting on a company that I am familiar with, and up until now have regarded to be the best suited to my needs.. I’ve never used Intel, so I can’t really comment there althogh as far as pereformance goes I can certainly say that ATM they kick AMD’s arse.. although personally the price is a bit much (saying that though C2D’s are now cheaper that AMD.. E6850 for about £165, where as a Phenom 9600 is £180.. and the C2D will absolutely demolish the 9600 in every possible way.. so that’s certainly a consideration when I upgrade.

As far as gpu’s are concerned though.. Nvidea’s sli has (usually) worked whereas ATI’s crossfire (as far as I knw) NEVER worked, or at least didn’t to any reasonable standard…

I’m not to sure about this multiple GPU malary and TBH the whole farce kind of put me off Using AMD/ATI.. (had a Ti4200 128mb once and I absolutely loved that card, but for my recent upgrade I went for an X1900xt, which I like also.)

By: Wibble

Wibble — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:31:33 +0000

BTW.. is this version of Crossfire going to actually work this time, as opposed to garbage that was sold previous that didn’t work?

By: wheeee

wheeee — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:24:41 +0000

@69

Nice one sided slam, were you saying this when Dell and NVIDIA were introducing Quad-SLI configs? Or did you reserve it now for ATI because it seemed like a long enough span since the SLI offering that maybe people forgot.

And yeah, the 3870 and 3850 are that weak essentially, it’s already been said online and in many other cases that it’s just a 55nm HD2900XT with a crippled 256bit ring bus controller and DX10.1 support.