AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 8, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Microsoft Excel 2007
Just as there are applications that favor the Phenom II's IMC, there are those scenarios that are highly optimized for Intel's architectures. Running the Excel Monte Carlo simulation all of the Core 2 Quads and even the Core 2 Duo E8600 are faster than AMD's Phenom II. This is simply a test that is highly optimized for Intel's architectures, which is a big reason Intel prefers it. But it's real world and it's worth identifying.
Sony Vegas Pro 8: Blu-ray Disc Creation
Encoding yet again, and Phenom II does very well. This time around we're creating a Blu-ray disc, something that will perhaps become more common place in the next couple of years. Other than the Core i7, Phenom II is the fastest processor around. It's the strength of the integrated memory controller at work - both Core i7 and Phenom II rule the charts here. Penryn is good but not good enough, even at the same clock speed, to compete.
Sorenson Squeeze: FLV Creation
There's a certain degree of variability between the runs here which is why we see the Q9400, Q9550 and Phenom II X4 940 all around the same level of performance. The takeaway point? AMD is fully competitive here, and a real alternative to Intel's Core 2 Quad at the same price point and beyond.
WinRAR - Archive Creation
Compression programs love multiple cores and fast memory access. This test bodes well for the Phenom II's IMC design and it shows with results besting all of the Core 2 processors except for the $1100+ QX9770.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
93 Comments
View All Comments
ViRGE - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
Those numbers are all correct, mate. I'm not sure why you'd be getting something different.Finally - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
Seriously guys, you should check out the new hard disk technology by Seagate. New density record, already available.kknd1967 - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
I thought Q9450 should be better with larger cache?Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
In some of the tests the two will swap places simply because they run at the same clock speed and the added cache doesn't always help performance. In those cases if the Q9450 is behind it's most likely due to normal variation between test runs.Take care,
Anand
Goty - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
If I didn't have a 5000+ BE sitting in a K9A2 in my rig right now I probably wouldn't consider this CPU, but seeing as I do, it looks like I've found my next upgrade.kmmatney - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
I was on a plane flying back from Taiwan (I work in the Fab industry) and I happened to sit next to an Intel employee who had traveled to Asia for the Core i7 launch. I asked him about the small L2 cache, and he explained that these run about 300 test applications, and chose the cache amounts based on a compromise between performance (and latency) and die size. We talked a bit and he asked me how I knew so much about computer hardware, and I mentioned I'm an avid Anandtech reader. He recognized the name, and mentioned that he saw Anand argue with one of his coworkers for quite some time about the L2 cache size!Zaitsev - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
That's a great story! I would love to see anand duking it out with some intel employees! LOLslayerized - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
AMD has indeed made some notable improvements with Phenom II and their 45nm. Reviews keep mentioning about how there is an upgrade option with Phenom II being AM2 compatible; however, what next (this is probably their last product with AM2 compatibility)? Shouldn't the reviews consider the upgrade options for Core i7/X58 with Westmere in a couple of years too? For someone who is considering a fresh build, I think that is something that should be analyzed too imo. Great review otherwise as always; the playing field if not leveled is at least starting to look competitive in a few segments!!Griswold - Friday, January 9, 2009 - link
No. Facts and "might turn out that way in a few years" arent the same thing.san1s - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - link
still slower than core 2?