AMD's Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition

65 Comments

View All Comments

• poohbear - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  hey, is it safe to conclude that since farcry2 shows a 5% increase going from ddr3 1066 to ddr 3 1333 & another 4% going from ddr 3 1333 to ddr 1600, that overall it'd show a 9% increase switching from ddr1066 to ddr1600? that's quite a leap just based on memory!

• lopri - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  Unfortunately
  Sadly
  Unlikely
  Disappointing
  Useless
  Waste
  Unpleasant
  Painfully
  Negligible
  
  --
  
  Luckily
  Thankfully
  Great
  Possibility
  Benefit
  impressive
  Once again
  Surprise
  Refreshing
  
  Next up (my guess): SSD or Mac

• aguilpa1 - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  Unfortunately - at 3.2 it can't keep up with 2.66 i7
  Sadly - AMD needs new architecture
  Unlikely - that it will happen soone
  Disappointing - results even though quality is improving
  Useless - to keep comparing the lates amd to intel
  Waste - of article space for these comparisons
  Unpleasant - to AMD fans
  Painfully - obvious AMD is far behind
  Negligible - improvements with new releases
  
  --
  
  Luckily - there are other articles to read
  Thankfully - I don't own one of these chips or mobos
  Great - bunch of useless data
  Possibility - AMD may pull something actually new of these days
  Benefit - of better pricing and competition
  impressive - how I'm still finding things to write on this
  Once again - I am bored by a Tom's article
  Surprise - (sorry no surprises here)
  Refreshing - my post has come to an end.
  

• Nfarce - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  Hahaha! I'm still waiting on the AMD whiners complaining of Anandtech anti-AMD bias every time Intel whips them.

• Nfarce - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  Oh yeah, and the fact that a stock i7 has Turbo Mode is fair game. AMD needs to produce better than this. They own the mid-range GPU market with excellent cards like the HD 4870, but their processor development just - flat - needs - help.

• Procurion - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  Not an issue-I own both AMD and Intel systems but am considering moving up from my 9950BE to the 955 and want to be sure of what I am buying before I spend my money. Some of us aren't as well versed as others in the finer points and that's what I thought the comments section was for.

• Procurion - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  I can understand some of your comments, but according to his data/listed values, the i7 920 is NOT running at stock speed. The frequency he lists is 2.8, NOT 2.66. What's up with that Anand? I can't see where you mention that your test was run with OC'd cpu's but the speed you list for the i7 920 is overclocked? It does skew the results if that is the case.

• Procurion - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  To clarify, the listed speeds for Sysmark, which would make the i7 part look much better than if you had run it at 2.66. To draw the conclusions at the end of your article without noting the difference(if there is one and it's not a typo) or justifying your conclusion with proper references of performance in 50% of your published tests is confusing to say the least. Can you clarify?

• Spacecomber - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  I'm guessing that he is showing the processor's actual speed during the test. The 2.8GHz speed likely is due to the i7's native ability to overclock itself via Turbo Mode (see page 4 of the article). In other words, the i7-920 dynamically has an actual clock speed up to 2.93GHz, depending on the application(s) running.

• Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

  woops, sorry for the confusion there, the i7-920 ran at its stock speed of 2.66GHz but Turbo Mode was enabled so it'll run as fast as 2.8GHz when more than one core is active.
  
  Take care,
  Anand