Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (198091)	5/20/2006 9:10:08 AM
From: eracer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Read them and weep: Some Cinebench 9.5 and WinRAR comparation with a X2 (mine ) @2.4ghz and @2.6ghz : Here Conroe lost 2 out of 3 at same clock. I get the feeling Conroe will underwhelm vs its hype. As I've been saying for weeks now I don't believe Conroe is going to win EVERY benchmark. I've also specifically mentioned in the past that Sciencemark, WinRAR and Cinebench will be benchmarks that NGA may not be much, if any, faster than Athlon 64 clock-for-clock. They belong to a handful of benchmarks that Yonah stinks at compared to Athlon 64. The problem is that Athlon 64 tying Conroe in 20% of the benchmarks and losing by moderate to large margins in the rest is going to be seen as a major win for Conroe. It will be similar to the Athlon 64/P4 situation now. Just because P4 can beat Athlon 64 in a few benchmarks doesn't mean P4 is viewed as an equal or a close competitor to Athlon 64 in terms of performance.

To: pgerassi who wrote (198091)	5/20/2006 11:11:13 AM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Pete, with the latest ScienceMark binaries, Conroe's score at 2.4ghz is 1551, 17% better performance :) It's right there in the forum you linked. :) Why are the new binaries better? Because: These 32-bit binaries use x87 code which is legacy and not utilized in 64-bit. In 64-bit only SIMD arithmetic is utilized to perform FP operations. Moreoever, when SIMD is used we can build with the Intel compiler to enable vectorization and attempt to quantify how much faster Conroe is when those 128-bit engines in it's "Media Boost" unit are utilized. Opteron, P4 and pentium M have only 64-bit engines. Just look at the BLAS benchmark score.. there you see the beginnings of those 128-bit MEDIA processing units paying off. From the ScienceMark author, talking about the new binaries: ScienceMark was not written to show the power of the Athlon -- ScienceMark has been around for a while, in the 1.0 incarnation and in the 2.0 incarnation; and we receive no help from either AMD or Intel in regards to the benchmark. Any software or hardware is bought out of our own pocket -- I have bought numerous Pentium 4 machines and Pentium M machines, and I imagine when Conroe becomes available for me to purchase, I will purchase a Conroe as well. Carfax posted my reply over at Aces' (thanks Carfax for posting it here) -- Intel actually recommends using x87 in scalar situations over SSE on the Pentium 4, due to x87 adds being pipelined. 64-bit code will probably be *Conroe shines in ScienceMark because it is a strong* architecture. Anyone seeing the benchmark results will realize that.** The writers of ScienceMark are hardware enthusiasts, just like you folks -- we love seeing how our code performs on different architectures, and if an architecture is strong in our code, we have no problem shouting it from the rooftops. I suspect any tie in WinRAR & Cinebench probably goes away with a recompile, too :)