Am not sure if it's real or fake....Just want to share....

Source : http://chiphell.com/viewthread.php?tid=8750&extra=page%3D1

Added in by lex:

Original benchmark source: http://forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=161127





This post has been edited by lex: Sep 3 2007, 10:55 AM

39secs for 1m super pi?
something is wrong somewhere or is it really that slow...

This post has been edited by mmohdnor: Aug 31 2007, 03:42 PM

it super slow for new proc.... maybe got something wrong...

39 secs...no way man...LOL

I heard some comments saying K8 architecture scales much better (non-linear, more than rate of 1, OMGWTFBBQ) after 2.4/2.5Ghz (On stuff like SuperPi) "flies" at 2.4+Ghz, but no solid references to prove so. (Nothing scales higher than 1 )

That should be the right assumption, but SuperPi as a first-run test is essentially retarded- shows no signs of how the cores work together in different situations.

This post has been edited by X.E.D: Aug 31 2007, 09:58 PM

we..as a user no need to know how the cores work together or under wat situation. wat we wan is performance and efficiency.

So you care about SuperPi running on a chip on a mobo that runs HTT at 200mhz final (NOT base, bus running at 1/10 of intended speed), heavily crippled (ES CPU or bad BIOS), but not say, wait until Q4 2007 where reviewers without their own agenda (Cooaler is Intel heaven) tell you better on the chip that the consumer's buying?

Agena performance is only going to be better than Barcelona. Still, if you really want to brag (seriously, 75% above of general consensus on LYN) to everyone else that you can do single digit seconds in SuperPi and yet not across the board, there's the Core 2 Duos that you can buy now, clock to hell and back with Liquid Nitrogen, saves you the agony (if you really were aiming for SuperPi).


(And the author of the benches I think is acting dumb to whatever issues with the Barcelona benches, and proceeds to post Penryn 2.0Ghz ones instead- )

Whatever it is, still not final product and just have to wait till 10th september to see real benchies.

http://chiphell.com/viewthread.php?tid=8750&extra=page%3D1

http://www.coolaler.com/forum/showthread.php?t=161127

how come there are difference in Rated FSB on both screen shots 200 / 1000 Mhz

Either it's a fake, or SuperPI doesn't really work well with it yet.

As what everybody has speculated, probably it's fake or...

- buggy BIOS
- crappy core revision (B0/B1 as some ppl said...final revision should be B2)
- current softwares are not optimized for K10

p/s: but why would somebody waste their time making a fake AMD bench? (unless they have a deep hatred over AMD...lol)

This post has been edited by soulfly: Sep 1 2007, 09:41 AM

maybe it's from the "in" and "tell"... another wise a55 marketting strategy...
if it were AMD X2 4000 getting this result i will belive it...

Mass volume Opteron (80+% of what the businesses will buy and compare) starts from B3.

BIOS is definitely not up to touch (even production grade rev.A boards are weeks away), and SuperPi was never as good on AMD as Intel.

It might not be fake, but there are so many variables in which the author can castrate the CPU and its performance, or he just had the "bad" B1s with discrete L2 cache disabled (only L1 and L3 shared) and/or HTT running at core link speed, not 2Ghz.

I don't think buffered RAM platforms do well with SuperPi anyway.

nahh.....i think it is fake one...
wait till it fully release ar.....

the thisg sure will not let AMD fans down....

SuperPI is beginning to show its age and limitations...

or is it just AMD not trying hard enough?

hm.. food for thoughts

39secs ?... something wrong

Source http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=157136

Original source http://forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=161127

How do we read this??
Core speed: 200Mhz
Mulitplier: 10
Number of core: 4
= AMD x4 8000??!!

cpumark 253? good ah?

don't have super pi score ah?

can't oc ah?

It wouldnt be 39 seconds if L2 was disabled. Much slower.

a single core can reach that figure...

why invest in quad core?

The rumor said the early revision had problem with hierarchy cache...

My 3800 x2 939 finish in 37sec with folding, torrent, av, and lots of program running at the background....

it's normal on Gigabyte or Abit boards... i got 42sec on MSI boards... even got 4x512MB Corsair value select memory... i spit on MSI...

don worry AMD fans... i'm sure this is a deja vu of the HD2*** series GC...

This post has been edited by t3chn0m4nc3r: Sep 2 2007, 12:13 PM

coolaler is a reputable reviewer..idont think tat superpi fake (imho)

then i don think tat's the performance line... should be a renamed quadcore sempron...
How can AMD sux big time when their ATI products are so great...

This post has been edited by t3chn0m4nc3r: Sep 2 2007, 06:55 PM

how come ur 3800 X2 finish in 37sec ? do u oc ?
my one is windsor am2 on stock 43sec ...

my stock 3200+ and ddr2-667 runs 46secs pi1M with torrent+firefox+ym+msn running

im getting 37sec also with P4 Prescott 3.0GHz @ 3.8GHz...

on a MSI board...

Ya, a bit la....
from 2.0 to 2.6 only...
and with crappy rams...

i got 21sec wif Celeron 347 3.0GHz at 5.something GHz...
on Gigabyte GA-945GCMX-S2

mine brisbane x2 4000 got 49s with itunes, firefox, bitcomet and other running. is there anything wrong? why mine so slow one?

There are other benchmarks at http://forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=161127 than SuperPi like....

Anyone can explain to me that how come the task manager is 8 graph one instead of 4?

-pWs-

dual processor

2x4=8cores

Wow. Wonder if this machine work in folding@home.
Dual SMP

This post has been edited by -pWs-: Sep 3 2007, 12:03 PM

Check this => link