AMD's Quad FX: Technically Quad Core
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 30, 2006 1:16 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
3D Rendering Performance with 3dsmax 8 & Cinebench
We've updated our benchmark suite a bit and we're now using 3dsmax 8 with the SPECapc 3dsmax 8 rendering test. The composite rendering score is graphed below, which is the geometric mean of the rendering times in the table below normalized to a reference system.
The FX-74 system comes within striking distance of Intel's Core 2 Extreme QX6700 and the unreleased Core 2 Quad Q6600, which is good for performance but not so great when you take into account power consumption and cost.
Looking at the lower end FX-70, performance isn't that much better than Intel's top of the line dual-core setup, making the purchase even more difficult.
Performance under Cinebench is similar, however the FX-74 actually manages to take the lead away from the QX6700.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
88 Comments
View All Comments
BikeDude - Tuesday, December 5, 2006 - link
Could the reason be that 1GB per memory node is simply too little?On a configuration like this, you'll easily see one of the nodes with only 256MB or so left...
So, put in some more memory! At this point 32-bit XP will be limiting, even for 32-bit apps. (XP won't address more than 2^32 Bytes, some of this will be masked by PCI and PCIe devices, and additionally each process only has a 2GB address space for code&data unless you upgrade to 64-bit Windows) Also be aware that nVidia ForceWare 80.00 and newer lost PAE support. You'll experience crashes and non-working games if combined with a PAE aware 32-bit OS (such as Win2003). ForceWare 79.11 works fine though.
(BTW: MSFT added NUMA support in XP SP2)
Kiijibari - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
Hi Ananand,sounds credible, because there is some extra cache snooping traffic going on, anyways, please keep us posted if there is a new BIOS version available, and if it would "do" something :)
Windows schweduler differences between XP and VISTA would be interesting, too.
So far there were only Win32 XP vs. Win Vista64 comparisions, not possible to draw a fair conclusion with that data.
Thanks a lot
Kiijibari
mino - Friday, December 1, 2006 - link
One important question:Are those new FX-7x CPU identical or is there some differentiation employed ???
Kiijibari - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
identical to what ?If you meant Socket-F Opterons, then yes, they are identical, if the BIOS allows it, then normal Opterons should be able to run in 4x4 boards, too.
cheers
Kiijibari
mino - Sunday, December 3, 2006 - link
Thanks that info(if correct) pretty much clears the FUD.Griswold - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
How so? The 2P+ Opteron IMC wants buffered RAM, while these FX types do not. I dont think a simple BIOS hack can circumvent that.Kiijibari - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
*gasp*Du you really think AMD engineers, tests, validate, etc. a CPU for a niche market ??
There are maybe only a few thousand 4x4 CPUs, that are sold worldwide per month ... it would be economical ridiculous.
But if you dont know anything about business, maybe that will convince you:
http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?i...">http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?i...
cheers
Kiijibari
lollichop - Sunday, February 26, 2017 - link
All idiots talking about old CPUs here :D Fast forward 11 years, Ryzen will be out in a week's time.