[AlabamaCajun]

Originally Posted by edit

(I originally thought I had this at 2.4 but sometime before folding I rebooted and BIOS had returned to stock 2.2. I discovered it after the unit checked in and I rebooted.)

I just wanted to pass along a sneak peak of what a typical Phenom 2.2G fold looks like.
This is AMD's latest arch with 4 Cores.

Project POPC #2653.



Overclocked 200Mhz the most I can run stable on this board until a good BIOS update gets out or my new ram plays nice. It's a green platform but so far it's almost as fast as my 2.8G 5600 running some apps. I just let it run 4 cores flat out. I know some people are using 2 instances but I think with this architecture 4 might work better unless I reconfigure the ram into split channels which basically sets 2 cores per stick. I haven't tested that yet so it's an unknown.

[thideras]

Is this a dual or quad?

My e6400 @ 3.4 gets 14/mins a frame...seems kind of slow.

[Ben333]

phenom = quad

And thats some insane folding PPD?

[jonspd]

I wonder if your gonna get to be able to crank one out in less then a day....

[AlabamaCajun]

Originally Posted by thideras

Is this a dual or quad?

My e6400 @ 3.4 gets 14/mins a frame...seems kind of slow.

Yes at this time a 3.4 Kent Dual does what a 2.4 Agena Quad does. This is the fastest rig I have at this time. I may get a Q9450, s'pose to kick some arse.

Originally Posted by jonspd

I wonder if your gonna get to be able to crank one out in less then a day....

It will be just about one day. Hopefully better with the new ram.

[jonspd]

Originally Posted by AlabamaCajun

It will be just about one day. Hopefully better with the new ram.

But thats only one client 4 cores not 8 so about 3K ppd for sure on 2 clients?

[harlam357]

If that's a 1760pt WU you are getting just @ 1800ppd on a 200MHz OC. In any case that WU will finish in just under a day.

That's calc'd using 14:03 as a base frame time.

If for some reason that's a p2608/2609 then the ppd will be lower but there's hope that the 1760pt variety will also have a better showing.

Needs to give us the project AC... without that it's just tpfs without meaning.

[Sleepy_Steve]

I normally keep an eye out on a certain number for just this reason:
14m 24s * 100 = 1 day

As a reference, my E6600 at stock speeds gets 18m 32s /frame in windows. It was a lot better at 3.6ghz in Linux

[William Hung]

Hmmm, I would have expected MUCH better, but I guess with the small cache the SMP WU's cause it to bog. Hopefully some better mempry timings and tweaks will get it down.

Is this native Linux?

I'm installing it right now on my box to see what native brings to the table. I am getting two ~8:40 second frames in each VM under linux now at 4.16 Ghz on the QX9650... I think that's like 5500 ppd.

I think I'll also be getting a Q9450 to replace my wife's "aging" QX6700... Even at 3 Ghz, that should be good for ~4k ppd.

[ChasR]

Assuming we're seeing frame times from a p2653 (or 2604, p2605, or p2651) running native Linux, Phenom performance looks to be in the same range, clock for clock, as an E6420. Trouble is, it won't clock anywhere close. I expected better and I doubt better ram is going to provide the miracle cure that makes the Phenom anywhere close to a match for an Intel Quad. I've no doubt that the Phenom is a great chip for day to day use, but bang for the buck isn't there as far as folding goes.

@jon
Running two instances will make less ppd if the cpu is cache bound, as is likely the case.

[AlabamaCajun]

It is a 2653, POPC.

I just wish AMD had the capitol to have brought it but now that Intel is hammering them on all fronts it's less likely we will see a big difference. These beat the Conroe's but fell short of the Kent's. My post is not to prove any "points" but to show others what they can do with AMD hardware. I don't expect to fold much on this rig as it's windows unless I dual boot. For those wishing to Fold on AMD hardware, my suggestion. is to go with the Duals until the updated stepping.

[ChasR]

When you look at it from the perspective of the machine being your daily use machine, doing what you need done and doing it well, the Phenom will be a great addition. Look at the points as gravy. The Phenom just isn't going to be viable as a farming implement. Have you thought about installing vmware, running two instances and setting affinity on it. That could provide a nice boost in production. Using VMware, affinity sticks to the vmware-vmx processes instead of the cores that restart and lose affinity on every new WU. Also set priority to low on the vmware-vmx processes so they back out pretty much like the native Windows client.

Had I thought about it, with the screen shot it has to be a Windows install and in that case, it's quite a bit faster than a E6420/E6600, clock for clock. 1800 ppd in Windows is nothing to sneeze at.

[Adak]

Thanks for all the info on your new Phenom, AC.

It will be great to see how much the L3 cache correction will speed up it up, and where AMD will go from here with their 45nm next generation chips.

[LandShark]

keep in mind that the Phenom is a 4 core chip! so, comparing it to a 2 core E6420/6600 isn't fair. (I haven't keep track on their price tho....) one should compare it to a X3210/Q6600 at the very least, if not Penryn! @750ppd/Ghz (or so), it doesn't look good at all when compare to Intel's QuadCore chip.....

[AlabamaCajun]

Originally Posted by LandShark

keep in mind that the Phenom is a 4 core chip! so, comparing it to a 2 core E6420/6600 isn't fair. (I haven't keep track on their price tho....) one should compare it to a X3210/Q6600 at the very least, if not Penryn! @750ppd/Ghz (or so), it doesn't look good at all when compare to Intel's QuadCore chip.....

You might have to look at history to see why. These were designed to Kill Conroe Duals as to why people are making those comparison. We knew since the iQ6600 hit the market that the playing field was going to tilt. If it weren't for something that Intel did right in there process, you would not be seeing these overclock that these iQ6600 are getting. Phenom does belong with the Kents. We just hope AMD can match results up to at least 3.2Ghz.

BTW, I have to retest, I shutdown today to change RAM and I found the CPU clock back on Auto that would drop me back to 2.2Ghz or 800ppd/Ghz. for these 1760 pointers.

[ChasR]

These native Linux results were posted on the Temp FC Fourum:

I've been folding with my Phenom 9500 since Friday. Here is my setup, no OC'ing, all stock speeds.

Phenom 9500
Biostar TF560 A2+
Team DDRII 800,1gig

P3050-3,30,17 10min 10sec
P3059-0,89,92 8min 48sec
P3043-8,25,87 10min 30sec
P3050-9,31,12 10min 4sec

That's an average of 2023 ppd for the 1440 pointers and 1910 ppd for the p3059. p2653 is known to produce more ppd than any of these WUs.

[ChasR]

I compared the Phenom to the Intel chip (that I have) closest to it in performance. What's not fair about that? Not fair to who? At 3.3 GHz (almost every one of them goes at least that fast), the E6420 makes 2300+ ppd in native Linux. Maybe I should have compared the Phenom to a lesser Intel chip to make it fair?

Point is, AMD has a long way to go to equal Intel's cpus as far as folding goes. It's going to be a great chip at everything else.

[AlabamaCajun]

I'm not sure where thread is going with this but AMD may not have that far to go. The only hurdle they really have is getting to 45nm. When test came in clock for clock with similar ranked CPUs the results were not that far apart. People are jumping happy over the success of this monopoly that is purposely attempting to disrupt other business for it's game. Enjoy those chips, what we are doing here is great for the science and fun for us. Overclocking is our advantage that the average consumer does not. A iQ9450 or iQ9550 is of interest to me but the more I see big headedness and bad business practices from the blue one the less I want to invest money in the products. I'll spend more on an AMD just to avoid supporting these practices. I stopped frequenting the Folding are because I got turned off reading about Conroe and Kentsfield. AMD hardware moved a lot of science last year putting me on page 1 and is still doing so.

[Adak]

I was alluding to the L3 cache bug that was found in the Phenom. Once they get that ironed out, I think the Phenom should be reevaluated for it's folding prowess. It definitely should be reevaluated when it's brought out at 45nm!

I remember several years ago, when Intel couldn't even get their 64 bit extensions done right, and finally gave up and bought a license to use AMD's.

Intel's done a remarkable turn-around in the last few years, but AMD has also been on the top of the heap, when they first came out with the first (true) dual-core cpu's. I'm sure AMD will remain competitive, and sometimes exceed Intel's offerings, in the future.

That competition between these two is so good for us consumers, that I couldn't imagine what it would be like to just have one commercial cpu provider. I cringe at the very thought of that.

[ChasR]

I also found this on the FC Forum:

I have the explanation : this is the reason why actual Phenom, with B2 steppings aren't aviable at 2.4 GHz (model 9700) ...

AMD is waiting for B3 stepping to get higher for a simple reason : they have an issue with the L3 controller at clock highers than 2.3 GHz. That also explains poor overclocking with actual steppings. This issue is a local overheating near this controller that lead to crash like you experienced

I'm pretty sure that if you try to overclock your CPU, things will be worse

If everything goes well, B3 stepping will comes with 2.4+ GHz chips and solve the issue (and overclock higher than 3 GHz).

I'm no Intel fanboy. When AMD builds the best folding cpu, I'll be on it like a fly on sh**. And I'll say if it weren't for AMDs constant pressure, Intel wouldn't be building cpus like Yorkfield and be on such a short product cycle. We all need AMD to be successful to keep Intel in line.

[William Hung]

I had about 5 years where I didn't own an Intel box, but ever since C2D, I've never looked back. I hope that someday soon AMD can get competitive again, but even price/performance just isn't there, and since all most of my machines do is fold and encode video/render video, Intel makes the most sense for now.

Will be interested to see as their process improves how much more performance they can get.

Right now though, 40% OC's out of the box on Yorkfield on air on a new process have me worried that AMD won't catch up for a long time...

[NedClocker]

Originally Posted by ChasR

I'm no Intel fanboy. When AMD builds the best folding cpu, I'll be on it like a fly on sh**. And I'll say if it weren't for AMDs constant pressure, Intel wouldn't be building cpus like Yorkfield and be on such a short product cycle. We all need AMD to be successful to keep Intel in line.

I'm no Intel fanboy either. I used to be 100% AMD and was proud to be "supporting" the underdog.

Yes, pray AMD does not fold. If it does, Intel will be able to set their own prices, you know, kind of like Microsoft does with operating systems.

[hitbyaprkedcar7]

alabama, chasr, harlam, i remember all of you i havnt been on ehre in so long, lol.

i just got my macbook pro folding, core duo 2.13ghz crunhing on a POPC 2065 with about 25mins a frame...

apparantly, intel is just kicking the **** out of amd. where have i been? when i left, c2d came out and was kicking ass, but not by a whole much. now amd's got quads, intels got quad's.

how exactly far is AMD behind?

and where did the mad smilies go? the ones with the flames?

[NedClocker]

Originally Posted by hitbyaprkedcar7

alabama, chasr, harlam, i remember all of you i havnt been on ehre in so long, lol.

i just got my macbook pro folding, core duo 2.13ghz crunhing on a POPC 2065 with about 25mins a frame...

apparantly, intel is just kicking the **** out of amd. where have i been? when i left, c2d came out and was kicking ass, but not by a whole much. now amd's got quads, intels got quad's.

how exactly far is AMD behind?

and where did the mad smilies go? the ones with the flames?

This one?

It's still here. Just type colon mad colon, only use real colons and no spaces.

[AlabamaCajun]

Originally Posted by NedClocker

This one?

It's still here. Just type colon mad colon, only use real colons and no spaces.

semi-colons cause IBS!

I'm trying to get stable at 2.4, that's my goal until I find a right settings so it might be a while for updates.

[Sleepy_Steve]

Alright, a bit of some hate on people who don't like big blue. Don't think me an Intel fanboy, I just buy what works best for my budget... Buying a product because it is from the underdog is not my thing.


As a business major, I can't really fault Intel for going for a dominating competitive advantage over a competitor that has proven itself of being capable of making products as good or better than their own offerings.

No where does it say that you have to play nice with competitors in your market so that they might be able to catch up and or beat you one day. Thats not how the game works. If you work for a corporation high up, your job is to figure out a way to beat the ever living snot out of anyone who does the same thing as you. Do you think an exec is paid what they are so they can beat the competition by a fraction of what they could have? No, you get gobs and gobs of money for making your firm the absolute best it could possibly be in relation to others in your market sector.

Don't take this personally... I'm not trying to call anyone a hippy, after all what would the morning be without granola?

[ChasR]

Originally Posted by hitbyaprkedcar7

how exactly far is AMD behind?

p3050
Linux Phenom at stock 2.2 GHz = 2000 ppd
Linux Q6600 at stock 2.4 GHz = 2400 ppd

Not so bad (20%) until you consider overclocking where you'll be lucky to get 2.4 GHz out of the Phenom while almost every Q6600 will get to 3.2 GHz on a decent motherboard. Then you're looking at 2200 ppd vs 3300 ppd. When you consider that you can get 4250 ppd running 2 Linux VMs on the Q6600 it gets worse.

It would be interesting to see how the Phenom stacks up on regular WUs.

[benbaked]

Originally Posted by ChasR

It would be interesting to see how the Phenom stacks up on regular WUs.

Regular units...(yawn)

I know this isn't the correct subforum, but I'm curious how a Phenom would do in seti@home.

[AlabamaCajun]

Originally Posted by ChasR

p3050
Linux Phenom at stock 2.2 GHz = 2000 ppd
Linux Q6600 at stock 2.4 GHz = 2400 ppd

Not so bad (20%) until you consider overclocking where you'll be lucky to get 2.4 GHz out of the Phenom while almost every Q6600 will get to 3.2 GHz on a decent motherboard. Then you're looking at 2200 ppd vs 3300 ppd. When you consider that you can get 4250 ppd running 2 Linux VMs on the Q6600 it gets worse.

It would be interesting to see how the Phenom stacks up on regular WUs.

Phenoms will do as much as 3.0G but folding stable may be more like 2.8G. ExtremeSystem't TonyOCZ is working with a DFI board and has determined a problem in the north bridge that can be tweaked to get it up in speed. That is a positive note because it means the problem is not in the Cores but still a problem none the less. A lot of people want to see AMD fail but they will be surprised if this problem is fixed and we start seeing results. What I'm expecting to see is an actual higher performance/MHZ at higher speeds. There are some changes to the architecture that as the speed increases actual throughput gets better. Temperature wise, my phenom OCed to 2.4 is 8-10C cooler than the Windsor 4600 I have at stock!

[jonspd]

Originally Posted by AlabamaCajun

Phenoms will do as much as 3.0G but folding stable may be more like 2.8G. ExtremeSystem't TonyOCZ is working with a DFI board and has determined a problem in the north bridge that can be tweaked to get it up in speed. That is a positive note because it means the problem is not in the Cores but still a problem none the less. A lot of people want to see AMD fail but they will be surprised if this problem is fixed and we start seeing results. What I'm expecting to see is an actual higher performance/MHZ at higher speeds. There are some changes to the architecture that as the speed increases actual throughput gets better. Temperature wise, my phenom OCed to 2.4 is 8-10C cooler than the Windsor 4600 I have at stock!

nice and cool I C

thanks for the info