Next-Gen Opteron Rev F Specrates blow past Woodcrest

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yousuf Khan
  • Start date Start date
Y

Yousuf Khan

Looks like it's AMD's turn at benchmarketing:

http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2971

Here's the appropriate chart image:

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1883_large_optyF2.png

Looks like Opteron 2220 SE is getting 122 on SpecFPrate2000, 108 on
SpecIntRate2000. Opteron 8220 SE is doing 111 and 106, respectively. The
same numbers for the topline Woodcrest is 83 and 123, respectively.

Here's where the Intel results come from:

http://www.intel.com/performance/server/xeon/intthru.htm

So it looks like AMD is set to take the floating point crown back very
quickly, but Woodcrest is still the integer monster.

Yousuf Khan
 
Looks like Opteron 2220 SE is getting 122 on SpecFPrate2000, 108 on
SpecIntRate2000. Opteron 8220 SE is doing 111 and 106, respectively. The
same numbers for the topline Woodcrest is 83 and 123, respectively.
Click to expand...

I want an K8 8820, that thing would be amazing!

DK
 
TM [Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:58:08 +0000 (UTC)]:
Please correct me if I have interpreted any of this incorrectly.
Click to expand...

You gotta love that chart labelling:

31.25 62.5 ... 125

as if that lends more ... whoknowswhat? Why
not just pick a scale that didn't need such
stupid labels, like hey, 25,50,75,100,125?
But that is only the hint that it's nonsense.

Anyway, you are right, of course. The cold war
propagandists back at work, I see. Or, plain
old chart junk (it's simply a stupid measure).
It's so wrong I could spend a few 100 lines
pointing it all out. I won't. (You're welcome.)
 
Yup, AMD is desperately trying to protect its leadership from that
upstart Intel. :-)
Click to expand...

It is a bit amusing to see the shoe on the other foot...

"Performance Projections in Percentage"? :-D

max
 
TM [Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:58:08 +0000 (UTC)]:
Please correct me if I have interpreted any of this incorrectly.
Click to expand...

You gotta love that chart labelling:

31.25 62.5 ... 125

as if that lends more ... whoknowswhat? Why
not just pick a scale that didn't need such
stupid labels, like hey, 25,50,75,100,125?
But that is only the hint that it's nonsense.
Click to expand...

Wha'? You have a problem with picking an arbitrary ceiling and dividing by
4?;-) Is that a trick they learn at one of those cheap MBA schools?
 
Back
Top