AMD Phenom X3 8750 - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 23rd Apr 2008, 08:47

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...enom_x3_8750/1

If you think quad-core is excessive but dual-core is old hat, how about a Ménage à trois from AMD's new Phenom X3 8750? Is it the cheap and cheerful multi-threading meat eater enthusiasts have been waiting to lap up? We just had to find out...

Naberius · 23rd Apr 2008, 09:56

Yet more disappointment from AMD, think i will stick with Intel for a while longer.

p3n · 23rd Apr 2008, 10:21

It really doesn't seem like a huge leap for someone to take AMD's place as second best; since they are second by such a large margin now

Kúsař · 23rd Apr 2008, 10:38

Hi Tim & Richard
Great review!(as usually) and +1 for including results of overclocked CPU.

Seems like AMD should focus on core architecture to catch up with intel(or leap ahead

).

I've got one question for you - I've bought Athlon X2 5000+ black ed., Asus M3-A32 MVP dlx and Corsair XMS2 at 800MHz CL4.
I managed to overclock it from 2.6GHz to 3.2GHz. I only had to rise CPU voltage to 1.325V to get it running completely stable, however I had to loosen memory timings from 4-4-4-12-2T to 5-5-5-15-2T. I would like to get mem's running at CL4 setting. Can you give me any advice on this? There are some other voltages to increase, but I'm not sure about them.
I'll be very thankful for any help.

Cheers
-K

Bindibadgi · 23rd Apr 2008, 10:40

Thanks.

We were told and were expecting the CPU to be £90-100: basically an E6550 contender. However we waited until this morning and it's far in excess of the price we were told

Have you increased the memory voltage/northbridge voltage (if there's a specific option for the CPU-NB)?

Kúsař · 23rd Apr 2008, 10:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bindibadgi

Have you increased the memory voltage/northbridge voltage (if there's a specific option for the CPU-NB)?

That was quick!
It's the very same mobo you used(M3A32) - I think I noticed "northbridge voltage" there.
I'll try it(and perhaps report how much it helped

)
Thanks!!!

K20 · 23rd Apr 2008, 12:04

I don't know what I'm most disappointed about: the lack of higher clock speeds, the stupid model number system AMD's using which stops them raising the clock speeds, AMDs slides saying quad was upto 20% faster than tri when we can clearly see it's >20% faster at times or the fact that Bit-tech didn't try gaming and encoding at the same time. Now so that you don't think I'm completely unappreciative of the work you do: Thank you, a nice thorough review as always.

Amon · 23rd Apr 2008, 12:12

Statistically, it doesn't seem like that bad of a processor. Lower the price about £25 and we've got a pretty decent chip.

And is it just me, or is the colour key for the "PCMark Vantage x64 Composite Scores" still off like it was in the last review?

Bindibadgi · 23rd Apr 2008, 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kúsař

That was quick!
It's the very same mobo you used(M3A32) - I think I noticed "northbridge voltage" there.
I'll try it(and perhaps report how much it helped

)
Thanks!!!

"Northbridge" is different to "CPU-NB". I know Phenoms have the CPU-NB option which is specific to the memory controller on the M3A32

Amon - "off"?

Amon · 23rd Apr 2008, 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bindibadgi

Amon - "off"?

Yup. E8500 and E8400 are burgundy and orange, respectively. But in the key, they are represented as blue and violet.

Bindibadgi · 23rd Apr 2008, 13:14

:| strange. I'll look at it.

Tim S · 23rd Apr 2008, 13:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amon

Statistically, it doesn't seem like that bad of a processor. Lower the price about £25 and we've got a pretty decent chip.

And is it just me, or is the colour key for the "PCMark Vantage x64 Composite Scores" still off like it was in the last review?

Yep, the problem is price - nothing else, really.

fev · 23rd Apr 2008, 17:49

faiding since when has faiding been a word?!

metarinka · 23rd Apr 2008, 18:42

poor AMD that can't seem to contend at all with intel on this round, definately not on price point.

Brett89 · 23rd Apr 2008, 20:26

I saw the numbers and X3 and thought, what kind of crazy graphics card is this for a second. I hope AMD can get a good high end chip into the market soon, competition is so much better for the consumer, like you don't know that though.

Spaceraver · 24th Apr 2008, 04:46

so an underclocked X3 8x50 in a microatx for a htpc isn't the way to go??
pitted against a BE is it a viable option for the price??

xtremeownage · 25th Apr 2008, 12:11

I have a question about AMD and ATI products. ON paper their Spec out perform the Nvidia GPUs...
400 or more stream proccessors compared to the 128 or 256. Its really wierd. Higher clock speed etc. Whats going on. They even use ddr4 and still cant beat the GTX versons of high end cards. there X2 came yes it was powerful on paper and couldnt out perform the gx2

xtremeownage · 25th Apr 2008, 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by xtremeownage

I have a question about AMD and ATI products. ON paper their Spec out perform the Nvidia GPUs...
400 or more stream proccessors compared to the 128 or 256. Its really wierd. Higher clock speed etc. Whats going on. They even use gddr4 and still cant beat the GTX versons of high end cards. there X2 came yes it was powerful on paper and couldnt out perform the gx2

K20 · 26th Apr 2008, 12:34

DAMMIT (AMD/ATI) and Nvidia have different ways of counting stream processors:
AMD counts a cluster of 4 small ones (which can't do special functions) and 1 fat one (which can do special functions) as a single stream processor.
Nvidia counts a cluster of one normal processor and one special function processor as a single stream processor.
- note that neither processor is comparable to its competitor's version.

So the total number of individual processors in:
AMD's Radeon HD 3870 - 320 SP running at 775 MHz - Total GigaFLOPS = 496. Core clock speed = 775 MHz. Mem speed = 2250 MT/s GDDR4.
Nvidia's GeForce 9800 GTX - 256 SP running at 1125 MHz - Total GigaFLOPS = 416. Core clock speed = 650 MHz. Mem speed = 970 MT/s GDDR3.
- Reference specifications. The core clock speed is what the rest of the chip (i.e texture units, command processor, output units etc.) runs at. Since both cards I've mentioned have identical ammounts of RAM and an equally wide bus to RAM, their RAM bandwidth is directly related to the speed of their RAM. GDDR4 has higher latency than GDDR3 so although it runs faster it has to do this to 'catch up', it offsets this by being able to run at higher speeds.

But the real reason for the Radeons falling behind the GeForce is the difference in texturing capacity: 12.4 GigaTexels verses 41.6 GigaTexels. I'm sure that the fact Nvidia works with almost every game developer has nothing to do with.

.

maha_x · 27th Apr 2008, 09:07

just proves that most stuff benefits squat from anything beyond dual cores.. Software hasn't been keeping up with these multiple cores..

23rd Apr 2008, 08:47	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	AMD Phenom X3 8750 http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...enom_x3_8750/1 If you think quad-core is excessive but dual-core is old hat, how about a Ménage à trois from AMD's new Phenom X3 8750? Is it the cheap and cheerful multi-threading meat eater enthusiasts have been waiting to lap up? We just had to find out... __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

23rd Apr 2008, 10:38	#4
Kúsař regular bit-tech reader Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Brnicko, CZ Posts: 221	Hi Tim & Richard Great review!(as usually) and +1 for including results of overclocked CPU. Seems like AMD should focus on core architecture to catch up with intel(or leap ahead). I've got one question for you - I've bought Athlon X2 5000+ black ed., Asus M3-A32 MVP dlx and Corsair XMS2 at 800MHz CL4. I managed to overclock it from 2.6GHz to 3.2GHz. I only had to rise CPU voltage to 1.325V to get it running completely stable, however I had to loosen memory timings from 4-4-4-12-2T to 5-5-5-15-2T. I would like to get mem's running at CL4 setting. Can you give me any advice on this? There are some other voltages to increase, but I'm not sure about them. I'll be very thankful for any help. Cheers -K

23rd Apr 2008, 10:40	#5
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,274	Thanks. We were told and were expecting the CPU to be £90-100: basically an E6550 contender. However we waited until this morning and it's far in excess of the price we were told Have you increased the memory voltage/northbridge voltage (if there's a specific option for the CPU-NB)? __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

23rd Apr 2008, 12:04	#7
K20 Minimodder Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: London Posts: 26	I don't know what I'm most disappointed about: the lack of higher clock speeds, the stupid model number system AMD's using which stops them raising the clock speeds, AMDs slides saying quad was upto 20% faster than tri when we can clearly see it's >20% faster at times or the fact that Bit-tech didn't try gaming and encoding at the same time. Now so that you don't think I'm completely unappreciative of the work you do: Thank you, a nice thorough review as always. Last edited by K20; 23rd Apr 2008 at 12:55.

23rd Apr 2008, 12:12	#8
Amon inch-perfect Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: cannoning into the reds, Toronto, Canada Posts: 2,456	Statistically, it doesn't seem like that bad of a processor. Lower the price about £25 and we've got a pretty decent chip. And is it just me, or is the colour key for the "PCMark Vantage x64 Composite Scores" still off like it was in the last review? __________________ Defunct Socket 939 San Diego 4000+::2GB PC3200::Radeon 9600 SE 128MB::200GB HDD::24" Dell 2407WFP-HC::WinXP x64/x86 dual boot Dell Vostro 1500 laptop::Socket P Merom T7100::2GB PC5400::Go 8600m GT 256MB::660GB HDD::15.4" WXGA+, 24" Dell 2407WFP-HC::WinXP::Fanatec 911 Wheel+Pedals

23rd Apr 2008, 09:56	#2
Naberius Multimodder Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Posts: 193	Yet more disappointment from AMD, think i will stick with Intel for a while longer.

23rd Apr 2008, 10:21	#3
p3n Hypermodder Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 736	It really doesn't seem like a huge leap for someone to take AMD's place as second best; since they are second by such a large margin now

23rd Apr 2008, 13:14	#11
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,274	:\| strange. I'll look at it. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

23rd Apr 2008, 17:49	#13
fev Corporate Whore Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Tesco - On Beanbag, Games Playing Office Posts: 2,886	faiding since when has faiding been a word?! __________________ I know what I'm doing... do you? Follow me on Twitter..go on

23rd Apr 2008, 18:42	#14
metarinka I am a Dremel Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Michigan Posts: 1,623	poor AMD that can't seem to contend at all with intel on this round, definately not on price point. __________________ project: Orbitoid project: Orbitoid discussion Project: Angry-9 the WWII radio

23rd Apr 2008, 20:26	#15
Brett89 Ultramodder Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Grand Forks ND Posts: 1,084	I saw the numbers and X3 and thought, what kind of crazy graphics card is this for a second. I hope AMD can get a good high end chip into the market soon, competition is so much better for the consumer, like you don't know that though. __________________ C2D e6700 @ 3.25 Asus P5n-e SLi, 4GB of OCZ Platinum, Xonar D2, 320 and 160 GB Seagate, eVGA 8800 GTX and an Antec P182. C2D T7500 2.2ghz, 2GB DDR2, Quadro NVS 135M 14.1in screen

24th Apr 2008, 04:46	#16
Spaceraver Weekend Junkie Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kolding, Denmark Posts: 1,307	so an underclocked X3 8x50 in a microatx for a htpc isn't the way to go?? pitted against a BE is it a viable option for the price?? __________________ "Faith: not wanting to know what is true." - Friedrich Nietzsche. "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca Last thing I remember, I was drinking this glowing green sht out of a test tube and dancing like a bstard.

25th Apr 2008, 12:11	#17
xtremeownage What's a Dremel? Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 13	I have a question about AMD and ATI products. ON paper their Spec out perform the Nvidia GPUs... 400 or more stream proccessors compared to the 128 or 256. Its really wierd. Higher clock speed etc. Whats going on. They even use ddr4 and still cant beat the GTX versons of high end cards. there X2 came yes it was powerful on paper and couldnt out perform the gx2

26th Apr 2008, 12:34	#19
K20 Minimodder Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: London Posts: 26	DAMMIT (AMD/ATI) and Nvidia have different ways of counting stream processors: AMD counts a cluster of 4 small ones (which can't do special functions) and 1 fat one (which can do special functions) as a single stream processor. Nvidia counts a cluster of one normal processor and one special function processor as a single stream processor. - note that neither processor is comparable to its competitor's version. So the total number of individual processors in: AMD's Radeon HD 3870 - 320 SP running at 775 MHz - Total GigaFLOPS = 496. Core clock speed = 775 MHz. Mem speed = 2250 MT/s GDDR4. Nvidia's GeForce 9800 GTX - 256 SP running at 1125 MHz - Total GigaFLOPS = 416. Core clock speed = 650 MHz. Mem speed = 970 MT/s GDDR3. - Reference specifications. The core clock speed is what the rest of the chip (i.e texture units, command processor, output units etc.) runs at. Since both cards I've mentioned have identical ammounts of RAM and an equally wide bus to RAM, their RAM bandwidth is directly related to the speed of their RAM. GDDR4 has higher latency than GDDR3 so although it runs faster it has to do this to 'catch up', it offsets this by being able to run at higher speeds. But the real reason for the Radeons falling behind the GeForce is the difference in texturing capacity: 12.4 GigaTexels verses 41.6 GigaTexels. I'm sure that the fact Nvidia works with almost every game developer has nothing to do with. .

27th Apr 2008, 09:07	#20
maha_x What's a Dremel? Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 14	just proves that most stuff benefits squat from anything beyond dual cores.. Software hasn't been keeping up with these multiple cores..