My friend just got PWNED IN THE FACE for thinking the phenom is better than C2Q

one of my friends says the phenom is better then the core 2 quad's,i say he is wrong.

so i am making a topic here and giving him the link so he can hear what people have to say.

EDIT: specifically the q6600 b2 vs. phenom b2........ even tho they don't make b2's anymore.

How about you just point him to any performance review of the phenoms?Baselerd

he wont listen to reviews, so i thought he should see people's opinions.

Uh why are you comparing a q6600 (a specific model) to a codename (the entire phenom line????)?

Obviously its way better than a 9300 but only slightly better than the 9900. The 9900 even beats it here and there, but for the most part the q6600 is superior. Not only that, but the q6600 has alot better overclocking potential.

Uh why are you comparing a q6600 (a specific model) to a codename (the entire phenom line????)?

Obviously its way better than a 9300 but only slightly better than the 9900. The 9900 even beats it here and there, but for the most part the q6600 is superior. Not only that, but the q6600 has alot better overclocking potential.

shanelevy

the Q6600 B2s didnt overclock well. so when the obviously bugged Phenom B2s get replaced by the B3s im sure they will be better. so Q6600 B2s or Phenom B2s?

the Q6600 B2s didnt overclock well. so when the obviously bugged Phenom B2s get replaced by the B3s im sure they will be better. so Q6600 B2s or Phenom B2s?

KeeepOut

So...people's opinions on here mean more to your friend then actual benchmarks? I'm just making sure I read that right.

EDIT: This was directed at TC.

So...people's opinions on here mean more to your friend then actual benchmarks? I'm just making sure I read that right.Honus722

he posted, not me.

[QUOTE="Honus722"]So...people's opinions on here mean more to your friend then actual benchmarks? I'm just making sure I read that right.KeeepOut

he posted, not me.

yeh because u wouldn't listen to the bench marks.

[QUOTE="Baselerd"]How about you just point him to any performance review of the phenoms?bumsoil

he wont listen to reviews, so i thought he should see people's opinions.

Yeah, any official reviews from legitimate websites are going to be alot more factual than anything someone here will cough up. Go smack your friend for me.

And my official opinion: Core 2 Quad architecture is better than Phenom in every way. It executes more instructions per cycle, is clocked higher, and now with penryn coming out soon it will be much cooler, and then be able to be clocked much higher. And not to mention that quad core penryn's have hit 4Ghz on air cooling, the professional review sites couldnt even get a phenom above 2.8 with water cooling.

i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...KeeepOut

[QUOTE="KeeepOut"]i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...Indestructible2

i guess u could say that

i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...KeeepOut

I was not aware there ever was a B2 Q6600, just B3 and G0. Can you give a link showing a B2 stepping Q6600, now my E6320 is a B2 stepping.

[QUOTE="Indestructible2"][QUOTE="KeeepOut"]i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...KeeepOut

i guess u could say that

[QUOTE="KeeepOut"]

[QUOTE="Indestructible2"][QUOTE="KeeepOut"]i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...Indestructible2

show me

i guess u could say that

show me

[QUOTE="Indestructible2"][QUOTE="KeeepOut"]

[QUOTE="Indestructible2"][QUOTE="KeeepOut"]i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...KeeepOut

show me

i guess u could say that

show me

[QUOTE="KeeepOut"][QUOTE="Indestructible2"][QUOTE="KeeepOut"]

[QUOTE="Indestructible2"][QUOTE="KeeepOut"]i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...Indestructible2

show me

i guess u could say that

show me

im askin you now. find benchmarks with a B2. Iv never said Phenom B2s are better than Q6600 B3s or G0s. Im saying its better then Q6600 B2s. When the Phenom B3s come out, im sure it will be better than all the Q6600s

When the Phenom B3s come out, im sure it will be better than all the Q6600s

Thats a Load. You've got nothing to fight with so your bringing in a non-existant processor into the ring. Put your NEW Phenom B3 up agianst a newer non-existant Intel and see where you stand then. If you've got to go up to the best processor AMD has and put it up agianst the 3rd or 4th one down in Intels line then you are truly sad indeed.

im askin you now. find benchmarks with a B2. Iv never said Phenom B2s are better than Q6600 B3s or G0s. Im saying its better then Q6600 B2s. When the Phenom B3s come out, im sure it will be better than all the Q6600sKeeepOut

What is this B2 Q6600 you keep talking about?? There is a B3 and a G0 Q6600, no B2.

im askin you now. find benchmarks with a B2. Iv never said Phenom B2s are better than Q6600 B3s or G0s. Im saying its better then Q6600 B2s. When the Phenom B3s come out, im sure it will be better than all the Q6600s

KeeepOut

You do realise that different stepping is just a revision. They are usually have no tangible performance increase, and are just optimizations. Furthermore, letters indicate substantial changes, while numbers (ex. B2 to B3) represent very minor changes. The big difference in the B3 stepping at this point is that AMD claims it will fix the TLB erratum.

And also, why are you comparing a single processor (the Q6600) to phenoms ( a whole line of processors). I guarantee you that if you compare Core 2 Quads to Phenoms, the Phenom stands no chance. I do realize that many of the Core 2 Quads though are waaaay expensive, so I will disregard this fact. I am going to assume you are talking about the Phenom 9600, since that is the best one out right now.

Q6600 has a higher clock speed and can execute more instructions per cycle, and fits in the same thermal envelope (the B3 Q6600 is 110W, but the G0 is 95W, same as the Phenom 9600.)

Now, also why do you demand on comparing future phenoms to a year old q6600? The Yorkfield line of Penryn processors will be out before the B3 stepping of the Phenom. Those are faster, cheaper, cooler, and more advanced than the Kentsfield (Q6600), which makes them alot better than Phenoms.

The q9300 and q9450 are even further ahead of phenom. They are on 45nm feature size, and can achieve substantially higher clock speeds than the Kentsfield processors, much less the Phenoms, which have a maximum clock speed of 2.3 right now. Professional review sites have been able to get Phenoms to max out at 2.8 Ghz with water cooling.... they are releasing 3.2Ghz quad core processors on stock air cooling....

I think you fail to realise that different steppings will not bring in performance gains. Processor revisions are, as I said, optimizations/bug fixes/etc. Not a faster ALU or larger cache...

And also, I'm not an intel fanboy, I myself have an AMD processor. I just think your not using your brain ;-) (and btw, there is no B2 Q6600)

who care which is better no game can use either to its maximprezawrx500

Because most people have uses other than gaming for their computers.

To the OP, have your friend check out this review of the X4 9700...

http://www.guru3d.com/article/processor/477/8

As you can plainly see, an equally clocked Phenom is not superior to a Q6600 (B3, or G0), especially in gaming, or overclocking. 'Nuff said.

i just love how everyone here is refering to the Quad B3s. aperently no one can find a link to B2 benches...KeeepOut

Core 2 Quad never came out under B2 steppings.

Further, steppings don't usually lead to any performance increases. They mostly are introduced to lower power consumption or fix glitches.

Kentsfield (Core 2 Quad) > K10 (Phenom X4). Period.

Executes more instructions per clock, is able to reach higher clock speeds (due to Intel's superior 65nm process) and consumes less power across the board.

I really don't see what's so hard to accept here...

kick ass

[QUOTE="shanelevy"]

Uh why are you comparing a q6600 (a specific model) to a codename (the entire phenom line????)?

Obviously its way better than a 9300 but only slightly better than the 9900. The 9900 even beats it here and there, but for the most part the q6600 is superior. Not only that, but the q6600 has alot better overclocking potential.

KeeepOut

the Q6600 Bs didnt overclock well. so when the obviously bugged Phenom B2s get replaced by the B3s im sure they will be better. so Q6600 B2s or Phenom B2s?

B2s never existed. That is the main flaw in your argument. I pretty sure the b3s overclocked better than current phenoms do, considering that anandtech achieved a 3.3ghz overclock on their b3 q6600. but overclocking aside, any benchmark will tell you that the q6600 at stock speeds beats a phenom 9900 at stock speeds in almost all cases.

The bottom line is, clock for clock, the q6600 is faster. AND, the q6600 b3 DID overclock better than phenoms did, and often reached overclocks of 3.1 or 3.2 ghz.

[QUOTE="KeeepOut"][QUOTE="shanelevy"]

Uh why are you comparing a q6600 (a specific model) to a codename (the entire phenom line????)?

Obviously its way better than a 9300 but only slightly better than the 9900. The 9900 even beats it here and there, but for the most part the q6600 is superior. Not only that, but the q6600 has alot better overclocking potential.

shanelevy

the Q6600 B2s didnt overclock well. so when the obviously bugged Phenom B2s get replaced by the B3s im sure they will be better. so Q6600 B2s or Phenom B2s?

I pretty sure the b2s overclocked better than current phenoms do, but overclocking aside, any benchmark will tell you that the q6600 at stock speeds beats a phenom 9900 at stock speeds in almost all cases.

Thats intresting cause I have a Q6600 and revision # is B3 not B2. Hmm, there must be an other revision below mine. [/Sarcasm Off]

That is the main flaw in your argument. I pretty sure the b3s overclocked better than current phenoms do, considering that anandtech achieved a 3.3ghz overclock on their b3 q6600. but overclocking aside, any benchmark will tell you that the q6600 at stock speeds beats a phenom 9900 at stock speeds in almost all cases.

The bottom line is, clock for clock, the q6600 is faster. AND, the q6600 b3 DID overclock better than phenoms did, and often reached overclocks of 3.1 or 3.2 ghz.

shanelevy

Anandtech? He11, I'VE reached 3.3Ghz with my B3 stepping Q6600. I don't run it that fast on a daily basis though. I like to leave it at 3.0Ghz, so as not to stress it and my other components too much. And I have the proof as well. Try that with an X4 9700...

My rig @ 3.0Ghz (everyday clocks)

My rig @ 3.3Ghz (for 3DMark glory)

They should rename this to "My friend just got PWNED IN THE FACE for thinking the phenom is better than the core 2 quads"death1505921

I dont care. its funny to see 40 year old fat guys fight

I dont care. its funny to see 40 year old fat guys fight KeeepOut