|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Memory Bandwidth To test memory bandwidth, we are going to look at the Read, Write, and Copy values as tested by Everest. Higher numbers are better:
The Everest Memory Bandwidth benchmark is an interesting test, as we get to look at the direct benefits of the DDR3 memory controller. If you look closely at the chart data, you will see that in terms of Copy speeds, AMD rules the roost. The 965 again ranks as the best stock CPU in the bunch in terms of Copy and Read speeds, and second only to the 955 when overclocked. The story is the same with the write speeds only in relation to other AMD CPUs, as the Intel processors take the crown in this aspect. There is no doubt that the Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition is not a revolutionary step; it is an evolutionary step. However, it is still good to know that AMD is making sufficient advances in their fab processes to continue to bin out enough higher speed CPUs to justify a new SKU. The fact that 125W units are also on the way only serves to confirm this fact. It is also nice to see that the 965 BE will debut at the same price that the 955 did a mere few months ago. Hopefully the 125W units will yield more headroom than our current sample. In terms of performance, the stock CPU outdid pretty much every other stock CPU we have tested, which is all well and good, however the odd thing that we noticed was that the 965 was consistently slower than the 955 at the exact same 3.8GHz clock. I doubt this has much to do with the CPU, and probably more to do with the BIOS update that allowed for support for the 965. This is worthy of more investigation, for sure. However, it should not be forgotten that AMD is still lagging behind Core i7 in the high end desktop market in terms of absolute performance, and the 965 does little to change that. I would think that bringing the six-core Istanbul to the desktop market would do a lot for AMD to regain this crown, however they seem to be plenty satisfied attacking the mid-range with a competitively priced quad core platform. While this is good for a lot of enthusiasts who chase after the performance-per-dollar ratio, It is still depressing for the upper crust of enthusiasts who chase performance at any cost. Pros:
Cons:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
