AMD explains why 16Core Barcelona got fragged by an 8C Clovertown:
"The objective of our demo was to show performance scaling from our current dual-core processors to our upcoming quad-core processors within the same thermal envelope and drive home the point through a real-world demonstration that customers could expect to see 2x the performance without an increase in power consumption. "
Sounds like disaster control to me. Assuming that AMD is telling the truth and did intend to show performance-per-watt scaling, then I don't really see the value of the demo. The fact still remains that Intel's V8 showed better performance using less silicon. It is great that K10 scales well against K8 but if Barcelona comes out as a non-performer, who cares? Nobody is interested in comparisons to an already beaten product.
The question AMD deperately needs to answer is why is it that the best they can come up with is a crippled Barcelona while Intel's Penryn looks stable and ready to go.
AMD also said: "One thing to note, the system we showed, while it was a 4P, it was running only 6GB of memory".
I'm sorry, this is really a lame excuse. Why cripple the benchmark? I never heard of anyone running a benchmark and not optimise the setup to get the full potential of the system. Or maybe AMD can't afford the extra memory due to cost cutting.
[thanks to the anonymous poster for the link:]