Intel brings forward Nehalem Launch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Yes!

---

Well if one comes out like that, with a good phase Power, I will get an vanilla i7 board. One problem, I need the Intel Raid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuckbam

Well if one comes out like that, with a good phase Power, I will get an vanilla i7 board. One problem, I need the Intel Raid.

---

Of course. Some boards have better support than others.

Note I'll believe a Budget or even Mainstream board for Bloomfield when I see it. Anything coming from or meant for Intel with the letter "X" means eXpensive.;) X58 is more than likely just that. But everything I've heard or been told is that it will be worth every cent.:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Of course. Some boards have better support than others.

Note I'll believe a Budget or even Mainstream board for Bloomfield when I see it. Anything coming from or meant for Intel with the letter "X" means eXpensive.;) X58 is more than likely just that. But everything I've heard or been told is that it will be worth every cent.:up:

---

Well if I need to buy the box an all the cables, I will. I think you are 1000% about no bland boards at first. But, I don't know if that will be true after everything settles down. That is why I am thinking April or even out to July. Also, I have jumped early many times before, just to buy rev. 1.1 a few months later :rolleyes: I only want to build my new system one time next year.

God, please give me the strength to wait a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuckbam

Well if I need to buy the box an all the cables, I will. I think you are 1000% about no bland boards at first. But, I don't know if that will be true after everything settles down. That is why I am thinking April or even out to July. Also, I have jumped early many times before, just to buy rev. 1.1 a few months later :rolleyes: I only want to build my new system one time next year.

God, please give me the strength to wait a bit.

---

I'm thinking more like Aug or Sept 09. Performance gains will have to be pretty dramatic for me to jump the gun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

aka, we are QAing it. no need to spin it negatively, it is a normal process, nothing wrong. It is ready when we launch it, not before.

---

hehe obviously. And I feel that it is later than Intel thought. Some guy filtered a september launch, but this thing isn't ready yet (IMO due to some problem not expected).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PetNorth

hehe obviously. And I feel that it is later than Intel thought. Some guy filtered a september launch, but this thing isn't ready yet (IMO due to some problem not expected).

---

Who, fuad? :p:

September would be Q3. And its always been a Q4 product.

Have you seen theis chinese test already? http://diy.pconline.com.cn/cpu/revie...426985_10.html
The numbers are quite a mixed bag it seems, I hope I got the (quick and dirty) clock for clock comparison with penryn more or less right:
SuperPI MOD 1.4 --- 19,3%
WinRar 3.71 --- 77,3%
Fritz Chess --- 29%
Cinebench R10, singlethread --- 6,7%
Cinebench R10, 4CPU --- 25,7%
TMPGEnc 4.5 --- (-8%)
3dMark06, CPU --- 13.9%
Vantage, CPU --- 50.5%
Call of Duty DX9 --- (-8,6%)
Half Life 2: EP2 --- 2.3%
Wold in Conflict --- 6.6%
Company of Heroes --- (-7.2%)
Devil May Cry --- 5.1%

Nope,not posted before afaik.How come Far East guys always get the best toys first? :)
Is there any mention of the Turbo mode and whether it was active during their test?If it wasn't on during testing,according to your numbers it's on average 16% faster per clock,very good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

Nehalem and its plafform is a very complex change, we are busy making sure it is rock solid. More than 800Millions transistors, new Bus interface, new IO subsystem, performance validation and functional validation are exponentially complexe. It does increase as a permutation of combination.
People rarely understand the scale of validating a processor, it is looking for a niddle in 800millions parts ... with a motherboard team, a CPU team, a BUS team, a performance team, a Quality team, and several version of the CPU, for mobile, desktop, server multi processor ...
I am lucky enough to live this from the inside, right now, there are thousands of people busy, working like ants, and I admire the General manager for making all of this happen in parallele. Attention to details is critical.

We are paranoid, as Andy Groove taught us, so, even if it looks ready, we got to have the CPU and motherboard good enough to face the hightest requirements. This is almost an impossible task that we are after, we need time for this. We are workig hard on it, very hard, week end and nights are too short :) :rofl:

---

I have 2 of your clovertown systems here and 2 harpertowns.
Both have exceeded expectations and the two clovertowns have been running at 100% load since Jan 2007 with an uptime exceeding 98% at over 3000mhz.
As good as the clovers are, the Harpertowns almost make them look slow.
You take your time.
I'd rather have it "right" than fast.:up:
I guarantee you that I'll have a dual 3200 gainstown here as soon as the chips and boards are ready.
Can't wait to see what that will do in our Aids and cancer research!:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacky

Have you seen theis chinese test already?

---

That's no good.

Check the revision: Stepping 2, Rev B0.

Big improvements since then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrace215

That's no good.

Check the revision: Stepping 2, Rev B0.

Big improvements since then.

---

really? like what? I know this design isn't really meant to increase gaming performance but those numbers aren't that great, especially if the 2.66ghz version doesn't oc as well as a Q9550.

Nehalem has definitely been over-hyped by enthusiasts. Although, I have the feeling the average consumer will first be disappointed with a) single-threaded and general gaming performance, and then b) the expense of the entire platform. I also still have reservations about the overclockability of anything other than Extreme processors. Any delay in shipping dates certainly won't help quell this possible disappointment.

Although, I respect any company that doesn't rush buggy incomplete products to the market. Good things come to those who wait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by User9498

Nehalem has definitely been over-hyped by enthusiasts. Although, I have the feeling the average consumer will first be disappointed with a) single-threaded and general gaming performance, and then b) the expense of the entire platform. I also still have reservations about the overclockability of anything other than Extreme processors. Any delay in shipping dates certainly won't help quell this possible disappointment.

Although, I respect any company that doesn't rush buggy incomplete products to the market. Good things come to those who wait.

---

Have to agree!:yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by User9498

Nehalem has definitely been over-hyped by enthusiasts. Although, I have the feeling the average consumer will first be disappointed with a) single-threaded and general gaming performance, and then b) the expense of the entire platform. I also still have reservations about the overclockability of anything other than Extreme processors. Any delay in shipping dates certainly won't help quell this possible disappointment.

Although, I respect any company that doesn't rush buggy incomplete products to the market. Good things come to those who wait.

---

what delay in shiping dates? is Q408 already over... damn timewarps... :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by User9498

Nehalem has definitely been over-hyped by enthusiasts. Although, I have the feeling the average consumer will first be disappointed with a) single-threaded and general gaming performance, and then b) the expense of the entire platform. I also still have reservations about the overclockability of anything other than Extreme processors. Any delay in shipping dates certainly won't help quell this possible disappointment.

Although, I respect any company that doesn't rush buggy incomplete products to the market. Good things come to those who wait.

---

Geeks over hype everything though. In their zeal and excitement, they/we always drool over new stuff! Look at the Barcelona/Phenom Hype last year?
Reservations? Hell, folks like Jumpingjack, savantu and Hornet133 gave excellent posts on why these folks should stop over hyping Barcelona, didn't help there LOL! You can add Video Cards and even Newer Raptor Hard drives as well. Then, don't even get me started about 3D LCD's:D

@Informal

16% is too simple. That average hides too much. I'd not even bother wasting time on 3D Marks other than something to demo on a computer I'm trying to sale.

Call of Duty DX9 --- (-8,6%)
Half Life 2: EP2 --- 2.3%
Wold in Conflict --- 6.6%
Company of Heroes --- (-7.2%)
Devil May Cry --- 5.1%

That's just short of 6% on those games. If you're a gamer that's not that impressive at all. But if games are an after thought and those other apps are you main use, those same games and useless 3D Marks is hiding some pretty awesome performance improvements.

SuperPI MOD 1.4 --- 19,3%
WinRar 3.71 --- 77,3%
Fritz Chess --- 29%
Cinebench R10, singlethread --- 6,7%
Cinebench R10, 4CPU --- 25,7%
TMPGEnc 4.5 --- (-8%)

25% on these 6 and 31.66% on those in bold! Big time improvement on an apps AMD has always given Intel a whipping on and even after Core, gave Intel a run for the money. Never mind that it is an older steppings that better not show up on the open market.

To the other guy, good luck even finding a lot of single threaded apps. Most folks buying Quads are using them for Multi-threaded apps. Hell, even I don't use Quads. I'd love to see a 3.2GHz cheap Dual Core Nehalem rescued from the scrap heap right now, but I'm going Quad next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shiznit93

really? like what? I know this design isn't really meant to increase gaming performance but those numbers aren't that great, especially if the 2.66ghz version doesn't oc as well as a Q9550.

---

The B stepping had performance-impacting bugs, so analyzing these numbers is a waste of time.

They already have C-steppings (likely to launch, per Blauhung), and are even working on a D-stepping for the inevitable follow-up.

With C-stepping sample results now starting to appear, it is odd that this site used an old sample, but there you go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrace215

The B stepping had performance-impacting bugs, so analyzing these numbers is a waste of time.

---

Have we seen any numbers of the new stepping? What's your source, did I miss it in this thread and what exactly was broken? AFAIK we have only performance numbers for B stepping or earlier, which are damn impressive for everything multithreaded anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacky

Have we seen any numbers of the new stepping? What's your source, did I miss it in this thread and what exactly was broken? AFAIK we have only performance numbers for B stepping or earlier, which are damn impressive for everything multithreaded anyway.

---

http://www.xtremesystems.org/Forums/...postcount=1288

Not sure exactly what was fubar'd in the earlier steppings.

Read through Dr. Who? 's posts, as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrace215

http://www.xtremesystems.org/Forums/...postcount=1288

Not sure exactly what was fubar'd in the earlier steppings.

Read through Dr. Who? 's posts, as well.

---

Are you referring to Everest read/write/copy scores from pconline test?The scores are 15.3/14.7/16.5 MB/s from 2.93Ghz B0 versus 17.1/13.8/19.2 MB/s from 3.2Ghz XE Cx.They are lower on B0 due to a 1066Mhz memory that was used by pconline instead of 1600Mhz DDR3 used by hardspell and by higher clock of the NB in the XE 3.2Ghz Nehalem model... 50% difference in clock of the memory and lower CPU/NB clocks are going to affect the memory scores for sure.

:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Are you referring to Everest read/write/copy scores from pconline test?The scores are 15.3/14.7/16.5 MB/s from 2.93Ghz B0 versus 17.1/13.8/19.2 MB/s from 3.2Ghz XE Cx.They are lower on B0 due to a 1066Mhz memory that was used by pconline instead of 1600Mhz DDR3 used by hardspell and by higher clock of the NB in the XE 3.2Ghz Nehalem model... 50% difference in clock of the memory and lower CPU/NB clocks are going to affect the memory scores for sure.

---

I think everybody should relax and stop speculating on old steppings, it is like taking a brand new prototype of Nissan GTR skyline, and test it with the version of 6 months before the release ... performance tuning did not happen yet on it! :rofl::rofl::ROTF:

Be patient :clap::clap::clap:

Well i still don't understand why pconline even used that B0 CPU to begin with...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by User9498

Nehalem has definitely been over-hyped by enthusiasts. Although, I have the feeling the average consumer will first be disappointed with a) single-threaded and general gaming performance, and then b) the expense of the entire platform. I also still have reservations about the overclockability of anything other than Extreme processors. Any delay in shipping dates certainly won't help quell this possible disappointment.

Although, I respect any company that doesn't rush buggy incomplete products to the market. Good things come to those who wait.

---

I think any highly anticipated release of any product receives the potential for an inordinate amount of hype. My take is that Nehalem will show overall mixed results, in some cases the results will be stellar (highly multithreaded of course), in other cases mediocre or less impressive (single threaded circumstance). On the whole, it will probably we well received but there will be a good number of fanboys who will put down the product and will be 'unimpressed or disappointed' ... even if it quadrupled performance there will be a select group that will chant -- 'was expecting more, extremely disappointed' ... :)

It is as predictable as predicting night and day.

Deneb will be the same way to and extent, however, AMD has been much lower key on Deneb/Shanghai than they were with Agena/Barcelona -- probably to deflate the hype factor.

On your last statement--- one big Amen!

its basically multithreading oriented, so all it needs to show is improvement over penryn quad cores.
i guess if cheaper n's dont clock very well, penryns will still sell more...the imc and monolithic core features are the same as amd phenoms. (feature-wise) so from that basic laypersons perspective..thats that, but phenoms will remain a fair bit cheaper i suppose, due to, presumeably, lower performance.

I like all us geeks cannot wait....:p:

In the areas where they wanted to improve on conroe/penryn like multi-threading, memory bandwidth and latency, smt, qpi, they appear to have done a great job. AMD's server market share is about to disappear unless they come up with a miracle. If most of the applications I use every day would take advantage of 4-8 threads then I would be all over it (some do but I don't use them enough to justify the cost). But since I mostly use my pc for gaming I can't help but wish for an even better penryn with an IMC and 8mb+ of L2.