Nice attitude... just what im talking about. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
Printable View
Nice attitude... just what im talking about. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
Simple question. Ur building a machine and got 2 alternatives. They cost the same but one offers abit more performance than the other. Wich would u take?
Yes you're right!Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...hip_plans.html
Quote:
AMD's 12-core chip will include two 6-core processors on separate chips in a single processor package, McCarron said. That is a more realistic goal than including 12 cores on a single chip, which can be expensive to manufacture, McCarron said.
Ah ... enough with that kind of expression ... I don't give a dxxx, fact is a fact ..Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
Won't you agree more for what I meant above about "Numbers" ? ...
Wow... When are those MCM to be released?
These are just the start. I'm sure if HP and Dell ask for different configs AMD will comply. OEM's have made such requests in the past. If they want a cheaper MCM with 2 Quads, AMD is not going to say NO.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
Right now i dont care about numbers nor performance. My point is that u can compare the 2 systems. Heck u can compare it to MMs rig, the pentium D rig or whatever. As long as they can do the same job u can compare it. It is really as simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2.../kaigai_1l.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Seraphiel
Hopefully these rehashes will keep them afloat in the server/HPC space until they can put a mirror shine to Bulldozer, and then they might get interesting for desktops again.
Bit more performance in how many apps? Surely you're not talking about the limited tests done here, right? Again, does the TLB patch mean anything? Sure prices for processors with known bugs costs less. Too much is unknown to draw a conclusions from pro or con for either of the rigs talked about.Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
Oh yeah, sure, nothing wrong about it ... Already compare one to another right ? ... :clap: You can see all the complete charts ...Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
But at the end, who mentioned about numbers of threads compete to real cores ? This is just about what we all discuss about ...
I think a lot of people are getting caught up in arguing the semantics instead of looking at the values for what they are. If LIKMARK wants to see how a 4 Physical core/ 8 Thread Nehalem UP system compares to an 8 core/ 8 thread Barcelona DP system. Whatever, the numbers fall where they do and we all move on. Most people may not find this comparison very valuable due to significant hardware setup differences, but I can see where He finds it important. Sure it isn't a fair comparison, but it doesn't have to be as long as the details of the comparison are on the table and you know what you are getting. The only thing that LIKMARK has done that I might find fault with is that he expresses disappointment with the 8 Thread numbers from a 4 core Nehalem, but doesn't ever explicitly state that he understands why an SMT system would be expected to be lower than an 8 core system (Gainestown). Either this was oversight on his part or he simply didn't understand the architectural differences of SMT vs. physical core.
U dont get the point. All im saying is that u can compare the 2 systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Im not saying u should buy the "old" amd system, id go with nehalem myself.
Shure the amd system may beat the nehalem in 8 threaded apps, but nehalem crushes it in singel, double and even quad id guess.
But that is not my point.
We all get the point, but some of it just won't listen, thats all ...Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
If you want to compare Bloomfield with 2*Barcelona, its ok ... you do whatever you want ... But if you loudly mentioned about why Bloomfield result is sucked while compare to 2*Barcelona just isn't right ...
Still it related to "Numbers" right ? ...
PS : No one stop you to compare between system, all the charts is being made by Hornet311 ... so what do you want now ?
Ur attitude aint very good either. What u could have said instead of bashing is something like...
Nice to see ur tests, good to see how well the 4core nehalem actually holds up againts the 8core barcelonas.
If he aint personally impressed, so what?
Impressed to what ? 2*Barcelona ? ...Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
Oh ... how is this gonna end ... Help plz ...
I think my attitude is fine though, From the first place I don't know it could be compare to Bloomfield, so I provided Gainestown 2.4G(hey just the same to Barcelona, 8 threads vs 8threads) ...
Meaning, why don't pick your own rank to compete ? ...
At the end, just isn't right, how about compete it to Harpertown ? Reasonable right ? ...
PS : I'm suspected this is just a friend of that guy or just about the same guy with different ID ? :rofl:
Yeah nice attitude idd. I dont know Likmark at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
Rank..? are u a moron?
If ur building a server is "rank" what ur after? no what ur after is performance, price, price to run and so on. Who cares how many cores it is? its irelevant.
JC i think you should calm down a little bit, you did an awesome job with this nehalem benches and really contributed to this community by taking requests of what to bench and how to bench.
But your recent posts sound quite hostile to me, no disrespect but there are better ways to reply. I think it is pretty obviouse now that some guys want to see different numbers or comparrisons but they can do this on there own and can take the material you provided as a base. Dont get yourself in useless bickerings.
I hop you dont missunderstand this post, its nothing personal against you, i just try to view this in a neutral way.
OK, I'm a moron but I'm :with: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
Bloomfield is not a server ... And Hey, Nehalem isn't in the market yet ... why you bother to compare the price ... And other things, some believes AMD has nothing else to compete with except prices :up:
See "numbers" again, thus he just denied who cares about how many cores ... :rofl:
:dammit: ... Why I'm here reply to you ... still it's just same brain damage but a different guy ...
Thanks ... I'm cool ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
:)
I guess the new tactic to justify for inferiour performance is to do the 2vs1. Or if AMD ends fabless it will be good! Not even to think about those K10s uses twice the power to do...less? But its ACP! We invented that because its good for everyone. nobody runs full loads!
Who the hell educate these AMD diehard fanboys? The former Iraqi information minister? Not even Jihad people are this dedicated.
And all those praising themselves holy. Ohh, Intel fanboys always threadcrap and blabla. What is this?
try new version of winrar 3.71, this is old, not corecctly for dual and more CPUs...Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
to download trial version here: http://www.slunecnice.cz/sw/winrar-3/stahnout/
Wow, that is a very interesting pic. It shows Bloomfield running at 2.7GHz which I don't believe is one of the three stock speeds. I suppose that means there already exist board bioses that allow for changing the multi or QPI frequency. I know this was already known, but it's the first actual hard evidence I've seen of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chri$ch
EDIT: Nevermind, it is 2.66GHz. I was seeing things.
Was about to comment that, but im not going down to ur lvl.Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
XS is idd going down the drain, well maybe not but the quality just aint here anymore.
Im going back to the WC section, its a little better there than the news section anyways.
Maybe I was not meant to carried on from AndreYang posted redirect from XFastest.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunge100
Some Taiwanese posted here will just make things get worst ... This incident ever occured right ... If some know what I meant ...
I think I'm missing something...
I thought Bloomfield line up would take QX9770, QX9650 and Q9550 places on the market, that would mean I'd have one in my case, not in a server rack. Wouldn't be a fair comparison against "the old" QX9650? And maybe 9950BE x Bloom@2.66?
But I don't blame peolple for doing all kinds of comparison, there's lots of perpectives on the matter, we could just try to be polite on comments or keep mouth shut.
PS. Thank you JC for the benches, I hope you keep us posted
Hey, don't ... I'll taking this fall ...Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
:)
You don't get the point either because I didn't say you couldn't or even shouldn't run the test. I advocated running it and many more tests for better or more complete info. I said the results shouldn't be taken out of Context. Now if I'm saying don't do it, how do you get results? I said too much is unknown to draw conclusions from limited information. If he said "Faster on this test". That'd be different as well, get it?Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
I joined here in November 2005.. Just about "Two and half years ago"..:DQuote:
Originally Posted by grunge100
There were app 33,000 listed members then.
Now over 80,000.
Like all things in life, the more involved the tougher to control.
Also the more diverse the opinions.
You ignore the part that doesn't interest you and if some peoples posts bother you, you stick them on your ignore list.
Very simple way to deal with it.
I havent talked about results at all. What bugs me is the attitude of many people here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
If 2 systems can do the same job (be it cinebench, winrar superpi, server stuff or whatever) u can compare the 2. It really is that simple.
If its fair or not is not relevant either
Yes, you can compare them but what is the relavance of that comparision?Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
If I run a benchmark on my old single core FX51 and then run that same benchmark on my 8 core Harpertown what am I learning from that time spent?
Something that I already know, the Harper is faster.
You only get relavance when you compare one apple to one apple, not one to eight or four to eight.. I think that was the whole issue here.
just as movieman said... whats the point of such comparisons?
but maybe its my fault for putting all systems into one graph, maybe if someone can provide phenom benches @ 3ghz i could add them in direct comparison to bloomfield and core2.
No, No ... You did a great job :up: ... I personally was lazy to sum it all into excel charts ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Dont we constantly compare 1GPU systems to multiGPU systems?Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
And the price range is what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
Or you want to see a E2160 compared with a 4P Tigerton system?
HMM, interesting point, how to reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
Now remember that for what I do a high end vid card is not something I use BUT with my limited knowledge I can say this in rebuttal:
On the ORB don't they distinguish between scores submitted between single card and SLI or Crossfire equiped machines as it is not reasonable to compare one to the other..
The defense rests..:D
I wouldnt know, I dont look at ORB. But I know you have seen all the screens of the benchmarks done for the various cards over the last few years. Even for CPU's we see comparisions of Quad to Dual. Is that not the same?
And Shintai, in most benchmarks you can see 3850's compared to a 4870CF or GTX280 SLI, who cares about price.
I think relative gains in performance is good to know. Sure I think it wouldnt be useful to compare an FX51, but that doesnt mean it is irrelevant. What if the FX51 is the only thing you have now, and you want to guage the reletive performace increase you would see to the Bloomfield and maybe decide that for the $$$ a E8400 would be good enough?
I just dont see the problem with comparing a Bloomfield Quad with HT to a 4x4 Phenom. I just dont see that being the same as some of the comparisons that people are liking it to.
As long as the apps are multithreaded its very relevant. If the 4core with HT performed identically to the 8core barcelonas that would that would be very interresting and relevant. No?Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
what that test did show is that the 8core barcelonas wasnt twice as fast as the nehalem. Ofc that was expected since each nehalem core is much faster than each opteron core. But the test show how much difference it is between the 2. (in that test atleast)
If u go with that, why bother testing anything, u already know its faster...:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
Matter of definition. Comparing one computer to another computer, thats apples to apples in my eyes...Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
2.5 to 3 years ago you had the same kinds of fights. AMD fans were flaming Intel guys about Faked Conroe tests. A year before that Lithan, Petnorth and gang lived in the Intel section bashing any one with anything good to say about Intel for any reason, not just processors. The sad part was there would be 200 folks in the AMD section and 19 in the Intel section and 4 of those 19 were AMD Fans bashing the other 15. I remember Fugger making Lithan take back comments he made to 4 folks! Hell, look up Duvie LOL?Quote:
Originally Posted by grunge100
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...+Lithan&page=3
You get no argument from me there at all. Look at what I said, I said add more to give it a better prospective. ALL of the numbers would be interesting. Not pull any one *line out.Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
I have NOT even thought of buying two B2 Phenoms knowing they have a problem that will make them even slower? Look at the list I gave? His comparison is there. I added two more to it. I'd interested in seeing the best and worse case scenario.
Here?
Blue = Intel, Black AMD. I asked him what was wrong with that? Most Geeks here I know would love that info. It is not about who comes out on top. I bet folks would talk about how HT changed or didn't the results, more than what or who won, don't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Look, this Puma platform with an X2 3800 CPU. A shame it gets obliterated against this Skulltrail with quad SLi and 2 heavily OCed QX9770.Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
Apples to apples....right?
All you and LIKMARK want is to make K10 look good against Nehalem. In whatever way you can. And now calling it apples to apples? :rofl:
Just a shame it was 2 quads vs 1 quad....
count me in for that. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
LIKMARK's intent was to compare how efficent is SMT on Nehalem,that's the way i look at it.So he wanted to know how 8 threads in Bloomfield system compare with his 8 thread(2x RevBA).
I already showed you in my previous posts that LIKMARK's Barcelona system is around 25% per clock slower than jan's RevB3 system in Ceinebench10.
So if anything ,LIKMARK's system is actually holding its own against the new Nehalem system.The fact that it's 2xQC vs 1 QC(8 thread) chip doesn't make it apples to apples comparison,but it's valid as any other similar comparison when it comes to comparing previous gen. vs next generation chips.Remember ,while AMD is at its first attempt with Quad Cores and still on DDR2,intel is on it's third generation(65nm C2Q,45nm C2Q,45nm Nehalem).So basically you compare first TLB patch plagued RevBA system with yet unreleased 3rd generation intel quad core system.
The more valid comparison would be single Deneb versus single Bloomfield ,all at the same frequency.That's what we will have in Q4.Even better,a Deneb running a same DDR3 memory(AM3) as Bloomfield so we can have as close as possible memory subsystems,even tho Nehalem is better in that respect thanks to 3 channel IMC.
guys, just do the comparison benchmarks, and laugh/whine for a minute and leave it at that - just to end this crap here.
you're running in circles - there's so much useful information in this thread that's totally overshadowed by such useless discussions.
Sure if that Xeon vs Opteron. Good point about the RAM. Also 45nm Phonem for Desktop vs. Bloomfield:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Then I'd love to see a wide range of test apps as well. Not one or two that one's better at.
Yes,a whole range of test is needed,covering all bases(professional->like cad/cam,compiling,web server etc. and non-professional like games ,encoding,archiving etc.).
winrar bench my X3 8650@2750MHz
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/3...arbenchhn5.jpg
this about 1500, Nehalem on 2.66Ghz 2500KB/s !!!OMG, nice "speed"..:)
How much is on 2.99Ghz? Try it anyone
For just a casual observer looking for new posts on Nehalem benches this threat is out of control.
Maybe there should be a sticky thread, not for bickering and flaming but just with graphs in the first post being updated and screenshots being posted by someone who can be trusted to do a fair job of it.
This is chaos, and already the graphs in this thread cannot be found by 90% of the viewer of this thread.
Just a thought...
:/
A tweaked Phenom with high NB Clocks and DDR2 1100 makes around 2200kb/s at 2.75 GHz. B/c this bench is very Memory related Deneb would even score higher with DDR3.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
You can compare anything you want, its the conclusion you reach that's important.
/ot
Well i don't know about you guys, but AMD section losed again one valuable memeber, thanks alot. Getting harder to get any iformation about amd systems.
ot off/
Thanks JC for result's, hoping prices to drop down on DDR 3 so i can buy one of those for testing :P and how's the triple channel performance vs single channel, i think i have missed that :S
You can monitor www.nehalemnews.com. I don't publish every bench test there but most material can be found there.Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
Who?Quote:
Originally Posted by KeZzZu
LIKMARK ... He just compared his 2p setup against nehalem comp and wellQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
it turned out to be flame festival against him... it was rude IMO...
What was point of all this ? zero/none we all can see nehalem is very fast and LIKMARK just compared his 2p system nothing else, did he declare amd for performance winner? no... he just compared, same as one hd 38xx or 48xx series against SLI or Crossfire. x2 3870 vs 280 gtx quite usual versus situation, it's just comparing nothing else, he didn't deserve that kind of behavior.
We can continue in PM so we wont post nonsense on this thread. /OT OFF
OK going to check out that nehalem news site.
grunge100 was shown the door, obviously he didn't like it here and needed a push in the right direction.
I don't know where to start, so I'll be brief. He did his tests, and then he compared the results in a (IMO) stupid way, so many people here told him so. If he didn't like it that's not a reason to leave the forum, but he can do whatever he wants. Then you come here to thank us that he no longer post in this forum? Man what's up with the AMD people these days :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by KeZzZu
Actually I'm not interested to reply any post in this thread or update any benchmark in this thread anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeZzZu
But I need to make this things right.
We all sure we don't matter of he being compare Barcelona with Nehalem. I believed some of members already HIGHLIGHT this thought over and over again ...
Just at the end from what he commented occured began unreasonable ... And we began to try to explain and make some correction on his wrong concept, thats it.
See below ... Hope below Info is useful !
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=836
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=888
Does anyone know if Nehalem Skulltrail is imminent ? Will it be delayed many months after the X58 mobos are released, or will they be available concurrently or soon after ? I want a dual cpu socket for my next machine.
Dual socket will be ready for release, maybe even before the regular desktop release. Whether any of those will be friendly to overclocking is another case. I don't think there will be any 'enthusiast' dual-socket boards ready for launch, but you never know..
i doubt the successor of skulltrail will be avaible at lunch, it took intel also some time to release the QX9770 and skulltrail.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
compliments of Devastation
sorry if this was already duplicated in this thread...Ace:)Quote:
Originally Posted by OC3D
Cool, but if they want to move onto multi-core i don't get why they're still selling, and planning on selling, single cores into 09-10........
Maybe because they get money from them? Those CPUs go to very low budget systems anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingcarcas
He could have lived in the AMD section in peace. I know I wouldn't have posted to him there.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeZzZu
Not losing a Valued member, one less person to cause flames!Quote:
I'm getting all this sh1t because my dual cpu setup outperformed one single nehalem in one or two benchmarks. My intetions vere not to make nehalem look bad, and I assumed most XS readers understand that there is a difference between 1 cpu -> 2 cpu systems. That's why I did not comment further on it. I am not after making my dual AMD system shine on the expense of a pre launch single nehalem, I am not stupid, I know Nehalem will outperform Barcelona and most possibly Shanghai with a fair margin.
His system would shine if it were running against a Dual Socket Intel and showed better performance.
His rig would make Nehalem and its crappy HT look bad if it were One Barcelona were out performing it!
His system would shine even more if it used less power, kicked less heat and didn't have to depend on two, sheesh!
It isn't "possibly" running faster than Shanghai, Nehalem will wear the crown=P
I'll not miss him at all.:up:
Anyone seen suiggested prices on the top Gainstowns(dual socket)
Snarky. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
I think current server DP proc pricing should be a well enough indication since it's in their best interests to get enterprises moving to the new platform.
But in most cases, if you're rendering, wouldn't 2 Nehalem XEs OC better and achieve almost near-Gainstown scaling through network render? Non-OCed it would still be cheaper thanks to RAM.
Skulltrail for Nehalem should come, but we don't know how soon (it took darn long for V8 Bonetrail then Skully to come)
I'm just not familiar with F@H SMP, hope there aren't any false settings :shakes:
Nehalem-EP Gainestown 16threads Folding@Home SMP
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...ous/FAH_G3.jpg
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...ous/FAH_G4.jpg
...
Hmm? That score's a tad low for 2 quaddies. Especially furthermore with SMP.
JCornell, disable SMP and run 2 SMP clients. Your score should go up a lot...
IIRC Q6600s OCed could go over 4k although I don't fold myself.
Thanks for the advice ... Reasonable thought :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
although SMP2 is already calculate the ppd, maybe the total ppd will be at approx 6.5k ... :shrug:
well you need to wait several days till your score levles out. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
id say 5-7 days till you get reasonable results. (of course only it the machine is running 24/7 :p: )
Thanks for more info JC
Thanks JC. A question:are those coretemp reading correct,or we can ignore them?Mdd 80s on one chip and high 70s on the other are a bit high,aren't they?
As for the ppd,you need some more time for it to level out,but it seems it gets around ~5500 ppd.Try turning off the SMT,maybe it will help in this case.How much would a single Gainstown@3.07Ghz chip get(with SMT on/off)?
Yeah, thank you JC for the update and still wanting to show more results/tests/data :up:
I thought SMP was optimized for four cores and didn't like more than four cores or hyperthreading? Would explain strange numbers at least.
WOOT!! Finally, i'm interested in seeing a Quad-8 thread CPU running SMP :rehab: Also the difference between running just 1 instance and 2 instances of the client. Getting the WU in faster is more important to me than getting more points.
The reason one chip is 80C and other 70C is the HSF airflow ... The HSF is not a gigantic cooler and motherboard is mounted inside the case(I can't post out the pics ... lol) ... so I don't care for the temp.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I'd dedicate a couple days to study this SMP ... still got problems I don't know how to solve :mad:
I intend to leave it for a couple days see how the results level out ...
What you said is right, stanford releasing SMP is just for 4cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
But some said, can execute 2*SMP on 4cores without losses any performance ... :shrug: Yeap, I don't know, this is what I read :D
JC to see if the SMP client has issues with so many cores you could try and run in just a Bloomfield CPU and compare the PPD, then we can see if it is a software issue on the F@H client.
I hope you will be able to release more info/pictures soon
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
plus, knoone knows what the real tjmax for nehalem is, hell even for yorkfield noone knows, coretemp uses 105 which is imho to high, realtemp uses 95 which was also verified with a E8xxx.
Damn, enough with this SMP crap ... Maybe I'll just shift this machine to BOINC dedication ... :shakes:
Don't quite understand, why F@H don't make one like BOINC Client ? ...
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...neous/hung.jpg
...
I'm not exactly an expert but I thought BOINC just distributed different tasks to different cores. SMP tries to leverage parallelism by having four cores work on the same task. You could run 16 or 8 different single-threaded clients with different machine IDs to see what happens then.
boinc is only a distribution platform, it depends on the project which way the use, but typically they use one thread for one app.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
Personally i like that more then SMP, id rather have 4 WU at that are worked at the same time then 1 at a time. :)
What a weird SMP, today 3 & 4 SMP became normal again, continued the previous WU :shrug:
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...ous/FAH_G5.jpg
...
interesting, also i see your running a 2665 WU. On the offical forums the say 2665 WUs cost quite some performance/PPDs.
but this score is still awesome, beats a Q9450 + 8800gts 512 :yepp:
Another result for Chess mania users (TogaII) :shrug: ,
Thanks to someone for this brief analysis :yepp:
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...lem/TogaII.jpg
...
Register at wcgrid.org, join team XtremeSystems, set 16 cores to the default profile (under Profile manager) download BOINC client, and start it. Let's see some 16core goodness :up:
Haha, but for C/P, NVidia PhysX users would simply kick this Nehalem ass :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Uh, a single Bloomfield at 2.93 beats two Harpertowns and almost reaches up to Skulltrail at 4.0?
I need a new computer hobby.. Something involving a lot of threads. :cool:
Any pics from that CPU + mobo config?Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
Just interested :)
Could u measure the cooler mounting holes dimensions?
Config ?Quote:
Originally Posted by s0lid
Holes dimensions ? for what purposes ? :p:
the more we know about it the better! *cough* :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
:rofl: ... Ok, no problem ...Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
But I don't quite understand about CPU & M/B config refers to :p:
I guess he's interested in the layout of the cpu area, as well as the mounting holes. We wanna know what we have to deal with to get some supercooling on the chip :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
Is there any chance of running 3dmark06 and Vantage cpu test? :D
well its dp gainstown so its different form bloomfield anyways. :p:
Pic from mobo for exsample :pQuote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
Well i'm makin SS for DP harper xeon combo and would like to know the cooler mounts for DP nehalem xeons just for upgrades, simple :p
This is as far as I can give ... :D Gainestown platform ...Quote:
Originally Posted by s0lid
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...alem/Neh_6.jpg
...
No cooler mounting dimensions :/?Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by JCornell
no offence, but the 5 mins you spent taking the photo and editing it in photoshop weren't worth it :p::D:D
FYI, this pic was taken 6months ago :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
Tomorrow ... Be patience :DQuote:
Originally Posted by s0lid
Ah kthxbai :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JCornell