Nehalem-EP......BLOOMFIELD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphiel

Thanks Dave, and now off to sleep with you, dreaming about retail systems performance for a DP version (DP Beckton especially) :)

---

Since I have seen absolutely nothing as yet on Gainstown, the dual socket version of Bloomfield, I will have to dream on just single socket for now.
After a couple minutes to think on this I think that his single socket quadcore Bloomfield with working trichannel memory and maybe at 3400mhz would out work my just assemblend dual socket Harpertown at 3400mhz
Close but that reality is that nehalem may well be close to twice the computational power of an equally clocked Harpertown(Yorkfield)
That scary..
Ok, Now I need sleep.
Good night Gentlemen and thanks very much for posting the benchmark!:up:

Compare Fritz by 4phy & 4log cores with 1phy core
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...alem/Fritz.jpg

===

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...lem/Fritz2.jpg

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

First of all Thank you very much for running the benchmark.
Now just so I am sure, this is a single socket quad core correct?

---

Sure it's single socket, if not it wouldn't be Bloomfield ... :yepp:

Maybe tomorrow will end this Bloomfield benches, to Gainestown 3.xxGHz benches ... :clap:

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCornell

Sure it's single socket, if not it wouldn't be Bloomfield ... :yepp:

Maybe tomorrow will end this Bloomfield benches, to Gainestown benches ... :clap:

...

---

OMG :shocked:

Please do a BOINC WCG run with that Gainestown benchmark, please!

Thank you, for all this insight and pre release benchmarks, it is really appreciated :bows:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphiel

OMG :shocked:

Please do a BOINC WCG run with that Gainestown benchmark, please!

---

Consider Done :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCornell

Consider Done :rofl:

---

Yepp, thank you very much for all the info!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCornell

Sure it's single socket, if not it wouldn't be Bloomfield ... :yepp:

Maybe tomorrow will end this Bloomfield benches, to Gainestown 3.xxGHz benches ... :clap:

...

---

I just had to be sure so I asked. Agfain my Thanks for taking the time to do this.
As to Gainstown, are you trying to stop my aging heart?:rofl:
See if there is a setting in either Bllomfield or Gainstown to shut off the HT and then try and run that bench in BOINC again.
I think you will be very surprised, as will we all.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bowman

Of course they could, but that's exactly what Intel wants. SLI on Intel chipsets. At the same time NVIDIA's chipset business would go out of business, at least for desktops, because the 6 and 7 series for LGA775 sure has given them a frayed reputation.. Even if their Nehalem chipsets turned out 'okay', why would anyone bother if Intel had SLI and with the cloud of data corruption, crashes, bugs and bad drivers looming over nForce?

---

what u said there made me think.. if this debacle between Intel & NV is true (RE: chipset/SLi) - then one could essentially say that NV does not want to earn its keep - they rather get away with making crap chipsets (which they have been), than pull up their socks & put some effort into it :shakes: :down:
if an individual/small business had this kind of work ethic they would quickly go bust! :yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I think you will be very surprised, as will we all.;)

---

I wont be surprised, but just in a continued state of awe :yepp: ;)

Hi JC,

Still busy with the Bloomfield..or changed to Gainestown now.
Hope you like to do the chess tests for me!

Thanks,JP

You can always contact me on MSN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

First of all Thank you very much for running the benchmark.
Now just so I am sure, this is a single socket quad core correct?
If that is so, then the new Hyperpath(Hyperthreading) is skewing your numbers. If it is possible to shut off that function so that only 4 threads are working you may see some VERY incredible numbers.
Not quite double but maybe 60-75% above what was shown.
If that is true, then you are sitting on essentially the most powerfull machine that exists outside of some supercomputer.
I don't say that lightly, on the old dual single core xeons the difference in benchmarks with HT turned on and off were app 70% greater.
Now add into this that your only on single channel memory on a board that will do tri channel, a pre release board and probably still some bugs and added all up my thought is Dear God Almighty!:rofl:
Oh, and I forgot to add: You only at 2933mhz..
At the risk of sounding like some schoolkid instead of a jaded 56 year old guy, stop and think what this will do when on a retail fully debugged board with tri channel DDR3-1333 or DDR3-1600 and running in the 3400-3600mhz range.
Just think on that a minute or two, before you call and buy Intel stock!

Oh yea, quick, get the nitro pills for my aging heart!:ROTF:

---

My heart's all aflutter as well Dave. Dual socket 6 channels of memory for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphiel

Thanks Dave, and now off to sleep with you, dreaming about retail systems performance for a DP version (DP Beckton especially) :)

---

Hehe, remember that Beckton is only MP platforms on the bigger socket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCornell

Compare Fritz by 4phy & 4log cores with 1phy core
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...alem/Fritz.jpg

--snip--
...

---

Not bad at all.. Faster than Q6600 @ 3600 MHz, and almost as fast as Quad Xeon 5320 8 cores x 2330 Mhz.

http://www.jens.tauchclub-krems.at/d...enchmarks.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Face

Not bad at all.. Faster than Q6600 @ 3600 MHz, and almost as fast as Quad Xeon 5320 8 cores x 2330 Mhz.

http://www.jens.tauchclub-krems.at/d...enchmarks.html

---

Just ran this on my dual harper at 3404 and got this but this is 8 cores and almost 500mhz faster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Just ran this on my dual harper at 3404 and got this but this is 8 cores and almost 500mhz faster.

---

:eek:
I'm going to have an anxiety attack waiting for the Nehalem.

X58 mobo
HD4850x2
6GB DDR3 (Tri-channel mode)

Oh my...! Think I'm going to need more Xanax. :shocked: :shocked:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xoulz

:eek:
I'm going to have an anxiety attack waiting for the Nehalem.

X58 mobo
HD4850x2
6GB DDR3 (Tri-channel mode)

Oh my...! Think I'm going to need more Xanax. :shocked: :shocked:

---

And a pile of clean shorts to change into every hour reading this post.
I gave up, just ordered in a truckload of Depends..:rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xoulz

:eek:
I'm going to have an anxiety attack waiting for the Nehalem.

X58 mobo
HD4850x2
6GB DDR3 (Tri-channel mode)

Oh my...! Think I'm going to need more Xanax. :shocked: :shocked:

---

Hope you got an extra Xanax ... this is scary :ROTF: ... Please don't suffer from panic attack :rofl:
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_1.jpg

...

:rofl:

I haven't seen any Atoms here. :(

They should at least make it possible to use Nvidia's chip, so that either individual mobo makers, or Intel themselves could offer SLI on the high end, much like Skulltrail, but say on X58 and Gainestown? SLI on Intel is mostly going to be taken up by the high end anyway, and that would leave Nvidia to sell high/med/low as they like, and still leave them the middle market where they probably make the most money.

Oh well. If quad 4870's turns out anything good in driver support and performance, SLI will probably die off anyway. Nvidia will still sell cards - I'm not that doom and gloom, but SLI itself could dwindle to a tiny niche market, which would mean it would lose regular driver support, which further perpetuates the dwindling.

I find it funny that they want ATI to support Physx for free, but they don't want Intel to do SLI. ATI could put all that work in and then get shut off when Physx 2 comes out? Oh well. Come 2009 when mainstream Nehalem hits, without a license, Nvidia will be effectively nearly out of the mobo business anyway. See what happens then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCornell

Hope you got an extra Xanax ... this is scary :ROTF: ... Please don't suffer from panic attack :rofl:
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_1.jpg

...

---

But how does it perform when HT is enabled? ;)

It seems single threaded performance does not shape up as nicely as multi threaded performance.
We have seen SuperPi, cinebench, deep fritz and CPU mark 99 tests so far.

SuperPi shows impressive gains but isn't superPi quite bandwidth constrained so the reduced latency/increased bandwidth may help?
It looks like ~50% for 32m and ~25% for 1m.

Cinebench 1cpu (32bit) shows ~2% performance gains according to Anandtech, JC's tests look more like ~5%.

Single threaded fritz chess score is ~1,x% faster than penryn.

CPU mark 99 improved by ~9% over penryn.

Performance improvements ranging from 2-9% are not really bad, but neither are they breath taking. However, it may be not that important considering we are in the era of multi threading. I can't even come up with any mainstream single threaded benchmarks (besides games) I could ask you to test, so I could be sure about Nehalem's single threaded performance.

Just wondering whether you guys agree that we may see 0-10% performance gains on some compute intensive, single threaded, but not in any way bandwidth sensitive applications like those above?

Anyway it's not bad at all considering how well Nehalem will perform on average and that most of the transistor budget went into SMT/IMC benefitting only multi threaded and BW heavy applications.

Yes, I know its early alpha silicon, but I am quite sure there won't be much more of a boost than <5% from improved boards and chips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Coolest

But how does it perform when HT is enabled? ;)

---

Hehe, Yeap BIOS issue,HT disabled ...
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_3.jpg

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_4.jpg

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_6.jpg

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_5.jpg

===

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_0.jpg

Without HSF burn in test :ROTF:
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_2.jpg

Onboard SSD
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...tom/Atom_7.jpg

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCornell

Hope you got an extra Xanax ... this is scary :ROTF: ... Please don't suffer from panic attack :rofl:
...

---

:zombie:

Thats sick... honestly JC, I thought we were all friends here, then you go and pull that shiz! I really cannot function with so much of mind mind idling with vision of grandeur and an exotic build. Let alone unimaginable (achievable) benchmarks.

I have to go self medicate, l8tr.

@JCornell

Is it possible to run the new TrueCrypt 6.0 Benchmark function (100 mb buffer) with multi core support on the Nehalem system?
http://www.truecrypt.org/downloads.php

cu, BitpowerPM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xoulz

:zombie:

Thats sick... honestly JC, I thought we were all friends here, then you go and pull that shiz! I really cannot function with so much of mind mind idling with vision of grandeur and an exotic build. Let alone unimaginable (achievable) benchmarks.

I have to go self medicate, l8tr.

---

I did too hehehe!

im glad i didnt buy a new penryn cpu and just wait for nehalem lol. i only wish beckton wasent released in Q4 of 2009. but then again i can always go for dunnington.
http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/3...ngton01gm9.gif
image off of xtreview