More Sandy Bridge performance numbers (+Rumoured Pricing)

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-07-2010, 04:31 PM
mAJORD

Smarter turbo modes seems to be the theme for both companies moving fwd..

Soon the IPC of the Power Control units will become more important than that of the CPU itself :lol:
08-07-2010, 08:47 PM
JumpingJack

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

from what ive seen and heard of that 20% is a best case scenario, NOT average...

:) You were convinced the best case was only 2-3% ...
08-08-2010, 02:52 AM
RPGWiZaRD

Ahhh, it's driving me nuts, I wanna know how these OCs. :D Exciting times ahead with both SB and BD released.
08-08-2010, 03:29 AM
PatRaceTin

interesting
08-08-2010, 05:02 AM
Hornet331

Quote:

Originally Posted by JumpingJack

:) You were convinced the best case was only 2-3% ...

Pssst don't tell him you are ruining his negative mood. :p:
08-08-2010, 05:44 AM
Iconyu

Quote:

Originally Posted by JumpingJack

:) You were convinced the best case was only 2-3%...

Is there really a worse or best case for it? When you look back at the C2 it's out of order, could do more than four instructions a clock, had crazy branch prediction, and did 128bit SSE3 instructions in a single cycle.

I think back to when the C2 launched and the only thing that looked even remotely bad was the loss of micro-op fusion in 64bit mode (which Intel got running in i7). Other than that it looked devestating and it still does. Intel have stopped making light promises since 2006.

Between sandy bridge and bulldozer I think 2011 is going to be epic.
08-08-2010, 06:01 AM
JumpingJack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iconyu

Is there really a worse or best case for it? When you look back at the C2 it's out of order, could do more than four instructions a clock, had crazy branch prediction, and did 128bit SSE3 instructions in a single cycle.

...

Between sandy bridge and bulldozer I think 2011 is going to be epic.

I was just razzing Saaya a little... I honestly don't care either way. My personal guess is you will see varying results, from 0% improvements to some workloads showing as high as 20 or 25%, with an average somewhere between 10-15%. Saaya has been adamant that at best SB will only boost performance 2-3%.

On your closing thought, I absolutely concur. 2011 will be a fun year to watch the CPU race.
08-08-2010, 11:53 AM
Drwho?

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Sweeper_

Compared to Bulldozer there already is a nice collection of benchmark numbers for Sandy Bridge. For example those posted by Coolaler, a few BOINC benchmark results and a video with a mobile Sandy Bridge running Cinema 4D. The video analysis done in the Planet3DNow forums resulted in a deciphered score of 19641, confirmed by the measured run time (44 s). This means, the tested mobile Sandy Bridge processor was as fast as a Core i7-975 Extreme. Another comparison could be done by using a recently published Geekbench result of a 1.6 GHz Sandy Bridge CPU. So I compared it to a Core i7 also running at 1.6 GHz and made following table with overall results and a diagram showing the differences in detail.

http://data6.blog.de/media/417/4863417_081e137fc4_m.png

So the average performance increase with those CPUs at the same base clock, but with different Turbo Boost implementations, is about 20%.

...see the rest in dresdenboy's blog: http://citavia.blog.de/2010/08/05/mo...mbers-9128712/

edit: rumoured pricing on some dual/quads

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/2528/sandyb.jpg

One more non tuned part ... :rofl: :ROTF: :rofl: :ROTF: :yepp: :yepp:
08-08-2010, 12:00 PM
terrace215

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

One more non tuned part ... :rofl: :ROTF: :rofl: :ROTF: :yepp: :yepp:

Yes, the memory results did look suspicious.

Questions (if you can say):

1. Will you guys be making some specific performance claims at IDF in September for these first Sandy Bridge parts?

2. What about for the high-end desktop / server variants?
08-08-2010, 12:07 PM
Drwho?

Without giving any range of numbers, without giving away anything ...
(I am speaking theory here, not about SandyB itself)
Benchmarks will scale based on the Amdahl's law ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law ).
If some sub systems were doubled, and you use a benchmark that uses 99% of the time this subsystem, you ll see a scaling of 2X.
now, there are some specs out there for SandyB that already release publically, not very detailled, but it is there ... you know that it has AVX.
For example, if you look at linpack, it is mostly L1 cache sensitive, and Floating based ... you add on the top of this that AVX is 256 bits, and SSE4.1 is 128 ... You get some indication of the improvement ... I see a lot of speculation here, but I don't see a lot of people trying to do the math properly.
Please try to raise the debate a little, I know there are smart people reading here, I just don't see them posting the math they are asking me questions about by email ...

I am not allow to give away any performance information, just understand that for SandyB, doing the math right will help you more than using a early prototype, those are not tuned properly.
08-08-2010, 12:16 PM
Mumak

Doing the math doesn't help much unless they have more information about what improvements are build it - I don't think that all of them were already publicly disclosed yet.. Moreover, the way Turbo works on SNB is also different and it's hard to make any expectations unless that improvement (+few constants ;) τ) has been disclosed too..
08-08-2010, 12:19 PM
duploxxx

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

Without giving any range of numbers, without giving away anything ...
(I am speaking theory here, not about SandyB itself)
Benchmarks will scale based on the Amdahl's law ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law ).
If some sub systems were doubled, and you use a benchmark that uses 99% of the time this subsystem, you ll see a scaling of 2X.
now, there are some specs out there for SandyB that already release publically, not very detailled, but it is there ... you know that it has AVX.
For example, if you look at linpack, it is mostly L1 cache sensitive, and Floating based ... you add on the top of this that AVX is 256 bits, and SSE4.1 is 128 ... You get some indication of the improvement ... I see a lot of speculation here, but I don't see a lot of people trying to do the math properly.
Please try to raise the debate a little, I know there are smart people reading here, I just don't see them posting the math they are asking me questions about by email ...

I am not allow to give away any performance information, just understand that for SandyB, doing the math right will help you more than using a early prototype, those are not tuned properly.

looks bad if you have to cover yourself only with general AVX + SSE4.1 chitchat...
where are the magic performance enhancements and 7-8GHZ runs ;)
08-08-2010, 01:02 PM
xVeinx

Quote:

Originally Posted by duploxxx

looks bad if you have to cover yourself only with general AVX + SSE4.1 chitchat...
where are the magic performance enhancements and 7-8GHZ runs ;)

Was anyone here promised 7-8Ghz runs? AVX and SSe4.1 will be useful when programs are coded to take advantage of them (not any different than using open64 can help boost opteron performance in some HPC applications). Turbo (and some IPC improvement, likely) helps single-threaded apps, and the architecture is tuned to help multi-threaded (or at least multitasking) performance and scaling. I'm not sure how an all-around performance boost makes "them" look bad. Hardware can move as fast as it wants, but at a certain point, the software has to be coded/compiled to make use of it.
08-08-2010, 02:08 PM
-Sweeper_

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

One more non tuned part ... :rofl: :ROTF: :rofl: :ROTF: :yepp: :yepp:

nice results for a non tuned part... :)
08-08-2010, 02:40 PM
Etihtsarom

My interest here lies only on SB's lowerend in a HTPC role, can any one comment on it? Think I'll just wait till IVY for the desktop part, hopefully 2011 will hit 4.5 - 5 Ghz on air :).
08-08-2010, 03:38 PM
Movieman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

Without giving any range of numbers, without giving away anything ...
(I am speaking theory here, not about SandyB itself)
Benchmarks will scale based on the Amdahl's law ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law ).
If some sub systems were doubled, and you use a benchmark that uses 99% of the time this subsystem, you ll see a scaling of 2X.
now, there are some specs out there for SandyB that already release publically, not very detailled, but it is there ... you know that it has AVX.
For example, if you look at linpack, it is mostly L1 cache sensitive, and Floating based ... you add on the top of this that AVX is 256 bits, and SSE4.1 is 128 ... You get some indication of the improvement ... I see a lot of speculation here, but I don't see a lot of people trying to do the math properly.
Please try to raise the debate a little, I know there are smart people reading here, I just don't see them posting the math they are asking me questions about by email ...

I am not allow to give away any performance information, just understand that for SandyB, doing the math right will help you more than using a early prototype, those are not tuned properly.

Looks in to see what teases Francois is giving us today!:rofl:

Not tuned huh? What's it need? New points and plugs?:D
08-08-2010, 03:47 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Movieman

Not tuned huh? What's it need? New points and plugs?:D

New points and plugs,you always crack me up :D :D

Anyhow ,Francois thanks for the input in this thread it's appreciated.We all know you can't say much but these mobile parts look very interesting.
08-08-2010, 03:54 PM
Movieman

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

New points and plugs,you always crack me up :D :D

Anyhow ,Francois thanks for the input in this thread it's appreciated.We all know you can't say much but these mobile parts look very interesting.

I try,someone has to be the comic relief in these threads.:bows:
They get too damned serious and besides, tune up? Plueeeeeese.
How about calling it what it is, the first ones got sent out with a crippled bios..:D
08-08-2010, 04:13 PM
-Sweeper_

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/923/96550671.jpg
08-08-2010, 05:08 PM
Nicksterr

These chips won't be overclockable? Intel locking buses? I seem to be finding mixed evidence in my searches. You can buy a dual-core i5-680 right now and get ludicrous clock speeds and performance in all games with a cheap 1156 mobo and 4gigs of ddr3. Guess its time for the numbers waiting game.
08-08-2010, 05:13 PM
Aberration

Quote:

Originally Posted by duploxxx

looks bad if you have to cover yourself only with general AVX + SSE4.1 chitchat...

Hardly. He is just covering his ass. What is said here does have ways of reaching people in Intel who make decisions about your employment.

Honestly I bet his is oozing with anticipation to talk about it.
08-08-2010, 05:29 PM
Movieman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aberration

Hardly. He is just covering his ass. What is said here does have ways of reaching people in Intel who make decisions about your employment.

Honestly I bet his is oozing with anticipation to talk about it.

So lets take him out and get him rip-roaring sheetfaced drunk..
OH, Wait..Have you seen him?
It might take a gallon of JD to get it done.
Guy is NOT small..:rofl:
08-08-2010, 05:48 PM
mstp2009

Just one gallon?

Pft. It's worth it. I volunteer to cover the bar tab.
08-08-2010, 06:00 PM
tool_462

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstp2009

Just one gallon?

Pft. It's worth it. I volunteer to cover the bar tab.

I'll split it with you.

NDA = Not Drunk Agreement right? So, if you are drunk and talk, you are still covered?
08-08-2010, 06:20 PM
Drwho?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aberration

Honestly I bet his is oozing with anticipation to talk about it.

you bet :)! ! !
08-08-2010, 06:31 PM
Drwho?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Movieman

Looks in to see what teases Francois is giving us today!:rofl:

Not tuned huh? What's it need? New points and plugs?:D

May be it is faster :up: , may be it is slower :down: ... but it is for sure not going at the right speed ... :shrug:

(I am sure some people will now speculate it is slower than those numbers ... hahahah , just to keep you dancing ... Tango style, one step on side, one step forward, one step on the side, one step backward ... hahahaha )
08-09-2010, 01:37 AM
Iconyu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

May be it is faster :up: , may be it is slower :down: ... but it is for sure not going at the right speed ... :shrug:

(I am sure some people will now speculate it is slower than those numbers ... hahahah , just to keep you dancing ... Tango style, one step on side, one step forward, one step on the side, one step backward ... hahahaha )

You're not a good enough fiddle player to make us dance like that.
08-09-2010, 02:49 AM
zsamz_

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

May be it is faster :up: , may be it is slower :down: ... but it is for sure not going at the right speed ... :shrug:

(I am sure some people will now speculate it is slower than those numbers ... hahahah , just to keep you dancing ... Tango style, one step on side, one step forward, one step on the side, one step backward ... hahahaha )

cant make me dance
but i can buy an amd cpu for spite:p:
08-09-2010, 08:03 AM
-Sweeper_

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screen...-09_102334.png
08-09-2010, 08:42 AM
terrace215

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Sweeper_

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screen...-09_102334.png

So I followed your link... so... boxed parts already exist for SB??? Or was that a mock-up? Can you link to the article that uses the pic?

Edit: Found it:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...rbst/CPU/News/

The slides are interesting... The turbo above TDP looks nice. And it seems with the p67 chipset, despite limited base clock modification, the ratio is either totally unlocked, or partially unlocked, so that, along with memory tweaking, will be the means of o/c

Link direct to slides:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...e/?iid=1409864
08-09-2010, 09:12 AM
-Sweeper_

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrace215

So I followed your link... so... boxed parts already exist for SB??? Or was that a mock-up? Can you link to the article that uses the pic?

Edit: Found it:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...rbst/CPU/News/

The slides are interesting... The turbo above TDP looks nice. And it seems with the p67 chipset, despite limited base clock modification, the ratio is either totally unlocked, or partially unlocked, so that, along with memory tweaking, will be the means of o/c

Link direct to slides:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...e/?iid=1409864

yeah, OC remains there, its just different..

and DMICLK overclocking in LGA2011 SBs will be similar to LGA1366 + nehalem/westmere... according to recent slides..
08-09-2010, 10:58 AM
FlanK3r

DrWho: bit not classic question. Its about software, i heard some about OC software for SB form Intel (equivalent AOD), its right or only gossip :D ?
08-09-2010, 01:30 PM
Mumak

You surely heared about XTU..

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlanK3r

DrWho: bit not classic question. Its about software, i heard some about OC software for SB form Intel (equivalent AOD), its right or only gossip :D ?
08-09-2010, 02:36 PM
terrace215

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mumak

You surely heared about XTU..

In case he didn't, a nice overview:

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/fea...tuning_utility
08-10-2010, 08:11 AM
FlanK3r

thx :)

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:55 PM.

XtremeSystems