The voltage reading isn't the only weird thing... E6400 with 4MB L2?
Anyway, very nice result :D
Printable View
The voltage reading isn't the only weird thing... E6400 with 4MB L2?
Anyway, very nice result :D
:cool: we want 3dmarks ,by the way doese anyone know if that mb can cf ? the cpu is probably an es .,
kill me
E6400 was the original SC/DC differentiation point, Intel changed this to E6500 (2.4Ghz) along the way when they demonstrated better yields. DC = 4MB L2 cache (think of it like 2MB/core), SC = 2MB L2 cache.
Makes sense, better yield -> bump the core speed, so DC minumum goes from 2.13Ghz to 2.4Ghz. We can't have a SC faster than a DC if we are trying to "push" more expensive dual core chips, can we? ;)
It's hard to believe how damn fast these things are. For the last several years each evolution of hardware has offered increased performance here and there, but it has been a while since something in the processor world has made this big of a jump from one generation to the next.
I can't wait until these things start showing their real power......remember, this is just very early testing with limited tweaks and very limited mobos.
wow!
AMAZING!:clap:
I am veeery anxious
AFAIK there will be also DC lower then 2,13Ghz.Quote:
Originally Posted by freecableguy
DC
Conroe: 4MB L2 cache, starting from 2,4Ghz
Allendale: 2MB L2 cache starting from 1,6Ghz
SC
Millville: 1MB L2 cache
they all dual core...
Millville is SingeCore:)
yeah, millville is single core, but millville isn't Conroe, its millville :p:. All the numbers we've seen are Conroes...
Ok talking to the wrong guy LOL, you know the numbers.
And to think I spent close to $500 for my Opteron 170, and now this will retail for much cheaper. Guess in a couple months, it'll be up in FS.:p:
Any idea why spi scores are lower for 2 instances running to load both cores than one instance loading only one core at identical speeds? Or is that not the case? I think people forget that it takes a lower clockspeed to stabilize both cores, rather than one.
So what motherboard was this run on? The 304 Badaxe?
I'd be happy with that CPU right now, even if it didn't do anymore on phase. If it does a 1Ghz overclock on air, then it must surely do insane speeds on phase/LN2 - unless Intel are so godly that they've basically made heat irrelevant in processor operation and overclocking? :D
Xtremely impressive Pi time. I hope that this bump in performance we'll be reflected in everyday applications. In the end that's what really matters.
I can't see how it can't to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by NoX
Yonah falls behind A64 in meaningful tests due to its limited cache, but fundamentally Yonah + 4MB cache = Christmas come early.
That said, I'd like to see some more relevant benchmarks. Would also be interested to know just how stable it was at that overclock. 1Ghz overclock on air makes no sense at all, it just blows my mind.
fcg have you guys contacted them in order to see what bios and mobo they are using? or have you all ready worked this out?
Seems I was right about Conroe at 3GHz. http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=908 ..or very close. :p:
The cache is shared between the two cores, so theyve gotta fight over it, instead of 1 getting all 4mb.Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderstruck!
Holy mother of jesus, this is great. It feels like 486 -> Pentium all over again.
Someone, get that SuperPI to a single number score!
Greets. Rise
Wow, what RAM is that on? I need to make sure to get it :)
I don't think I've yet seen any 3d05/06 scores for these chips yet (or better yet some sort of Conroe Oblivion fps compared to whatever chip you like). Is there any chance one you you guys with the es (or just early) chips can get some real numbers going, or not yet for some reason?
Oh so it seems you have missed Victor Wangs tests then :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tdenton1138
Ahh well what a pity..Seems someone is gona have to search :)
WOW this will be my next upgrade time to start selling stuff.
that is bloody amazing. Can't wait to see 3D @ 3GHz. Damn nice OC for stock air.