First Nehalem Benchmarks :)

Printable View

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

10-30-2008, 02:55 PM
Marvin_The_Martian

Unlocked multies is for wussies... real men overclock the fsb.. or qpi :fact:

;)
10-30-2008, 02:59 PM
BenchZowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tonucci

Someone may correct me but from what I've seen, the multi will go up a few notches even on non-extreme CPU's, due to the turbo mode. Extreme ones will go up beyond what turbo mode can do of course. Therefore we wont be limited by the QPI frequency alone.

You are correct.
Each model has 2 higher multipliers unlocked.
The 920 with the 20x multi can go up to 22x, the 940 can go up to 24x and the extreme... oh well it's fully unlocked :D
10-30-2008, 03:15 PM
AuDioFreaK39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin_The_Martian

Unlocked multies is for wussies... real men overclock the fsb.. or qpi :fact:

;)

but true men overclock and adjust both. :up:
10-30-2008, 03:18 PM
Marvin_The_Martian

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuDioFreaK39

but true men overclock and adjust both. :up:

You know what, my wallet disagrees but I can pm you my shipping info if you mean it :up:

:rofl:
10-30-2008, 03:40 PM
Tonucci

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

You are correct.
Each model has 2 higher multipliers unlocked.
The 920 with the 20x multi can go up to 22x, the 940 can go up to 24x and the extreme... oh well it's fully unlocked :D

Sweet, thanks for the confirmation :up:

Looks like the 940 will be needed to fully clock nehalen on air.... At least if initial boards clock QPI like OBR said. IF 200Mhz++ QPI becomes an reality for 24/7 operation than 920's will be sweet too.
10-30-2008, 03:45 PM
Epsilon84

Quote:

Originally Posted by justthefax

Yorkfield 30% faster on avg? What are you, an Intel employee? :rofl:

LOL he is in fact, but that's besides the point, he speaks the truth.

Yorkfields are clocked higher than Phenoms too remember, we're talking about a ~15% higher IPC and 3GHz+ vs 2.6GHz max, so yes, 30% is quite accurate if we're taking the top chips from Intel and AMD. Oh and please don't get started about how we're comparing a $1k CPU to a $200 one... that's really not the point here.
10-30-2008, 03:49 PM
[XC] gomeler

I thought the turbo mode only worked in limited cases and for the i920 and i940 it didn't bump the multiplier up at all?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin_The_Martian

Unlocked multies is for wussies... real men overclock the fsb.. or qpi :fact:

;)

real men max out the FSB and then continue to raise the multiplier :D
10-30-2008, 03:51 PM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metroid

I believe 4.0 is a reality if you get a good motherboard, 20 x 200 = 4000. The MSI claimed that anyone when using the Eclipse X58 can achieve that and no overclocking knowledge is needed, marketing was now some true reviews are needed.

Metroid.

Well that sounds very promising! Given i d be happy with 3.6ghz ish, as with the perf gain of 5% at least, its almost a 3.8 yorkie.
i920 seems like it could be a fun choice now :) if msi can keep that promise.. OBR said his mobo died on flash so , i guess i ll have to wait until nda to know. Do you know the retail of that board.. under 300$ i hope?
10-30-2008, 03:53 PM
Marvin_The_Martian

Quote:

Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler

real men max out the FSB and then continue to raise the multiplier :D

AudiFreak already got the shipping info, bring it on :up:

:rofl:

Jk, I know I wouldn't mind having an unlocked multi 775 as I'm very fsb limited on my old p5wdh but .. it's the piece of hw I paid the most for iirc in my whole rig so it's staying till it breaks :)
10-30-2008, 03:54 PM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredpace

http://www.coolaler.com.tw/toppc/I7920/06-3.JPG

Very nice! but alas the ES means the multi is unlocked so we dont know for sure what the qpi is, but nice to know its achieveable regardless :D
10-30-2008, 03:58 PM
BenchZowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler

I thought the turbo mode only worked in limited cases and for the i920 and i940 it didn't bump the multiplier up at all?

Turbo Mode is controlled by the "BIOS" and is trigger-controlled.
On the other hand, you can hard-set the multiplier in the BIOS :)
10-30-2008, 04:00 PM
Marvin_The_Martian

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

Turbo Mode is controlled by the "BIOS" and is trigger-controlled.
On the other hand, you can hard-set the multiplier in the BIOS :)

I'm going to bet you allot of people will be trying to break this x2 boost limit to the multi, I hope they pull it off ( sorry Intel but my own pockets come first, I'd rather buy your lowest end and make it run faster then your stock champion :D )
10-30-2008, 04:14 PM
Hornet331

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin_The_Martian

I'm going to bet you allot of people will be trying to break this x2 boost limit to the multi, I hope they pull it off ( sorry Intel but my own pockets come first, I'd rather buy your lowest end and make it run faster then your stock champion :D )

And they will all fail, you cant break into something that isn't there. :p:
10-30-2008, 04:18 PM
geo

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredpace

http://www.coolaler.com.tw/toppc/I7920/06-3.JPG

sorry if i've missed it. but is that on air and stable?
10-30-2008, 04:20 PM
Marvin_The_Martian

Axp days are over? turbo is bios controlled who knows what the communities brightest can do :shrug:

I'm not holding my breath for it but I wouldn't faint when I hear it's done ( or.. I'll faint becuase I want one )
10-30-2008, 04:24 PM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin_The_Martian

I'm going to bet you allot of people will be trying to break this x2 boost limit to the multi, I hope they pull it off ( sorry Intel but my own pockets come first, I'd rather buy your lowest end and make it run faster then your stock champion :D )

Well unless you are benching, i can actually see the powersaving and turbo mode features coming in useful, if I have my quad clocked at 3.8 - 4.0 at decent load and idle temps on air, i dont mind it powering down cores to save power and temps (wear and tear) as well as boosting up to 4.1, 4.2 if needed.
10-30-2008, 04:25 PM
Hornet331

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin_The_Martian

Axp days are over? turbo is bios controlled who knows what the communities brightest can do :shrug:

I'm not holding my breath for it but I wouldn't faint when I hear it's done ( or.. I'll faint becuase I want one )

As far as i understood nehalems turbo, its is controlled by the PCU and bios has only a switch to enable/disable it.

I doubt someone is brave enough to mess with the firmware of the PCU, hell i doubt its even possible to manipulate it. :p:

Btw. question regarding the PCU, since its controlling all the whole powerconsumption of the cpu and gets all the Informations about Temps/Voltages, is there going to be a whitepaper on how to use that data?
10-30-2008, 04:40 PM
Marvin_The_Martian

Quote:

Originally Posted by villa1n

Well unless you are benching, i can actually see the powersaving and turbo mode features coming in useful, if I have my quad clocked at 3.8 - 4.0 at decent load and idle temps on air, i dont mind it powering down cores to save power and temps (wear and tear) as well as boosting up to 4.1, 4.2 if needed.

Powering down cores...

HERACY

:stop::poke::idea::explode:
10-30-2008, 05:22 PM
JumpingJack

Quote:

Originally Posted by duploxxx

Intel just killed there own high end market share, not even AMD was required for that. they should have focused on there q109 2s server en 2h09 4s server launch in stead of this desktop platform.

:) :) I don't mean to pick on you, but this is an oxymoron. So Intel lost high end market share to who? Itself? :) :) Just sounds weird.

I think you meant to say that they just froze their current high end sales through an Osbourn effect.

What it does, though, is replaces their high end offering with a new high end offering, the current high end offering will slide down into the mid range, and the mid range will slide down into the low end... this is called progress.
10-30-2008, 05:31 PM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin_The_Martian

Powering down cores...

HERACY

:stop::poke::idea::explode:

LoL, I know, I know, i should fold with it, whilst not in use, but seriously, I lost a lot of money this past few months...thanks to a few bad trades, so I m on conservation/rebuild life mode at the moment, so savings matter again. :)
10-30-2008, 06:10 PM
Slovnaft

...*heresy*...
10-30-2008, 06:21 PM
Movieman

Quote:

Originally Posted by justthefax

Yorkfield 30% faster on avg? What are you, an Intel employee? :rofl:

You need to follow and read..;)
Yes, he is..
Francois Piednoel, the gentleman who was behind the development of the SkullTrail board and much more I'd imagine.
10-30-2008, 06:28 PM
JumpingJack

Quote:

Originally Posted by justthefax

Yorkfield 30% faster on avg? What are you, an Intel employee? :rofl:

Actually, it is true ... but under conditions of pure CPU limited measurements, for example, if you compare Phenom to Yorkfield at the same clock speeds at 1920x1200 using a nVidia 8500GT ... they will appear equal, but if you measure at 1280x1024 using a 280GT Yorksfield, on average, will be 20-30% faster clock for clock.

This does not make Phenom a cruddy gaming CPU, it can easily support high frame rates to make an enjoyable game... however, at an architectural level, the Yorkfield IPC is just much higher running gaming code.

I understand many people who are attached to their product preference do not accept this or like the result, but it is pretty much the case. RWT did an outstanding article to understand why this is the case:
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...WT102808015436 here they compare an older K8 overall, but the general idea is the same. Most of the good performance in the core architecture arises from efficient use of cache and, most importantly, very strong branch prediction -- Intel's branch prediction just overwhelms AMD's implementation.
10-30-2008, 06:33 PM
Drwho?

Quote:

Originally Posted by justthefax

Yorkfield 30% faster on avg? What are you, an Intel employee? :rofl:

go through the page here: http://www.matbe.com/articles/lire/1...eurs/page9.php

translated to english : http://translate.google.com/translat...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/a...0000077877.png http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/a...0000077852.png

100 CPU tested! And that look more than 30% to me ... :rofl: :clap: :clap: :clap: humm hummm ... ok, from 26% to higher ! :P

what about this:

http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/a...0000077856.png
10-30-2008, 07:39 PM
justthefax

Howcome you don't link to the overall performance graph which averages over all the tests? i.e. this one ("Une moyenne des 21 tests est ensuite calculée et reporté dans le graphe ci-dessous."):

2.5GHz Phenom 114.4
2.5GHz Yorkfield 139.9
18.2% or 22.3% difference depending on what you take as the base. Most would take that as ballpark 20%. 30%? Only Intel employees and Shintai :rolleyes:

I don't have a problem with company reps like Intel or OCZ posting here but trash-talking business rivals and using fanboi-math is distasteful and inappropriate. Getting too cosy eventually corrupts - remember Novak or Judith Miller? Or the newly-saccharine Bob Woodward?

When a large company uses these types of forums to spread the word about their products, it's a privilege for them to be allowed to post, not a favor they bestow on the forum.

http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/a...0000077926.png

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drwho?

go through the page here: http://www.matbe.com/articles/lire/1...eurs/page9.php

translated to english : http://translate.google.com/translat...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

100 CPU tested! And that look more than 30% to me ... :rofl: :clap: :clap: :clap: humm hummm ... ok, from 26% to higher ! :P

what about this:

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