You are yet to see high FSB low multi Yonah, expect better results from 266/333FSB version.
iirc ULV chips are as low as 16w per core.
Printable View
You are yet to see high FSB low multi Yonah, expect better results from 266/333FSB version.
iirc ULV chips are as low as 16w per core.
Fugger, what's your prediction, will an overclocked Yonah be able to kill an overclocked Dothan (ignoring the multicore benefits)? ;)
FSB wise, yes. With that advantage alone it will beat the dothan. Getting super high clocks will be harder with the lower multiples unless upper multiples are unlocked. This might be an option in the EE version planned.
saaya
95W for entire system not just for procs as was mentioned here:Quote:
and its consuming 95W! so thats 47W for each sosaman dual core chip running at only 1.5ghz!
http://www.computerbase.de/news/hard...ossaman_yonah/
and here:
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=490871
use http://babelfish.altavista.com/ to translate from chinese.
you mean 133/166fsb aka 533/800 quad pumped?Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
so welsey benched at 100fsb aka 400 quad pumped?
and 16w per core for an ulv chip is nothing compared to dothan wich goes down to 5W per core for an ulv chip :D
if 16w per core would be the average power consumption for a 2ghz chip that would be nice, but its a ULV chip... 16W for an ulv chip is a lot!
ulv chips are for handhelds and cooling 16W in a thin handheld pc is not nice unless you want an integrated handwarmer :D
kl0012, yeah, my bad :D
still 20W per core at 1.5ghz is a lot.
that means 40W for a dual core 1.5ghz sossaman/yonah...
performence per power consumption:
80W = 6ghz yonah
80W = 8ghz dothan
and a dothan ghz seems to be faster than a yonah mhz, wich is no surprise as yonah has half the cache and only 75% the fsb bandwidth...
so in the end things dont really change, dothan still beats yonah when it comes to performence per watt... and performence per watt is what intel said is their top priority now... so thats why im a little dissapointed of yonah.
i gotta admit that for beeing smaller than 2 dothans its performing pretty good.
but you have to admit, nobody was really "wow´ed" by the yonah benchmarks and specs we saw until now... its a nice cpu, but nothing that makes me start saving money to buy one and get excited over if you know what i mean...
Um, no
266FSB and 333FSB parts 1066 and 1333 bus speed
That's 20W per dualcore at 2GGz. There were 2 2GHz dualcore Sossamans in the HKEPC system. And the maximum power usage was 80W.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Those must be those stock 50W parts that the Inq was talking about..Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Too bad Yonah will be 32-bit only :(
With such a high FSB, Yonah's IPC should be higher than the K8s.
on computerbase they said the 1.5ghz dual dual core system consumed 90W.Quote:
Originally Posted by accord99
hkepc says 31W for the 2ghz dual core chip.
the screen shows 80W but you can see that the system isnt fully loaded at the moment the pic was taken, shows 29% cpu usage in the task manager.
30W for 2ghz dual core sounds nice, really nice!
maybe intel is going to use the bad chips on the desktop bumping lots of volts through them so they clock high and using the good ones with low vcore in the thin serverblade market or mobiles?
ah, THATS more like it! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-bit labs
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...212171644.html
nice headline there..
if it's slow in sandra, then it must suck...
Me stupid maybe, but how did you get 75%?Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
How are you gonna celebrate your 20000th post?:toast:
Fresh review on Anand's site:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2648
Still no direct comparision of power consumption.
by ordering a set of 1600pros to run crossfire :D heheheQuote:
Originally Posted by Mats
my bad :D
83 is 62.5% of 133 not 75%
thats not true...Quote:
Given the short amount of time we had for benchmarking we were forced to compare to older numbers from previous reviews, which unfortunately lacked updated gaming, encoding and 3D rendering tests.
they were given a short amount of time? by who? how?
other sites were reviewing it and they wanted to be first?
who? theres no other review, not even a preview by anybody else...
they had to return the cpu or mainboard?
obviously not as they ran a load more tests and post them in this second part.
sorry for the rant, but anandtech is posting shorter and less complex articles and reviews all the time and excuse it by saying they didnt have time and will post a second part. a bunch of those second parts have never been made...
anandtech is more and more moving to a preview site instead of a review site.
So the question isn't just how competitive Yonah is at 2.0GHz, but how high can Yonah go? Unfortunately our test platform wouldn't allow us to overclock our chip very far, but thankfully we've got access to a decent amount of Intel's future roadmaps so we can at least see what's going to happen to Yonah over the next year.
wow, that sounds like they didnt even reach 2.3ghz when they tried to oc their yonah cpu :eek:Quote:
While Yonah will make its debut at a maximum speed of 2.16GHz it will actually only receive a single speed bump before Merom's release at the end of the year. That means that we'll see a 2.33GHz Yonah after the middle of the year, but we'll have to turn to Merom to get any higher clock speeds.
if you ask me this clock target thing is bs... dothan ocs just as good as other cpus as its designed for low power...Quote:
Looking back to our initial articles on the Pentium M's architecture you'll remember that one of the important aspects of its design is that all critical paths in the chip were slowed down to meet a maximum clock target. Meaning that Intel set a clock target for the CPU and made sure that the chip ran at that speed or below, and did not optimize any paths that would have allowed the CPU to run higher. Instead, the Pentium M team depended on the manufacturing folks to give them additional clock speed headroom by providing smaller manufacturing processes every 2 years. In other words, the Pentium M was never designed for high clock speeds, which is why it debuted at 1.5GHz and has still not even reached 2.33GHz today.
"intel core duo" what a lame brandname for yonah :/
yonah sounds 10x better...
anyways, the results look good, but again, not as good as i had hoped :D hehehe i know im always expecting a lot and am usually dissapointed in new stuff, but i mean seriously... even with a higher fsb i dont see yonah beating the x2s on the orb...