Anandtech benches Nehalem

[Syn.]

Man are you for real. Did Intel not use an imc first anyway.

Looks like there is going to be a lot of sore fanboys about here before the nehalem dust settles .

Yea, so you are saying that Nehalem isnt following in the same footsteps that AMD started with K8?

Please for future references i am not a fanboy and as such dont feel bad about anything. It actually made me quite happy to see Intel bring out another great performing architecture. I just thought i might bring in a bit more constructive post to this thread then another "ROFL!!! GO Intel!!! AMD SUXS ASS!!!".

Here are some quote's from the article that i think you might find interesting after finding my post so funny.

Nehalem implements a very Phenom-like memory hierarchy

While Intel did a lot of tinkering with Nehalem's caches, the inclusion of a multi-channel on-die DDR3 memory controller was the most apparent change. AMD has been using an integrated memory controller (IMC) since 2003 on its K8 based microprocessors and for years Intel has resisted doing the same, citing complexities in choosing what memory to support among other reasons for why it didn't follow in AMD's footsteps.

It was at the same dinner that Pat mentioned Intel may do a chip with an integrated memory controller much like AMD, but that an IMC wouldn't solve the problem of idle execution units - only indirectly mitigate it. With Nehalem, Intel managed to combine both - and it only took 6 years to pull it off.

and finally

Pat also brought up another very good point at that dinner. He turned to me and said that you can only integrate a memory controller once, what do you do next to improve performance? Intel has managed to keep increasing performance, but what I really want to see is what happens at the next tock.

[Shintai]

K8 copied the IMC from 386SL and 486SL.

Phenom/Barcelona copied its cache hierachy from Itanium and other big tin.

The only thing "new" is basicly the HT.

In short, you make no sense Syn...unless you only look over a tiny tiny period of time and exclude other products.

[freeloader]

I didn't convert to Intel in 2006 or later - I haven't even tried a Core 2 platform, Conroe or Penryn.

What do you guys think it'll be like going from a 90nm AMD Athlon to this?

Unless you're doing distributed computing or something that requires 100% load for a few hours at a time, you'll notice nothing.

[gallag]

This makes me wonder, now that they finally implemented everything AMD invented so far what will they do next?

Come on mate, You make it sound like Intel does nothing but copy AMD and have never thought of anything themselves.

What did they copy exactly?

[freeloader]

K8 copied the IMC from 386SL and 486SL.

Phenom/Barcelona copied its cache hierachy from Itanium and other big tin.

The only thing "new" is basicly the HT.

In short, you make no sense Syn...unless you only look over a tiny tiny period of time and exclude other products.

I see you're living up to your nickname, "ShINTEL" as usual. Spread some more FUD if you wish.

[Shintai]

I see you're living up to your nickname, "ShINTEL" as usual. Spread some more FUD if you wish.

What part is fud? Please elaborate.

Would it be this part?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_laptops

introduction of the Intel 386SL processor, designed for the specific power needs of laptops, marked the point at which laptop needs were included in CPU design. The 386SL integrated a 386SX core with a memory controller and this was paired with an I/O chip to create the SL chipset. It was more integrated than any previous solution although its cost was higher. It was heavily adopted by the major notebook brands of the time. Intel followed this with the 486SL chipset which used the same architecture. However, Intel had to abandon this design approach as it introduced its Pentium series.

Or would it be this part?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium

From 2002 to 2006, Itanium 2 processors shared a common cache hierarchy. They had 16 KiB of Level 1 instruction cache and 16 KiB of Level 1 data cache. The L2 cache was unified (both instruction and data) and is 256 KiB. The Level 3 cache was also unified and varied in size from 1.5 MiB to 24 MiB.

[Syn.]

K8 copied the IMC from 386SL and 486SL.

Phenom/Barcelona copied its cache hierachy from Itanium and other big tin.

The only thing "new" is basicly the HT.

In short, you make no sense Syn...unless you only look over a tiny tiny period of time and exclude other products.

Come on mate, You make it sound like Intel does nothing but copy AMD and have never thought of anything themselves.

What did they copy exactly?

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...8&postcount=51

I am limiting my references to Nehalem only seeing as this is a thread about Preview Article of Nehalem ES CPU's. Nehalem is a combination of everything that AMD and Intel invented in the last decade, if you disagree please explain why.

[kiikkuja]

Has anybody somekind of idea about the mobo and proc pricing?

Nehalem looks like a product I would want.

[Shintai]

Has anybody somekind of idea about the mobo and proc pricing?

Nehalem looks like a product I would want.

Depends what type. For X58+Bloomsfield I would expect it to cost as X38 boards and CPUs from 400-500$ and up.

Lynnsfield starts under those 4-500$ and the Auburndale for alot less.

[xlink]

Smoked and baked! I hope the power consumption can be tweaked, even tho its still alot better performance/watt.

first consider this - the tri chanel nehalem setup had one extra stick of RAM. that's what 5-10 W right there
they have 6 months to improve manufacturing...
do you really think that nehalem will launch using more power at a given clock speed? chanches are the chip itself will launch with TDP 5-10W lower than penryn.

this is quite a leap, it's what, 30-50% faster than conroe...

[zaarath]

If you do the Cinebench math based on my stock result then 2.66Ghz Nehalem = 2.91Ghz Penryn. If you do it based on Anand's result then 2.66Ghz Nehalem = 3.29Ghz Penryn. So maybe this is why he said it was faster than any stock Penryn?

However it begs the question what the hell kind of screwed up mess did he use to get those Penryn benchmarks. They are terrible but he obviously knows what he is doing, so I could only think he lowballed the Penryn results on purpose to make the story more sensational and dramatic.

Your score is based on vista 64, Anand results are on vista 32, it is a known fact that Cinebench 10 runs faster under 64bit OS.

[G.Foyle]

OT: looks like Anandtech is running out of bandwidth, pages take forever to load or won't load at all...

[Carfax]

I'm not moving to Nehalem until it hits 32nm.

[kiikkuja]

Depends what type. For X58+Bloomsfield I would expect it to cost as X38 boards and CPUs from 400-500$ and up.

Lynnsfield starts under those 4-500$ and the Auburndale for alot less.

The bloomfield one as it is the poweruser/enthusiast model/package is it not?

So the overall cost with 3 sticks of RAM would be around 1000€ or over.

[Zucker2k]

Man, if you're NV this has to hurt. Imagine the biggest party of the year, and you get a note saying: "sorry, but the invitation we sent to you earlier was a mistake. Please accept our apologies."

[Karak]

Look at the table with 3dsmax score breakdown
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/int...spx?i=3326&p=7

Only ~10% faster in SpaceFlyby?
I guess that represents Nehalem single-threaded performance improvement :/
Could be better with mature mobo's, but I guess we shouldn't expect too much.

[awdrifter]

Damn that's some insane performance. Too bad it won't be oc'able. Hopefully someone will figure out some mod so we can oc. 20x multi would be crazy.

[Shintai]

Damn that's some insane performance. Too bad it won't be oc'able. Hopefully someone will figure out some mod so we can oc. 20x multi would be crazy.

But it can OC....who told you it cant? Fuad?

[RealTelstar]

About a 30% perf increase is what I would have expcted. Nothing exceptional.

It will take one year before a nehalem can beat a 4gig wolfie for gaming

[Shintai]

About a 30% perf increase is what I would have expcted. Nothing exceptional.

It will take one year before a nehalem can beat a 4gig wolfie for gaming

Unless you OC the nehalem too

[naokaji]

first consider this - the tri chanel nehalem setup had one extra stick of RAM. that's what 5-10 W right there
they have 6 months to improve manufacturing...
do you really think that nehalem will launch using more power at a given clock speed? chanches are the chip itself will launch with TDP 5-10W lower than penryn.

this is quite a leap, it's what, 30-50% faster than conroe...

that + power saving features on the nehalem boards where most likely not working properly yet.

[alucasa]

Is it just me, or does this so-called "discussion" sound a lot like those fights we had when Conroe ES was reviewed for the first time ?

[GoThr3k]

Why would they do that? That would be like testing a high performance V8 with 7 spark plugs removed.

why? because most applications today are single threaded?
its nice to see nehalem own in multithreaded benches, but we all knew that was about to happen....
But i want to see single threaded performance also

[Metroid]

I think there is not a real reason why to increase the performance upwards this, unless AMD comes with something good, Intel will keep doing its job. Refresh chips 5 to 10% new architecture 15 to 30% performance increase.

This quote from a month ago stands my point.

This is a great news and more important it came from a very trustful source. The issues were very well explained.

Single threaded applications should not really be taken in account as most of the applications use 2 cores, unless somebody is still living in the stone age.

Nehalem only tends to get better and better with new bios. What Intel really wants to show to developers is that they could adopt more than 2 cores example(4 to 8 threads scalar).

It is the Multithreaded era, AMD and Intel are together, adapt or die soon or later.

Metroid.

[Mungri]

I'm not moving to Nehalem until it hits 32nm.

Same here. I didnt get Core 2 untill it hit 45 nm. The earlier releases tempted me greatly, but my S939 system was still running everything out there back then and I didnt need to upgrade.

I'm sure that my E8400 will be good enough for another 12-24 months, and I can wait for Nehalem to fully mature and improve before getting one.

As for AMD dying, dont be too sure on that. The enthusiast community only makes up around 1% of the market. Average Joe buying a PC doesnt know which is better out of Intel and AMD, and also there are plenty of AMD fanboys that wont touch Intel CPU's no matter how much better they are.

There are far more people that play PC games that still buy Phenoms over a Core 2 Duo or Quad for whatever reason they have then you would expect, and refuse to listen to advice or accept that Intel's CPU's are better for games. Fanboys will be fanboys, regardless of how much faster one companies products are over another.

I myself used AMD for 10 years. My last Intel CPU was a Pentium 100 and since then I have been using AMD. But I wasnt going to buy an AM2 setup over my previous S939 when there was virtually no difference at all other then the type of memory, whereas the Intel setup geve me a huge performance increase over what I previously had.

why? because most applications today are single threaded?
its nice to see nehalem own in multithreaded benches, but we all knew that was about to happen....
But i want to see single threaded performance also

They will be great in single threaded applications also, they arent going to perform any worse then the Core 2 Quads. Hopefully we will start to see much more use of multi threading and multi core CPU's now. They have been around for ages and are used in most PC's today, whether it is 2 or 4 cores. Now is the time for software developers to make the step towards multi threading and to take advantage of the technology we have available.