Page 5 of 63 FirstFirst ... 23456781555 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 1572

Thread: Nehalem-EP......BLOOMFIELD

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,602
    Quote Originally Posted by savantu View Post
    Isn't it a bit early ?
    Umm way too early. I remember people going crazy over Penryn quads expecting crazy overclocks but it didn't happen. Speculation is just that.

  2. #102
    I am Xtreme Donnie27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,206
    Quote Originally Posted by MomijiTMO View Post
    Umm way too early. I remember people going crazy over Penryn quads expecting crazy overclocks but it didn't happen. Speculation is just that.
    I don't know about that, I don't remember a lot of folks saying something like that? This forum isn't crazy like a few others. Most estimated it would be easier to get Dual Core to 4GHz and Quad to 3.6GHz. Even when others talked about 4GHz for Quad, most folks agreed maybe with water and extra voltage.
    Quote Originally Posted by Movieman
    With the two approaches to "how" to design a processor WE are the lucky ones as we get to choose what is important to us as individuals.
    For that we should thank BOTH (AMD and Intel) companies!


    Posted by duploxxx
    I am sure JF is relaxed and smiling these days with there intended launch schedule. SNB Xeon servers on the other hand....
    Posted by gallag
    there yo go bringing intel into a amd thread again lol, if that was someone droping a dig at amd you would be crying like a girl.
    qft!

  3. #103
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    2,061
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinacolada View Post
    I'm passing Nehalem and I see no point in upgrade.

    10% on single core and 20% on multicore is not enough to consider me buying new : CPU,RAM,mobo and cooling.
    Penryn is good enough until cheap octalcores appear which will offer more than 100% multithreaded improvements than quadcore Penryn.
    Expect the performance improvements to increase significantly once motherboards have the kinks worked out. Any application that is constrained by memory performance will benefit much more with Nehalem.

    Check out how your current memory is being bottle-necked by the FSB and how Nehalem's triple-channel DDR3 IMC really opens the spill-way on RAM bandwidth...

    Note that Nehalem's tri-channel DDR3-1333 peak bandwidth is on par with Penryn L2 cache! (the likes of which would never be seen on Penryn with it's highly bottlenecked FSB).



    Source
    Last edited by virtualrain; 06-16-2008 at 05:19 PM.

  4. #104
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    near Boston, MA, USA
    Posts
    1,966
    DDR3 1333 is pretty cheap. It's the 1800-2000 stuff that gets pricey. Even if the advanced Nehalem offers 1600, that won't be too bad for 6gb triple sticks come Q4.

  5. #105
    Xtreme Member JCornell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    (.)(.)
    Posts
    208
    2.93GHz Rev.B0


    ...
    Last edited by JCornell; 06-18-2008 at 03:47 AM.
    ===N/A===

  6. #106
    Xtreme Mentor STaRGaZeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Spain, EU
    Posts
    2,947
    Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)


    Quote Originally Posted by PerryR, on John Fruehe (JF-AMD) View Post
    Pretty much. Plus, he's here voluntarily.

  7. #107
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,173
    Around 10% faster than Penryn @the same clock,not bad but not earth shattering.We need something else apart from useless Spi1m(wPrime ie. where multicore shines)

  8. #108
    Xtreme Cruncher Shintai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,745
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    Around 10% faster than Penryn @the same clock,not bad but not earth shattering.We need something else apart from useless Spi1m(wPrime ie. where multicore shines)
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=3326

    And thats still singlechannel
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  9. #109
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,476
    anyone can upload the pic on another image hoster, photobucket is down for me since yeaterday...

  10. #110
    Xtreme Addict Chri$ch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet331 View Post
    anyone can upload the pic on another image hoster, photobucket is down for me since yeaterday...

  11. #111
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by virtualrain View Post
    Check out how your current memory is being bottle-necked by the FSB and how Nehalem's triple-channel DDR3 IMC really opens the spill-way on RAM bandwidth...

    Note that Nehalem's tri-channel DDR3-1333 peak bandwidth is on par with Penryn L2 cache! (the likes of which would never be seen on Penryn with it's highly bottlenecked FSB).
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2991
    "In our recent DDR3 vs. DDR2 review we discovered a 16% to 18% improvement in memory bandwidth with the P35 chipset. This translated into a 2% to 5% increase in real world performance in some computer applications.

    This bandwith will be only for overpriced Bloomfield Nehalem,Nehalems in lower price will come in 2H 2009 and will have only dual channel.I expect Bloomfield setup to be 100-150% more expensive than Penryn setup (Intel will position Bloomfield as high-end system and it will cost) with performance around 10-20% single thread ,20-40% multithread.New drivers and better mobos won't help more than 1-3%.

    So until you really need new computer or you are into multithreaded apps upgrade to quadcore Nehalem does make sense.Otherwise you will pay 100% more for about 10-20% improvement - not worth IMO for typical user it's much wiser to upgrade GPU or wait for cheap SSDs.
    Quadcore penryn is good enough to wait till 2H 2009 for 32nm shrink where price/performance ration against Penryn will be much better.Most probably octalcores will be available then.

    People are expecting marvels from Nehalem but it will be more evolution than revolution.

  12. #112
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Chri$ch View Post
    thx mate.

  13. #113
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinacolada View Post
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2991
    "In our recent DDR3 vs. DDR2 review we discovered a 16% to 18% improvement in memory bandwidth with the P35 chipset. This translated into a 2% to 5% increase in real world performance in some computer applications.

    This bandwith will be only for overpriced Bloomfield Nehalem,Nehalems in lower price will come in 2H 2009 and will have only dual channel.I expect Bloomfield setup to be 100-150% more expensive than Penryn setup (Intel will position Bloomfield as high-end system and it will cost) with performance around 10-20% single thread ,20-40% multithread.New drivers and better mobos won't help more than 1-3%.

    So until you really need new computer or you are into multithreaded apps upgrade to quadcore Nehalem does make sense.Otherwise you will pay 100% more for about 10-20% improvement - not worth IMO for typical user it's much wiser to upgrade GPU or wait for cheap SSDs.
    Quadcore penryn is good enough to wait till 2H 2009 for 32nm shrink where price/performance ration against Penryn will be much better.Most probably octalcores will be available then.

    People are expecting marvels from Nehalem but it will be more evolution than revolution.

    how can you compare fsb to QPI/IMC ?

  14. #114
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,173
    Shintai,Pinacolada summed it up well here:
    So until you really need new computer or you are into multithreaded apps upgrade to quadcore Nehalem does make sense.Otherwise you will pay 100% more for about 10-20% improvement - not worth IMO for typical user it's much wiser to upgrade GPU or wait for cheap SSDs.
    Quadcore penryn is good enough to wait till 2H 2009 for 32nm shrink where price/performance ration against Penryn will be much better.Most probably octalcores will be available then.

    People are expecting marvels from Nehalem but it will be more evolution than revolution.

  15. #115
    I am Xtreme Donnie27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,206
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    Shintai,Pinacolada summed it up well here:
    So this isn't thread crapping,

  16. #116
    Xtreme Enthusiast bowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinacolada View Post
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2991
    "In our recent DDR3 vs. DDR2 review we discovered a 16% to 18% improvement in memory bandwidth with the P35 chipset. This translated into a 2% to 5% increase in real world performance in some computer applications.

    This bandwith will be only for overpriced Bloomfield Nehalem,Nehalems in lower price will come in 2H 2009 and will have only dual channel.I expect Bloomfield setup to be 100-150% more expensive than Penryn setup (Intel will position Bloomfield as high-end system and it will cost) with performance around 10-20% single thread ,20-40% multithread.New drivers and better mobos won't help more than 1-3%.

    So until you really need new computer or you are into multithreaded apps upgrade to quadcore Nehalem does make sense.Otherwise you will pay 100% more for about 10-20% improvement - not worth IMO for typical user it's much wiser to upgrade GPU or wait for cheap SSDs.
    Quadcore penryn is good enough to wait till 2H 2009 for 32nm shrink where price/performance ration against Penryn will be much better.Most probably octalcores will be available then.

    People are expecting marvels from Nehalem but it will be more evolution than revolution.
    Firstly, Bloomfield will launch in the Q9450, Q9550 and QX brackets - if you think a mainstream quad core Penryn is 'overpriced' to begin with then I guess the 2009 Lynnfield one will be too.

    For me upgrading the GPU is of no use because it's an 8800GTX, it plays every single game just fine and even folds quite quickly. The GT200 is an overpriced incremental upgrade that brings nothing new to the table, just more of the same.

    My CPU, on the other hand, is a 90nm AMD dual-core. Maybe it's not worth it for all your Penryn owners to upgrade, but everyone doesn't have Penryn.

  17. #117
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Donnie27 View Post
    So this isn't thread crapping,
    Hmm i quote another user's opinion(which btw is realistic),i don't call out any1 and you call that thread crapping?Get a grip man.I thought the Fugger's post was enough,seems not

    Quote Originally Posted by bowman
    My CPU, on the other hand, is a 90nm AMD dual-core. Maybe it's not worth it for all your Penryn owners to upgrade, but everyone doesn't have Penryn.
    I agree,in that case upgrade is well worth it.

  18. #118
    I am Xtreme Donnie27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,206
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    Hmm i quote another user's opinion(which btw is realistic),i don't call out any1 and you call that thread crapping?Get a grip man.I thought the Fugger's post was enough,seems not
    Sorry, talking about overpriced without a price list, trying to downplay performance with only estimations, ummm, sounds like crapping to me!

  19. #119
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,173
    It was a quote from another user.Get it?!This is so amusing.

  20. #120
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by JCornell View Post
    2.93GHz Rev.B0
    ...
    ...
    Please post some memory scores.
    Quote Originally Posted by Heinz Guderian View Post
    There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people.

  21. #121
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,476
    Quote Originally Posted by savantu View Post
    Please post some memory scores.
    i second that, maybe some everest scores?

  22. #122
    I am Xtreme Donnie27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,206
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    It was a quote from another user.Get it?!This is so amusing.
    Yes you are amusing LOL!

  23. #123
    I am Xtreme Donnie27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet331 View Post
    i second that, maybe some everest scores?
    I'd like to see them as well.

    But we'll still run into a problem. Unless the user is stressing the system, most of the time Bandwidth isn't a bottleneck now.

  24. #124
    Xtreme Member JCornell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    (.)(.)
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet331 View Post
    i second that, maybe some everest scores?
    Can't run everest, it crash while click the everest.exe

    I did run CINEBENCH R10 : Rendering (xCPU)
    ===N/A===

  25. #125
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,476
    damn would have been to good.

    same with sisoft sandra?

Page 5 of 63 FirstFirst ... 23456781555 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •