Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 86

Thread: Intel Reference P55 MB + Lynnfield 2.66G Test

  1. #1
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Taiwan
    Posts
    882

    Intel Reference P55 MB + Lynnfield 2.66G Test


    Intel Reference P55 MB


    CPU-Z

    More Test and pic

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    470
    i always thought lynnfield didnt have ht. but in cpuz that it has 8 threads, some error or what?!

  3. #3
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by haschioz View Post
    i always thought lynnfield didnt have ht. but in cpuz that it has 8 threads, some error or what?!
    It does have HT and also turbomode. However it can be different with some models.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  4. #4
    all outta gum
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    3,390
    Weaker than 920 in Vantage CPU by around ~1000 pts.
    www.teampclab.pl
    MOA 2009 Poland #2, AMD Black Ops 2010, MOA 2011 Poland #1, MOA 2011 EMEA #12

    Test bench: empty

  5. #5
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Taiwan
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by haschioz View Post
    i always thought lynnfield didnt have ht. but in cpuz that it has 8 threads, some error or what?!

  6. #6
    Live Long And Overclock
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    14,058


    Cinebench from the site.

    i7 920 STOCK Cinebench: 15.2K
    PII 925 STOCK Cinebench: 11.8k
    Core i5 2.66Ghz STOCK Cinebench: 11.4k

    Considering that the 2.66Ghz Lynnfield will be in the same price range as the PII 925, it looks like Intel has made it very clear what the purpose or the i5 will be: to keep PII in check.

    Perkam

  7. #7
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    The turbomode on Lynnfield is brutal. I guess we will see very high game performance.

    Quote Originally Posted by xoqolatl View Post
    Weaker than 920 in Vantage CPU by around ~1000 pts.
    Maybe due to singlechannel memory? I wonder why only 1 stick in the picture hehe.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    470
    perkam, the cinebench had only 4 threads enabled.
    whats the points of an i5 with all 8 threads?

  9. #9
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Im quite sure all the benches run is with single channel. A 2.66Ghz i5 will be almost identical to a i920. They use the exact same core. Only difference is dualchannel vs tripplechannel and ondie PCIe vs QPI+X58.

    And a beefier turbomode on i5.

    Cinebench is also abit proving of this. i7 gets way higher multiprocessor speedup. And they are identical.
    Last edited by Shintai; 05-23-2009 at 08:39 AM.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  10. #10
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    912
    I wonder what the flash modules that fit in the little DIMM slot will cost. And what the speeds will be like for those.

  11. #11
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by bowman View Post
    I wonder what the flash modules that fit in the little DIMM slot will cost. And what the speeds will be like for those.
    I would be bold to say its useless for desktops. Its the robson flash cache for HDs. And depending on size I say 10-25$.

    Unless you hook up some 4200rpm 2" disk I doubt it will give much. And since we stand in front of the SSD revolution I say its dumb.

    But again, its a reference/validation board that also applies to laptop designs. But even with intels 80GB SSD to cost something around 150$ at christmas time. Aint it time for robson to die?
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  12. #12
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    Im quite sure all the benches run is with single channel. A 2.66Ghz i5 will be almost identical to a i920. They use the exact same core. Only difference is dualchannel vs tripplechannel and ondie PCIe vs QPI+X58.

    And a beefier turbomode on i5.

    Cinebench is also abit proving of this. i7 gets way higher multiprocessor speedup. And they are identical.
    You seem to be forgetting that the 2,66 i5 won't have hyperthreading...

    Also the multiprocessor speedup seems way low - is this just a testament of lack of bandwith or something else?

  13. #13
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Shipai
    Posts
    31,147
    well, intel CLAIMS robson boosts hdd speeds to that of SSD's...

    their cinebench are a tad slow, but its not sc mem... for me sc is faster in cinebench than dc for some reason... not surprising, its the same on i7 iirc
    must be really slow mem or the bios is really really untweaked, which wouldnt be surprising for a ref board...

    lynnfield perf is nothing extraordinary at all...

    how fast is a core i7 at 2.66 in superpi 1m with ddr3 1066 777 dual channel?

  14. #14
    Diablo 3! Who's Excited?
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    9,412
    Core i7 with trip channel and dual channel has been shown to be within a few percentage points of each other in most applications.. so Core i5 will cannibalize Core i7 sales with it's lower price point and similar performance. Core i5 will be great for crunchers and such

  15. #15
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Shimla , India
    Posts
    2,631
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    Im quite sure all the benches run is with single channel. A 2.66Ghz i5 will be almost identical to a i920. They use the exact same core. Only difference is dualchannel vs tripplechannel and ondie PCIe vs QPI+X58.

    And a beefier turbomode on i5.

    Cinebench is also abit proving of this. i7 gets way higher multiprocessor speedup. And they are identical.
    Yes they use the same core but the internal interconnects "DMI" are way slower than the i7 QPI as you mentioned.

    If anything this is more comparable to the Phenom II and Core Quad's.

    The turbomode is beefier because i think the TDP is lower than i7's.

  16. #16
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Shipai
    Posts
    31,147
    seeing the huge turbo boost speeds, i wouldnt be susprised if i5 even beats i7 in some tests since most apps are still single threadded...
    of course, when overclocking this wont matter, but for stock performance turbo really makes i5 a whole lot more attractive

    btw, did anybody else notice that westmere only supports ddr3 1066? 0_o

  17. #17
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Shimla , India
    Posts
    2,631
    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    seeing the huge turbo boost speeds, i wouldnt be susprised if i5 even beats i7 in some tests since most apps are still single threadded...
    of course, when overclocking this wont matter, but for stock performance turbo really makes i5 a whole lot more attractive

    btw, did anybody else notice that westmere only supports ddr3 1066? 0_o
    I think its got something to do with the reason why intel does not wanna sport a higher than 1066 speed on the i7.

    Odd that i7's shrink cant officially support more than 1066 same as i7. Maybe a QIP thing or Triple channel thing who knows...

  18. #18
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Shipai
    Posts
    31,147
    i think its cause it takes a lot of time to test and tweak the mrc code for 1333 and up... and they think its not needed...
    but weird, i think 6 cores and 12 threads will def benefit from ddr3 1333 and up...

  19. #19
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by ajaidev View Post
    Yes they use the same core but the internal interconnects "DMI" are way slower than the i7 QPI as you mentioned.

    If anything this is more comparable to the Phenom II and Core Quad's.

    The turbomode is beefier because i think the TDP is lower than i7's.
    i7 uses the same DMI interface between ICH10R and X58.

    i5/i3 uses DMI between PCH and the CPU. And PCH=ICH10R in functionality. X58 is simply a PCIe switch for 36 PCIe lanes. i5 got an ondie PCIe x16.

    Also the performance wouldnt matter a single bit in those tests. The only outside thing that matters is memory.

    Nope, its a good classic single instead of dualchannel

    Quote Originally Posted by Boissez View Post
    You seem to be forgetting that the 2,66 i5 won't have hyperthreading...

    Also the multiprocessor speedup seems way low - is this just a testament of lack of bandwith or something else?
    I compared it to an i7 with HT disabled. With HT on the multiprocessor speedup would be above 4x (I think it was 4.15x with HT on and 3.55x without HT).

    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    i think its cause it takes a lot of time to test and tweak the mrc code for 1333 and up... and they think its not needed...
    but weird, i think 6 cores and 12 threads will def benefit from ddr3 1333 and up...
    The tripplechannel seems to outpace it and Intel selected memory timings for speed due to that. For Xeons only the higher end with fast QPI got 1333 to fuel the NUMA.
    Last edited by Shintai; 05-23-2009 at 09:47 AM.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  20. #20
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,700
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler View Post
    Core i7 with trip channel and dual channel has been shown to be within a few percentage points of each other in most applications.. so Core i5 will cannibalize Core i7 sales with it's lower price point and similar performance. Core i5 will be great for crunchers and such
    I agree. Though, GPU folders/crunchers, in that price range, will probably stay with PII or C2Q. If they have a bit higher of a budget, then i7.


    Core i7 920 D0 B-batch (4.1) (Kinda Stable?) | DFI X58 T3eH8 (Fed up with its' issues, may get a new board soon) | Patriot 1600 (9-9-9-24) (for now) | XFX HD 4890 (971/1065) (for now) |
    80GB X25-m G2 | WD 640GB | PCP&C 750 | Dell 2408 LCD | NEC 1970GX LCD | Win7 Pro | CoolerMaster ATCS 840 {Modded to reverse-ATX, WC'ing internal}

    CPU Loop: MCP655 > HK 3.0 LT > ST 320 (3x Scythe G's) > ST Res >Pump
    GPU Loop: MCP655 > MCW-60 > PA160 (1x YL D12SH) > ST Res > BIP 220 (2x YL D12SH) >Pump

  21. #21
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    The original board back in october 2008 havent changed much


    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  22. #22
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Shipai
    Posts
    31,147
    wow pciE is that small huh? makes it obvious again that x58 was NOT just a pciE hub

    wtf is wrong with intels board btw?
    green pcb? 4 pin cpu pwm plug? no 90 degree angle sata slots?
    not a single solid cap, 2+1+1 analog cpu pwm, cheap components, terrible slot layout, fugliest heatsink ever, not to mention the slot colors


  23. #23
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    wow pciE is that small huh? makes it obvious again that x58 was NOT just a pciE hub

    wtf is wrong with intels board btw?
    green pcb? 4 pin cpu pwm plug? no 90 degree angle sata slots?
    not a single solid cap, 2+1+1 analog cpu pwm, cheap components, terrible slot layout, fugliest heatsink ever, not to mention the slot colors

    Its validation boards
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  24. #24
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    3,433
    motherboard looks like its forgot some stuff on it :P
    "Cast off your fear. Look forward. Never stand still, retreat and you will age. Hesitate and you will die. SHOUT! My name is"
    //James

  25. #25
    Hardware Nightmare
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Taipei :)
    Posts
    854
    Heh, I like that mictor connector on the right edge near CPU for debug and MSRR hacks via JTAG :-D
    Taking GND reference from another galaxy

    Electronics engineering @ extreme overclocker
    LN2: Cel347@8199.5MHz,920@5300,E8600@6610,QX9650@5700,X 3050@4311,X3470@5060

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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