It's been a while since I've banned anyone, and I'm itching...
It's been a while since I've banned anyone, and I'm itching...
Originally Posted by Nedjo
Once again: as the scene that's being rendered simpler - there's less work to be done for CPU - less geometry to feed GPU, less traficking over the PEG, less driver overhead to deal with...
I agree that there's a point in testing CPU's where GPU is becoming bottleneck and it shouldn't be passed for the sake of shadowing CPU performance, but going so low as Kyle did is ewen worse 'cos it misleads readers about true potential and usability of CPUs in gaming scenarios
ABSOLUTELY! If I'm spending serious money on new powerful HW I want to see how it performs on my big 30" TFT, and apparently here's the answer:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3634&p=9
2560x1600:
He don't have clue... or maybe does... anyhow he's misleading readers! If he wanted to stress out CPU in gaming he should have run software rendering of Unreal 1 and Quake 1 in 640x480!!
Insulating CPU in trying to portrait gaming performance is by definition nonsense, but you can make of it something if you know how to do it, and I've suggested how! And as someone pointed xbit is using that approach, as well as anandetch... http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3634&p=8
but yeah Kyle is smartest of them all
Eh you did.
Some of us would rather go without a CPU, (if AMD went under) than give our cash to Intel....
I cannot see how anyone can consider an AMD platform today.
Oh well, guess the AMD fanbois will have to clutch at any staws they can reach right now.
No flames intended...
Just love it when you try to flamebite people with the same stuff over and over again... and its esepcial funny since, most of your questions where already answerd in a thread you posted....Why don't you explain how prefetchers work and when they work?
While doing that you can also explain the differences in how the cache work on i5/i7 vs Phenom II
It is one thing to just say someone don't know, but to explain is another ballgame
... gosh is simply amazing... his question has been answered a thousand times and he has been proven wrong a thousand times but I guess the green smoke is too blinding for him.
Last edited by Clairvoyant129; 09-08-2009 at 05:15 PM.
Hopefully someone shows what the core i5 750 can hit with reasonable volts before long.... Something like lowest stable volts for 3.6g , 3.8g and 4.0g while still being stable on all course would be great.
This oh we need 1.5 volts for 3.6g is ridiculous and so is the fact that everyones pushing it to 4.2-4.5 at 1.4+ volts theres no way that will be stable specially since not all the reviewers had aftermarket heatsinks for it. Bnechmarking at that level on the stock heatsink is asking for blue screens, crashes and piossibly a fried chip in my opinion. 90 + degrees celcius no thank you.
That doesn't mean that gaming tests at real world resolutions (i.e. 1280x1024 and 1680x1050) fails to show the performance difference wrt different CPU's.Are you serious? As mentioned, he's not stressing the GPU. The lower the resolution, the more CPU bound the game is.
If it were up to you, you would probably want to test it with AA also.
Gaming with more detail is more stressful for the GPU, not so much the CPU. In case you didn't understand, he's trying to isolate the CPU performance.
That's why we have other benchmark test suites to test just the CPU. When it comes to testing CPU's and games, I'd like to see what difference a faster CPU can do for my graphics card with the settings I run my game at. No one on this forum (or any other PC hardware forum) runs their games at 640x480 and with minimum settings.
I suggest you throw out most of the components in your PC then.Some of us would rather go without a CPU, (if AMD went under) than give our cash to Intel.
No flames intended...
You do know that Intel collects royalties from the various technologies that they've invented other than the CPU itself? PCI Express, JEDEC, form factors, SATA, various I/O interconnects, CPU instructions, operating systems and circuitry are just some of the areas that Intel has either pioneered or contributed significant investment and reasearch into developing.
Last edited by Wesker; 09-08-2009 at 05:59 PM.
Everytime you buy an AMD CPU you give cash to Intel.Some of us would rather go without a CPU, (if AMD went under) than give our cash to Intel.
Yeah, yeah, you got me there! Darn licensing...Everytime you buy an AMD CPU you give cash to Intel.
Here you goSo u want to get the i5/i7 and play at 640x480??? Ohh okk so the logic is you get more frames...ohh
EDIT: Where the hell are all the mobo reviews?? Wanted a review of P7P55D Plain and P7P55D LE soo bad.....
ASUS P7P55D Motherboard Review
EliteBastards
MSI P55-GD80 Review
Guru3D
A look at Asus' P7P55D Deluxe, Gigabyte's GA-P55-UD6, and MSI's P55-GD65
The Tech Report
MSI P55-GD80 Motherboard Review
[H]ard|OCP
Which of the Asus boards, not including the maximus formula III is the best.
if you've read my post correctly you would notice that my comment about clueless is about Kyle's approach, not Anand'sEh you did.
Adobe is working on Flash Player support for 64-bit platforms as part of our ongoing commitment to the cross-platform compatibility of Flash Player. We expect to provide native support for 64-bit platforms in an upcoming release of Flash Player following the release of Flash Player 10.1.
Do people give any weighting to the min frame rates that the processors were showing in Dawn of War, Sacred 2, WoW and Prototype in Anand's review?
The i7-920 was a bit disappointing in 2 of those 4 games, compared to the i7-870, which seemed to be the best balanced of the group that includes the i7-870, i7-920, i5-750 and PHII965.
Thanks for the Asus P7P55D review. Waiting for the P7P55D LE one toughHere you go
ASUS P7P55D Motherboard Review
EliteBastards
MSI P55-GD80 Review
Guru3D
A look at Asus' P7P55D Deluxe, Gigabyte's GA-P55-UD6, and MSI's P55-GD65
The Tech Report
MSI P55-GD80 Motherboard Review
[H]ard|OCPalso does anyone know if P7P55D plain has a option in the BIOS to force the second slot into 4x mode. What i am looking for is running 16x and 4x "16x for the 5870 x2/GT300 and 4x for a RAID card, but the card is 8x"
In case of P7P55D LE the second slot is able to deliver only 4x and cant split the 2 slots into 8x/8x mode only 16x/4x is possible.
Coming Soon
Intel Core i5 750 and Core i7 870 Processors
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1060/1/
Intel Core i7 870 Processor
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...=362&Itemid=63
Last edited by onethreehill; 09-08-2009 at 11:47 PM.
Why don't you explain how prefetchers work and when they work?
While doing that you can also explain the differences in how the cache work on i5/i7 vs Phenom II
It is one thing to just say someone don't know, but to explain is another ballgame
You have some graphs (Phenom II cache)^^ ?
I've read so many reviews, it's hard to keep them all in my head... ouch!
on topic:
The i7-860 looks to be a winner!
Sure, you give up a little memory bandwidth, but gain slightly in everything else, over the i7-920. (at lower wattage too)
I'm looking to stick with low db air cooled gamer rig. OC, and 27/7 operation. I think the i7-860 is the real winner in the enthusiast market. We'll see this chip @ $219 before the Superbowl.
The P55 seems to be kind to memory, so a nice 8GB, 7-7-7-20 @ 1866Mhz seems easily doable for a near quite system. (Raven 2 case)
Strictly gaming and video encoding, etc...
Last edited by Xoulz; 09-09-2009 at 01:43 AM.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ntel_lynnfield
most reviews are testing same applicatioins, you don't need to keep them in your head.
i5 is very good and at last applications can move to threaded workloads. i7 did not sell enough and core 2 isn't an option
Last edited by gosh; 09-09-2009 at 03:45 AM.
^
-_- oooookayyy thers something quite wrong with this review....
870 can't be slower then the 920 in non bandwidth critical situations.... (audio encoding, pov and a few others....)
There are situations where the benches make sense (870 a tiniy bit faster then the 920 due to higher stock frequency), but some benches are just plain unbelivable (lame and flac comes to mind, just to mention a few examples).
Those graphs are skewed or something. How does the i5 750 constantly beat the i7 870 in many of those benches ..?
Makes no sense!
What is the difference in speed for the L3 cache in 920 vs 870?
"constantly"?
there was a test where hyperthreading might have been a problem
Even author by self admits that there is something wrong with the benches, which is not surprise since an unstable alpha version of OS was used and probably this version know nothing about the new hardware:
What is important to keep in mind though is that Intel Turbo Boost Technology was disabled on the processors during testing, since this functionality had not worked under Linux for increasing the clock frequency but instead appeared to cause some sporadic performance problems...
What is also missing from the equation is any thermal monitoring support for the P55 / Lynnfield processors using LM_Sensors on Linux, though that should come with time. Update: after starting to see a flow of Windows-based reviews today, it looks like there are some more serious Linux + Lynnfield problems at hand, which we are currently investigating.
2,13ghz vs 2,4ghz....
The L3 speed of the 870 is faster then that of the 920... (at stock)
Also apps that don't really have needs for huge memory bandwidth don't profit that much from faster L3.
And why does the 920 then performes better (also with HT) in contrast to the 870, which is basically the same cpu, just faster and performes worse.
Best example for that are again the audio encoding benchmarks.... how can a 870 perform worse then a 750 when the 920 is slower then the 870...
edit:
thx Kl0012 didn't noticed that, so basically that review is worthless
Well I also think it is a bit strange that phenom II 710 did perform that good vs i5/i7.
But what is good is that there is at least one site that do test other different software. Doing that it might be problems because Intel may not have prepared it(a joke)
You need only read one (or two) tests on sites that test the standard tests as everyone else (almost) so you know how they work.
The best thing with i5 is that I will soon have a portable that I can work on
Russian review of i5-750 Turbo on/Turbo off/overclock:
http://www.3dnews.ru/cpu/intel_core_i5_750/index3.htm
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks