Page 6 of 17 FirstFirst ... 345678916 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 405

Thread: The Sandy Bridge Preview (Anand)

  1. #126
    Xtreme Addict cegras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,094
    Copy pasta, since I couldn't have said it better myself:

    So the 3.1 GHz Sandy Bridge is 23% faster than a 2.8 GHz Nehalem. So roughly 10-15% faster clock for clock as Anand says in the teaser intro on the main page. Also, you get 10% less power. Not bad. However, that means that Bulldozer only has to slightly perform better than Nehalem to match Sandy Bridge clock-for-clock and live up to the 10-100W power envelope.

    I change my vote on the weekly poll to match Sandy Bridge performance.
    Be careful when comparing clock-for-clock. In the comments to the article, there was this exchange:

    ------------------------------
    "I take it turbo was also disabled on the rest of the parts used to compare, right?"

    "Turbo was enabled on everything else - SB performance should be higher for final parts.

    Take care,
    Anand"
    ------------------------------

    The Nehalems are tricky: given half-way decent cooling (which I'm sure AnandTech has), they will Turbo even when all 4 cores are active. Thus, the supposedly 2.8 GHz Nehalem actually runs at a minimum of 2.93 GHz and goes up to 3.33 GHz in single or dual threaded tasks. A lot depends on what Turbo scheme Intel has chosen for Sandy Bridge.
    E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
    Intel's atom is a terrible chip.

  2. #127
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    32
    So the 3.1 GHz Sandy Bridge is 23% faster than a 2.8 GHz Nehalem.
    but there is no 2.8 GHZ Nehalem in this test..

    760 is 3.06-3.33GHZ
    880 is 3.2-3.7GHZ

  3. #128
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,176
    Quote Originally Posted by terrace215 View Post
    Yeah, 20% IPC increases just fall from the trees everyday... totally worthless! Meanwhile, Phenom II owners will... what? wait until Q4 of next year to buy a new BD platform for a Zambezi that will be significantly behind the competition? That's right, BD is officially NOT Am3 compatible:

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...forms_AMD.html
    What a shocking revelation. That I posted about last week.

    BD will bring a bigger jump in perf than nehalem to sb.

    Intel is about to get athlon'd

  4. #129
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,479
    880 is 3,33ghz (2 speedbins )

    And if you look at Singelthreaded scores, the increase in performance is quite respectable... a 3,1ghz cpu beats a 3,73ghz cpu (ST)? Or in MT apps a 3,1ghz cpu beats a 3,33ghz cpu, and most of the time we are in the double digit range...

    So offering more performance then a 880 and consuming 20% less energy while doing it.

  5. #130
    Xtreme Member Booj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    300
    I want to see 3dmark 01 & 05 on SB

  6. #131
    I am Xtreme Hornet331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,479
    Quote Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides View Post
    What a shocking revelation. That I posted about last week.

    BD will bring a bigger jump in perf than nehalem to sb.

    Intel is about to get athlon'd
    You know that amd has deliver a performance boost of 35-40% over deneb (per core) to be in the range of SB, and thats with the current numbers, without turbo.

  7. #132
    Xtreme Enthusiast ridney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    547
    this is great news and a good performing chip + gpu, interesting times ahead. i'm still excited on what ontario/llano brings to the table though
    Phenom Monsta - Gallery
    AMD Phenom II X6 1055T | MSI 790FX-GD70 | Dominator 1600 C8 8GB | 4770 CF | 2xWD640GB Raid0 | 2xWD1.5TB Raid1 | Corsair HX850 |Lian-Li PC-7FW
    Enzotech Luna Rev.A | 2 x MCW60 | MCP-350 | XSPC Dual DDC Res | TFC Monsta 420/360 Limited Edition


    Canon EOS 7D | EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS | Nissin Di866 | D-Lite4 | 17" MiniSoft | 53" Midi-Octa | 7" Reflector + 20º Grid | Explorer XT SE | Crumpler 6MDH

  8. #133
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hiding under a blanky with a flash light
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides View Post
    Intel is about to get athlon'd
    In about 14 months. 'nuff said.

    I am predicting 1q 2012 release. Seriously.

  9. #134
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet331 View Post
    880 is 3,33ghz (2 speedbins )
    not 1 ?

    1/1/4/5
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors

  10. #135
    Xtreme Cruncher Chumbucket843's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bloomfield
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by flippin_waffles View Post
    Haha well, it looks like you're in for a world of hurt also. btw, how are those 32nm issues at intel coming along? Surely they've got it all worked out by now. No? Oh.
    2 failures i must fix.

    have you even read natarajan's paper? no. do you even understand the first thing about what makes a process good?

    for one thing it is quite concerning when at iedm 2009 there were many papers on new 32nm processes and none of them were from global foundries. intel has the best gate and metal pitch, the fastest drive current, almost 2x faster pmos performance, and the fastest SRAM. seeing that they recently posted record profits they must be doing something right with their god awful manufacturing and architecture.

    Quote Originally Posted by terrace215 View Post
    Yeah, 20% IPC increases just fall from the trees everyday... totally worthless! Meanwhile, Phenom II owners will... what? wait until Q4 of next year to buy a new BD platform for a Zambezi that will be significantly behind the competition? That's right, BD is officially NOT Am3 compatible:
    fail. IPC is a misleading performance metric. you must have never multithreaded code or understand how it works i take it.

  11. #136
    Xtreme Cruncher meanmoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    671
    This may be a ridiculous, but could someone please explain what "HT on" means on an i5 part stated to have 4C/4T?
    upgrading...

  12. #137
    Xtreme Mentor Olivon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    France - Bx
    Posts
    2,595
    Quote Originally Posted by meanmoe View Post
    This may be a ridiculous, but could someone please explain what "HT on" means on an i5 part stated to have 4C/4T?
    In order to help Intel’s partners test HT functionality however, the i5 2400s being sampled right now have Hyper Threading enabled. For the purposes of our test I’ve run with HT both enabled (to give you an idea of higher end SB parts) and disabled (to give you an idea of i5 2400 performance).
    On page : The test

  13. #138
    Xtreme Cruncher meanmoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    671
    Quote Originally Posted by Olivon View Post
    On page : The test
    thank you. somehow I missed that.
    upgrading...

  14. #139
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    970
    Quote Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides View Post
    What a shocking revelation. That I posted about last week.

    BD will bring a bigger jump in perf than nehalem to sb.

    Intel is about to get athlon'd
    Yep, or how about "KO'd".

  15. #140
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,979
    Quote Originally Posted by flippin_waffles View Post
    Yep, or how about "KO'd".
    I am not sure how this is gonna happen, other than just brute force more cores (modules).

    AMD's presentation was 33% more cores for 50% more throughput over MC, amortizing 50% over the core count does not give them the IPC improvement you guys are thinking it will.... the math just doesn't work.

    Now, if AMD matched module count to Intel physical core count, it may turn out they are in good shape... but that would be one massive CPU in terms of die size.
    One hundred years from now It won't matter
    What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
    How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
    -- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft

  16. #141
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides View Post
    BD will bring a bigger jump in perf than nehalem to sb.
    That's easy to do when your starting point is lower. But what does that mean for BD vs SB? In Anand's WoW test SB was 50%+ faster than a higher clocked Thuban and if Turbo was in fact disabled then it's only going to get worse. So are you saying that we should expect 50-60% performance improvements from BD too?

  17. #142
    Xtreme Cruncher trn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,630
    I'm loving the performance per watt; not so much loving the new chipset locked 100bclk scheme although the K chips help... but it still sucks. Mid-end chips are Meh! and integrated graphics and transcoding silicone on a desktop can suck it! save that crap for laptops. Wish they would go ahead and step up their game with a Hexa/octo core launch of Sandy Bridge instead of 2c/4c launch.
    XTREMESupercomputer: Phase 2
    Live up to your name - November 1 - 8
    Crunch with us, the XS WCG team

  18. #143
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    535
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet331 View Post
    You know that amd has deliver a performance boost of 35-40% over deneb (per core) to be in the range of SB, and thats with the current numbers, without turbo.
    You're forgetting that AMD's plan isn't to compete core per core with Intel, but thread per thread. One Bulldozer module competes with one hyperthreaded core. Not saying that it isn't a long shot for AMD to equal/beat SB, but BD is a new kind of chip that challenges the way we typically think about performance.

  19. #144
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,362
    If I remember correctly, an Intel-FTC settlement forces intel to provide an interface for its cpus in next 6 years. That would be a big opportunity for nvidia to design chipset especially for overclockers.

  20. #145
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,979
    Quote Originally Posted by kl0012 View Post
    If I remember correctly, an Intel-FTC settlement forces intel to provide an interface for its cpus in next 6 years. That would be a big opportunity for nvidia to design chipset especially for overclockers.
    A PCIe interface... nVidia is pretty much out of the chipset business.
    One hundred years from now It won't matter
    What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
    How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
    -- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft

  21. #146
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by flippin_waffles View Post
    Haha well, it looks like you're in for a world of hurt also. btw, how are those 32nm issues at intel coming along? Surely they've got it all worked out by now. No? Oh.
    Might share with us your insights about Intel's 32nm problems ? I'm sure Intel's management would love to have such problems ( which lead to 60%+ gross margins ) all the time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Heinz Guderian View Post
    There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people.

  22. #147
    Xtreme Addict 570091D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hollywierd, CA
    Posts
    1,284
    Quote Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides View Post

    Intel is about to get athlon'd
    sig'd

    Quote Originally Posted by kl0012 View Post
    If I remember correctly, an Intel-FTC settlement forces intel to provide an interface for its cpus in next 6 years. That would be a big opportunity for nvidia to design chipset especially for overclockers.
    the clock generator is now on-die with SB so intel can lock it down and no-one can touch it. the free performance upgrade was fun while it lasted.


    I am an artist (EDM producer/DJ), pls check out mah stuff.

  23. #148
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,125
    Quote Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides View Post
    BD will bring a bigger jump in perf than nehalem to sb.
    Considering how far behind Nehalem Phenom II single-thread IPC is, it now looks doubtful that they will even narrow the gap by much.

    Prediction: As a client processor, BD is basically dead. The core performance that the turboless SB sample showed at Anandtech is just too strong. Server & HPC it should do ok, modulo GloFo's 32nm process continuing to flounder.
    Last edited by terrace215; 08-27-2010 at 11:56 PM.

  24. #149
    Devil kept pokin' slaveondope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    South Kakalaky
    Posts
    1,294
    Quote Originally Posted by terrace215 View Post
    Considering how far behind Nehalem Phenom II single-thread IPC is, it now looks doubtful that they will even narrow the gap by much.
    On the Llano side most likely yes, on the BullDozer side its pointless to speculate at this point. BD is completely different from Phenom II as you know. Its anyones guess what and when it will bring to the show.

  25. #150
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,536
    guys, its no corect good full test of SB, but "pro Intel" marketing preview...No atack to SB, it will good CPU, but now its only Intels reaction at Bulldozer technology dates from Hotchips
    AMD FX-8350@5 GHz 1.52V + H100 Corsair, Crosshair V Formula-Z, 2x 4GB GSKill TridentX 2400 MHz+ 10-12-12-25, EAH HD6870 DirectCU, Corsair TX850W
    CPUs:next 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, 2x Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930K, i7-5960x coming this yearAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

Page 6 of 17 FirstFirst ... 345678916 ... 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
  •