MMM
Results 1 to 25 of 324

Thread: Anandtech benches Nehalem

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by zanzabar View Post
    ..

    thats 3015 to 2931 so thats 2.6%, and thats not impressive since it has 30-50% more memory bandwidth and the core2 is running with stock 333mhz fsb
    That's actually incredibly good.Why ? Because , IMO , Penryn has a better cache subsystem :

    Penryn - 32KB L1 3 cycles , 6MB L2 15 cycles
    Nehalem - 32KB L1 4 cycles , 256KB L2 11 cycles , 8MB L3 39 cycles

    Nehalem has 4 cycles L1 , that's a lot , but if probably hidden with SMT and other techniques.The small L2 has very good latency , but at only 256KB it's really tiny.The L3 is very large , but also very slow.

    Basically , it's far from optimal for single threaded apps ( Core/Penryn are best there ).

    To be honest , I expected Nehalem to be slower than Penryn in single threaded apps that aren't BW dependant.This might still be the case , but it looks like Intel did its job.
    Hell , even maintaining Penryn single thread performance coupled with K8/K10 scalability ( in fact even better ) makes Nehalem an excellent all around monster.
    Last edited by savantu; 06-05-2008 at 02:39 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Heinz Guderian View Post
    There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people.

Tags for this Thread

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
  •