Nehalem-EP......BLOOMFIELD

[spoof]

LOL nehalem losing to sucky AMD tech! I mean, people have been "Omg nehalem 8threads crush all Core2 nd AMD can say goodbye! !" ...then a dude comes with two AMDs, 8 threads and kicks nehalem's ass. Quite ironic, isn't it?

:|, seriously.

No, cause you have 4 physic cores + 4 virtual, witch isn't equal to 8 physic cores.

[Calmatory]

Sarcasm, people, sarcasm! Thus the ":|, seriously".

[flippin_waffles]

I'd say that is a corner case which should be further investigated.
What exactly is being tested there? It can't be anything related with SSE , that's fairly obvious.Is it x87 ?How does it perform on Core ?

*There is an update to Hwinfo32 that supports Nehalem , dated July 22.Any difference in scores with it?

I've often wondered the same thing about SPi. Any insights and what exactly is being tested in that particular case as well?

[Periander6]

Sarcasm, people, sarcasm! Thus the ":|, seriously".

Oops, sorry. :P

But some people here really are trying to make a serious comparison on a per-thread basis, and that really is just laughable.

[gallag]

LOL nehalem losing to sucky AMD tech! I mean, people have been "Omg nehalem 8threads crush all Core2 nd AMD can say goodbye! !" ...then a dude comes with two AMDs, 8 threads and kicks nehalem's ass. Quite ironic, isn't it?

:|, seriously.

I know, Imagen 8 cores besting 4 cores, Rock on AMD:rolleyes

When did someone say "Omg nehalem 8threads crush all Core2 nd AMD can say goodbye! !"

Do you honestly believe thread count matters when we are comparing cpus? Should it not be quad vs quad or do you think it should be quad vs dual quad? Do you really think that Intel have made the first native octocore cpu lol.

Just seen that you were being sarcastic, All to sad that people are actually using this argument though lol

[JCornell]

they are already there...

btw. JC, Bosch makes a good suggestion can you run Winrar on bloomfield and gainestown?

would be cool.

Sure, why not

[JCornell]

Are people brain damaged here? AMD fanboys comparing a hyperthreading CPU vs. a non-hyperthreading CPU on a PER THREAD basis?!?!?!?



Comparing 2s vs. uniprocessor systems???

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

No, really. This crap is too funny.

Need a complete brain scan I think.
Most people are kindly trying to explain, but some guys just won't listen ...
We don't blame being a Fanboy ... But need to back it up for what being said/done ...

I know, Imagen 8 cores besting 4 cores, Rock on AMD

Do you honestly believe thread count matters when we are comparing cpus? Should it not be quad vs quad or do you think it should be quad vs dual quad? Do you really think that Intel have made the first native octocore cpu lol.

Just seen that you were being sarcastic, All to sad that people are actually using this argument though lol

Good point

[Kingcarcas]

I think we can all agree that we want to see more of JCs wallpapers

[RaZz!]

I think we can all agree that we want to see more of JCs wallpapers

geees, because of all the examination of the scores and tech specs i didn't even notice his wallpapers.
now i feel appalled

[Donnie27]

Need a complete brain scan I think.
Most people are kindly trying to explain, but some guys just won't listen ...
We don't blame being a Fanboy ... But need to back it up for what being said/done ...

Good point

Please, where are those scores from WinRAR and etc..?

[Jacky]

How about a nuclearus run on nehalem?

[LIKMARK]

Need a complete brain scan I think.
Most people are kindly trying to explain, but some guys just won't listen ...
We don't blame being a Fanboy ... But need to back it up for what being said/done ...

Ok lets sum it up.

I saw your benchmarks and decided I wanted to se how my system did in the same benches. I decided to post the results thinking that probably it might be of interest to other people here. To make it easier for everyone to see, I posted the pics in succesion so that it would be easier to see the different results. As most of my posting is done in the AMD section my benchmark posts in this thread obviously is very offending to some of you. I can find a total of three people (i think) who shows any interest in the numbers themselves, most of the other posters is ridiculing me for comparing the two systems

I'll grant you that some of it is my fault since I take the bait and is partly responsible for the thread derailing into core/cpu/thread/logical/virtual whatever. I apologize for this.

My intentions were to compare the systems no matter what amount of cores and ht threads.

The comparison apparantly is invalid because of different amount of cores. Guys why are you picking on this? I never stated in the benchmark post that ht threads were the same as cores, I mentioned in other posts that the os shows threads, and that I was interested in the numbers of nehalem including ht.

My benchmark posts were never intended like a showdown of any kind.

As most people here obviously is more into playing cool, ridiculing than showing any interest for the actual numbers, comparing future nehalem to todays dual socket setup. I don't see this place as a forum I want to be associated with anymore.

Too much crap in this forum kills the joy of being an enthusiast. The moderators reluctance to do anything about it is proof enough to me that they feel it is allright that the forum goes this way.

I apologize also to shintai, donnie27 and jcornell for any harsh words I have written. I do not usually engage in discussions like that.

Peace out.

[flippin_waffles]

Ok lets sum it up.

I saw your benchmarks and decided I wanted to se how my system did in the same benches. I decided to post the results thinking that probably it might be of interest to other people here. To make it easier for everyone to see, I posted the pics in succesion so that it would be easier to see the different results. As most of my posting is done in the AMD section my benchmark posts in this thread obviously is very offending to some of you. I can find a total of three people (i think) who shows any interest in the numbers themselves, most of the other posters is ridiculing me for comparing the two systems

I'll grant you that some of it is my fault since I take the bait and is partly responsible for the thread derailing into core/cpu/thread/logical/virtual whatever. I apologize for this.

My intentions were to compare the systems no matter what amount of cores and ht threads.

The comparison apparantly is invalid because of different amount of cores. Guys why are you picking on this? I never stated in the benchmark post that ht threads were the same as cores, I mentioned in other posts that the os shows threads, and that I was interested in the numbers of nehalem including ht.

My benchmark posts were never intended like a showdown of any kind.

As most people here obviously is more into playing cool, ridiculing than showing any interest for the actual numbers, comparing future nehalem to todays dual socket setup. I don't see this place as a forum I want to be associated with anymore.

Too much crap in this forum kills the joy of being an enthusiast. The moderators reluctance to do anything about it is proof enough to me that they feel it is allright that the forum goes this way.

I apologize also to shintai, donnie27 and jcornell for any harsh words I have written. I do not usually engage in discussions like that.

Peace out.

I'll follow you out. This is a good place for Intel lovers but the rest of us clearly don't belong...

[mAJORD]

The only way the comparison would be valid from a COMPETITION point of view would be if the Opteron was a single 8core CPU.. or perhaps even 6 Core.

[Donnie27]

Ok lets sum it up.

I saw your benchmarks and decided I wanted to se how my system did in the same benches. I decided to post the results thinking that probably it might be of interest to other people here. To make it easier for everyone to see, I posted the pics in succesion so that it would be easier to see the different results. As most of my posting is done in the AMD section my benchmark posts in this thread obviously is very offending to some of you. I can find a total of three people (i think) who shows any interest in the numbers themselves, most of the other posters is ridiculing me for comparing the two systems

I'll grant you that some of it is my fault since I take the bait and is partly responsible for the thread derailing into core/cpu/thread/logical/virtual whatever. I apologize for this.

My intentions were to compare the systems no matter what amount of cores and ht threads.

The comparison apparantly is invalid because of different amount of cores. Guys why are you picking on this? I never stated in the benchmark post that ht threads were the same as cores, I mentioned in other posts that the os shows threads, and that I was interested in the numbers of nehalem including ht.

My benchmark posts were never intended like a showdown of any kind.

As most people here obviously is more into playing cool, ridiculing than showing any interest for the actual numbers, comparing future nehalem to todays dual socket setup. I don't see this place as a forum I want to be associated with anymore.

Too much crap in this forum kills the joy of being an enthusiast. The moderators reluctance to do anything about it is proof enough to me that they feel it is allright that the forum goes this way.

I apologize also to shintai, donnie27 and jcornell for any harsh words I have written. I do not usually engage in discussions like that.

Peace out.

Same here, I'm sorry if I came off in a negative way on in poor tastes to ya'! Did you see my post about the numbers to the other poster? He presented it in a different way and there wasn't any fights are flames to it.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=910

See my reply? Did I flame him?

[Donnie27]

The only way the comparison would be valid from a COMPETITION point of view would be if the Opteron was a single 8core CPU.. or perhaps even 6 Core.

To get a full set of numbers, run;
Intel vs AMD in that order.
One core on each,
4 cores on each with HT disabled,
4 cores plus HT vs 4 cores,
4 cores plus HT vs 8 cores as he's saying,
8 cores with HT disabled vs 8 cores,
And finally 8 Cores vs. 8 Cores with HT enabled.

Picking just one of these and not accounting for the others can be seen as cheating? Many here are geek enough to want to see the numbers, I do mean all of the numbers. Most will criticize partial numbers most of the time. If you want to know what 8 cores vs 4 Cores + 4 Virtual cores then also ask about the rest, right? Taking any ONE of these out of context will draw criticisms.

[bowman]

To get a full set of numbers, run;
Intel vs AMD in that order.
One core on each,
4 cores on each with HT disabled,
4 cores plus HT vs 4 cores,
4 cores plus HT vs 8 cores as he's saying,
8 cores with HT disabled vs 8 cores,
And finally 8 Cores vs. 8 Cores with HT enabled.

Picking just one of these and not accounting for the others can be seen as cheating? Many here are geek enough to want to see the numbers, I do mean all of the numbers.

Wouldn't everyone be interested in those numbers? All of those charted out neatly would be awesome!

[Donnie27]

Wouldn't everyone be interested in those numbers? All of those charted out neatly would be awesome!

IMHO, he wasn't being jumped for just the numbers. I've been here long enough that if a link was given to a site doing this, the hits would pile up quickly. Most folks here are Geeks, not AMD or Intel Fanboys.

[grunge100]

Wouldn't everyone be interested in those numbers? All of those charted out neatly would be awesome!

That would be awesome. 4 core Nehalem vs 4 core Shanghai. HT disabled, which may be interesting.

[grunge100]

IMHO, he wasn't being jumped for just the numbers. I've been here long enough that if a link was given to a site doing this, the hits would pile up quickly. Most folks here are Geeks, not AMD or Intel Fanboys.

Donnie, no offense, but where do you fit in. Or is your presence needed to right the injustice of people liking a product that may be inferior.

[Donnie27]

Donnie, no offense, but where do you fit in. Or is your presence needed to right the injustice of people liking a product that may be inferior.

It is a forum, you know, where we all meet and talk about Geek stuff? Simple, I come down on the side saying don't take stuff out of context. So you tell me, what's wrong with the list I made?

[Epsilon84]

That would be awesome. 4 core Nehalem vs 4 core Shanghai. HT disabled, which may be interesting.

Interesting on an academic level perhaps, but I'm more interested in real world performance.

[ryanmartini]

soo..

I guess Ill search elsewhere for information on these cpu's. Tired after reading through the first 10-12 pages of flaming in here.

[Donnie27]

Interesting on an academic level perhaps, but I'm more interested in real world performance.

Aren't we all? But in the grand scheme of things, Let make that at 3 way shoot out? Make it Penryn based Xeons vs Nehalem vs Barcelona then go right down the list as I proposed? I think the hits would be off the charts?

[Epsilon84]

soo..

I guess Ill search elsewhere for information on these cpu's. Tired after reading through the first 10-12 pages of flaming in here.

As they say, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Theres plenty of useful info in this thread, you just have to sort through the BS.