Quote Originally Posted by PetNorth View Post
What about turbo impact?

If anandtech estimate is correct http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sho...spx?i=3570&p=4

i5 at 2.66, is running really at ~2.93 (4 threads) and ~3.33 (1-2 threads). Or something like that, If I am not missing something...
That's a good point, I always forget about Trubo (adds extra complexity)... but you are missing something from the Anand article, the engineering sample was locked at 1 step for the engineering sample.

Unfortunately this is the sample I tested with. Thankfully it was healthy enough for me to overclock the BLCK to 166MHz, resulting in a 2.66GHz frequency. Turbo mode was still stuck at a 1x increase over the stock frequency, so final Lynnfield performance should be much better in single and dual threaded apps than what you’ll see here today.
So even with a 166 Block with a 1x bump, Nehalem is still an impressive 20% clock for clock better on average. It is actually closer to 25-30% on a wider range of applications since I have both an i7-965 and a PIIX4-940 and have seen these type of discrepancies. If you throw SLI 295's (two cards 4 GPUs) or 4870 X2's the discrepancies grow even larger in quite a few (majority) of games.

I know it is not something you like to think about, you are obviously a huge AMD supporter, but for the moment (and for a while longer, until at least bulldozer), AMD is playing the value card.

Personally, I don't think it makes a huge difference ... the 940 runs everything just fine, I gravitate to the i7-965 for heavy duty video encoding/editing work though.

Jack