4GHz i7 920

[covert24]

dammmm a 22x multiplier?! wut are they crazy

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Call me crazy, but isn't Nehalem going to be absolute perfection for Photoshop and its ilk?
Imagine 24GB RAM (6x4GB) or even 12GB (6x2) with say 8+GB made into a RAMdisk with 15GB/s. Plus lots of cores.
4 cores, 8 threads, 6 RAM slots = infinite possibilities.

Maybe after Adobe finally releases a 64-bit version. Until then, keep dreaming... Supposedly CS4 might have it.

Originally posted by: AuDioFreaK39

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Call me crazy, but isn't Nehalem going to be absolute perfection for Photoshop and its ilk?
Imagine 24GB RAM (6x4GB) or even 12GB (6x2) with say 8+GB made into a RAMdisk with 15GB/s. Plus lots of cores.
4 cores, 8 threads, 6 RAM slots = infinite possibilities.

too bad Photoshop CS4 just switched over to GPU rendering

can't wait to run it on my GTX 280

Got Link? I'm genuinely curious. I don't see GPU rendering being at cross-purposes with 64-bit...

 

[AuDioFreaK39]

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Call me crazy, but isn't Nehalem going to be absolute perfection for Photoshop and its ilk?
Imagine 24GB RAM (6x4GB) or even 12GB (6x2) with say 8+GB made into a RAMdisk with 15GB/s. Plus lots of cores.
4 cores, 8 threads, 6 RAM slots = infinite possibilities.

Maybe after Adobe finally releases a 64-bit version. Until then, keep dreaming... Supposedly CS4 might have it.

Originally posted by: AuDioFreaK39

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Call me crazy, but isn't Nehalem going to be absolute perfection for Photoshop and its ilk?
Imagine 24GB RAM (6x4GB) or even 12GB (6x2) with say 8+GB made into a RAMdisk with 15GB/s. Plus lots of cores.
4 cores, 8 threads, 6 RAM slots = infinite possibilities.

too bad Photoshop CS4 just switched over to GPU rendering

can't wait to run it on my GTX 280

Got Link? I'm genuinely curious. I don't see GPU rendering being at cross-purposes with 64-bit...

NVIDIA & Adobe - Creatively Partnered (NVIDIA Official Page)

NVIDIA GPUs Power A Creative Revolution With Adobe Creative Suite CS4

Adobe Creative Suite 4 Family (Adobe Official Page)

BetaNews - Adobe CS4 will be 64-bit, but only on Windows (April 3, 2008)

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: AuDioFreaK39

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Call me crazy, but isn't Nehalem going to be absolute perfection for Photoshop and its ilk?
Imagine 24GB RAM (6x4GB) or even 12GB (6x2) with say 8+GB made into a RAMdisk with 15GB/s. Plus lots of cores.
4 cores, 8 threads, 6 RAM slots = infinite possibilities.

too bad Photoshop CS4 just switched over to GPU rendering

can't wait to run it on my GTX 280

Adobe Photoshop® CS4 allows digital artists of all kinds to work in a more intuitive, natural way by taking common Photoshop tasks - image rotation, zooming and panning - and accelerating them with the power of NVIDIA® GeForce graphics cards.

I'd still take a fast CPU thanks.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Volts are a little high for that O/C.

Ya know I understand that Intel wants tis chip out in the server Market . But for the high performance enthusiast on the Desk top . I can't help but think intel is blowing a great opertunity here . I am actually baffled by it.

The high end desktop release should be dual core withSMT enabled. This is clearly for the Time the smart move.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I can't help but think intel is blowing a great opertunity here . I am actually baffled by it.

What opportunity is Intel blowing and how are they blowing it in your opinion? Are you talking market timing or launch clockspeeds or something else?

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
The high end desktop release should be dual core withSMT enabled. This is clearly for the Time the smart move.

This part makes no sense to me. Are you thinking a dual-core Nehalem will outperform a quad-core Yorkfield?

When the i7 965 is released the 3.2GHz QX9770 will be 1 year old (released Nov 18, 2007).

Don't you think after one year passing and releasing an entire new architecture that the flagship product ought to at least outperform the prior year's and prior architecture's flagship product?

Now I do agree that the kick-ass desktop chip for 95% of us enthousiasts would be a 3.2GHz (or higher stock clock) dual-core Nehalem with all the cache left intact.

But I'm not thinking for a second that such a chip would beat a QX9770 in anything that involved multi-threaded benches and apps. (I'm not saying this is what you are thinking or stating with your post, just saying it here to state my unsolicited opinion )

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1


The high end desktop release should be dual core withSMT enabled. This is clearly for the Time the smart move.

wtf?

You think i would downgrade from my quad to a dual with hyperthreading or whatever they are calling it these days?!

Not sure how that makes any sense whatsoever.

Dual core ain't high end anymore, regardless of what those with their 4.5 GHz C2Ds like to think.

I'll take my slower clocked quad anyday thankya

 

[aigomorla]

the board used was an MSI X58 Eclipse.

I got my eye on that board right now for many reasons, this being one of them.

Im also guessing a over 200 dollar tag. The board has a PLED diagnostic and display integrated, so expect $$$$.

 

[extra]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1


The high end desktop release should be dual core withSMT enabled. This is clearly for the Time the smart move.

wtf?

You think i would downgrade from my quad to a dual with hyperthreading or whatever they are calling it these days?!

Not sure how that makes any sense whatsoever.

Dual core ain't high end anymore, regardless of what those with their 4.5 GHz C2Ds like to think.

I'll take my slower clocked quad anyday thankya

Ahem, depends on what you are doing with your computer thank you very much.

 

[v8envy]

I wants. Can I haz?

This is a chip tailor made to run big bloated Java processes. Massive memory bandwidth with low latency means useful (read: multi-hundred M to several G) JVM heap sizes will no longer perceptibly pause the JVM on a full GC. And if the promised on-silicon string primitives are useful a la IBM mainframe CPU versions of the same I'm going to be one exceptionally happy camper.

Giev.

 

[AuDioFreaK39]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I can't help but think intel is blowing a great opertunity here . I am actually baffled by it.

What opportunity is Intel blowing and how are they blowing it in your opinion? Are you talking market timing or launch clockspeeds or something else?

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
The high end desktop release should be dual core withSMT enabled. This is clearly for the Time the smart move.

This part makes no sense to me. Are you thinking a dual-core Nehalem will outperform a quad-core Yorkfield?

When the i7 965 is released the 3.2GHz QX9770 will be 1 year old (released Nov 18, 2007).

Don't you think after one year passing and releasing an entire new architecture that the flagship product ought to at least outperform the prior year's and prior architecture's flagship product?

Now I do agree that the kick-ass desktop chip for 95% of us enthousiasts would be a 3.2GHz (or higher stock clock) dual-core Nehalem with all the cache left intact.

But I'm not thinking for a second that such a chip would beat a QX9770 in anything that involved multi-threaded benches and apps. (I'm not saying this is what you are thinking or stating with your post, just saying it here to state my unsolicited opinion )

The QX9770 C0 was actually released in March 2008. The QX9650 C0 (first desktop Penryn) was released on November 12, 2007.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Volts are a little high for that O/C.

compared to what? LOL... <you guys wont see another overclocked neha for at least 1 more month>

Nemesis, have you forgoten new architecture = new rules.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1


The high end desktop release should be dual core withSMT enabled. This is clearly for the Time the smart move.

wtf?

You think i would downgrade from my quad to a dual with hyperthreading or whatever they are calling it these days?!

Not sure how that makes any sense whatsoever.

Dual core ain't high end anymore, regardless of what those with their 4.5 GHz C2Ds like to think.

I'll take my slower clocked quad anyday thankya

As long as gaming isnt in the picture

Screw being CPU bound.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2232751&enterthread=y

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: AuDioFreaK39

Originally posted by: Idontcare
When the i7 965 is released the 3.2GHz QX9770 will be 1 year old (released Nov 18, 2007).

The QX9770 C0 was actually released in March 2008. The QX9650 C0 (first desktop Penryn) was released on November 12, 2007.

I was going by Intel's stated date on their website:

December, 2007
Intel® Core?2 Extreme Processor QX9770
3.20GHz
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/quickrefyr.htm#2007

As well as the article publish dates for a bunch of articles that came up on google:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=3154

http://www.neoseeker.com/Artic.../Reviews/intel_qx9770/

http://www.tomshardware.com/re...treme-qx9770,1736.html

But if it was in fact March 2008 then I stand corrected.

Are you thinking of the QX9775? It was released in Feb 2008 for Skulltrail.

http://www.intel.com/pressroom.../quickreffam.htm#core2

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
the board used was an MSI X58 Eclipse.

I got my eye on that board right now for many reasons, this being one of them.

Im also guessing a over 200 dollar tag. The board has a PLED diagnostic and display integrated, so expect $$$$.

Any other reasons?

 

[SolMiester]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31


As long as gaming isnt in the picture

Screw being CPU bound.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2232751&enterthread=y

AFAIK, a Quad can clock to 4.5 also!

 

[bryanW1995]

yes, but a normal person with super badass air or water could reasonably expect to get 4.3+ out of an e8600 right now but nothing over 3.8 on a non-extreme quad. Of course, that is an artificial fsb-imposed limitation that obviously won't exist with nehalem.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

As long as gaming isnt in the picture

Screw being CPU bound.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2232751&enterthread=y

Gaming is in the picture.
http://images.anandtech.com/gr...070108145125/17174.png

Notice the higher clocked duals getting their asses kicked.

Obviously, it depends on the game, but since i play UT3 & other UE3 games that do utilize quads better than duals, i have no interest in downgrading to a higher clocked dual

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

As long as gaming isnt in the picture

Screw being CPU bound.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2232751&enterthread=y

Gaming is in the picture.
http://images.anandtech.com/gr...070108145125/17174.png

Notice the higher clocked duals getting their asses kicked.

Obviously, it depends on the game, but since i play UT3 & other UE3 games that do utilize quads better than duals, i have no interest in downgrading to a higher clocked dual

You picked one out of a couple games that use four cores. Im sure that will change in the future. But as of right now, wolfie > yorkie for gaming. Unless, of course, you get water on a QX and get it to 4.0+.


Edit:

 

[Nemesis 1]

I was just thinking that. A dual core nehalem with SMT enabled should be a very formidable chip in todays envirorment. Even more so for gaming. A chip capable of higher clocks(maybe) and still 4 thread capable . Seems to be the perfect gamer chip . For today.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I was just thinking that. A dual core nehalem with SMT enabled should be a very formidable chip in todays envirorment. Even more so for gaming. A chip capable of higher clocks(maybe) and still 4 thread capable . Seems to be the perfect gamer chip . For today.

Isn't that what turbo mode does for you though? Shuts down your two unused cores and amps up the clockspeed on the remaining loaded cores while gaming with your dual-threaded game?

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

You picked one out of a couple games that use four cores. Im sure that will change in the future. But as of right now, wolfie > yorkie for gaming. Unless, of course, you get water on a QX and get it to 4.0+.


Edit:

*whistling*

*looking down at my sig*

*whistling again*

 

[Foxery]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I was just thinking that. A dual core nehalem with SMT enabled should be a very formidable chip in todays envirorment. Even more so for gaming. A chip capable of higher clocks(maybe) and still 4 thread capable . Seems to be the perfect gamer chip . For today.

Isn't that what turbo mode does for you though? Shuts down your two unused cores and amps up the clockspeed on the remaining loaded cores while gaming with your dual-threaded game?

There's a catch to this that occurred to me recently, though. Right now, Windows XP and Vista systems have shit logic for balancing CPU load on multicore systems, such that single threaded apps are randomly moved from one core to another. Without an intelligent patch from Microsoft, no gaming machine will properly kick into Turbo Mode because the cores never stay idle.

Until someone at Microsoft wakes up to this, the feature will only benefit *nix users. Technically this is fine for a while, since *nix servers are the main target audience, but it'll have to be fixed eventually.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Foxery
There's a catch to this that occurred to me recently, though. Right now, Windows XP and Vista systems have shit logic for balancing CPU load on multicore systems, such that single threaded apps are randomly moved from one core to another. Without an intelligent patch from Microsoft, no gaming machine will properly kick into Turbo Mode because the cores never stay idle.

Until someone at Microsoft wakes up to this, the feature will only benefit *nix users. Technically this is fine for a while, since *nix servers are the main target audience, but it'll have to be fixed eventually.

I was under the same line of thinking when I asked Johan to inquire about this issue in his "ask me what to ask Intel" thread at aceshardware a couple weeks ago: (I posted under my same handle idontcare)

http://aceshardware.freeforums...ghal-nehalem-t628.html

As you can read in that thread, Johan kindly swept aside the suggestion this could be an issue.

His speculation on how this issue is no longer an issue is contained in that thread.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I was just thinking that. A dual core nehalem with SMT enabled should be a very formidable chip in todays envirorment. Even more so for gaming. A chip capable of higher clocks(maybe) and still 4 thread capable . Seems to be the perfect gamer chip . For today.

Isn't that what turbo mode does for you though? Shuts down your two unused cores and amps up the clockspeed on the remaining loaded cores while gaming with your dual-threaded game?

Not unless MS patches the thread scheduler in their OS to stop the damn bouncing around between cores.

It's a bad side-effect of their scheduler hack for hyperthreading, in which it was advantagous to avoid "sticky" core affinity, which had been the norm for Win2K.