AT Benches Nehalem

[Hulk]

What really impresses me is that this clock-for-clock comparison was performed "tock" against "tick." Or Nehalem vs. Penryn. Penryn is already a slightly enhanced version of Conroe.

"Tock" against "tock" would also be an interesting comparison since it would pit first generation Conroe architecture against first generation Nahalem architecture. In that case Nahalem would show an even larger percentage improvement.

Kudos to Anandtech for pitting Nahalem against Penryn and not Conroe.

I am going to upgrade to a quad in the near future since I can simply pop in the new chip. I'll probably wait for Nehalem until "tick" when prices are lower and motherboards are solid and better optimized.

I am relieved to see that Intel is still pushing the envelope even though AMD hasn't been the competitor they have been in the past. I think the fiasco with P4 scared the pants off Intel and they aren't just concerned about AMD, but more so the possibility of another upstart company, maybe American based, or perhaps likely foreign based, that could come out of no where to challenge them if they let up on development for any significant period of time.

They are in the lead and are keeping the pedal to the metal. Hey if we're going to pay top dollar for new CPU's due to the lack of competition at least we'll be getting some great chips.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Peelback79
So it's going to have a locked multi and oc'ing will be done by adjusting the frequency in 133Mhz jumps. How does that differ from now? Is it comparable to FSB x Multi = clock? Is it now going to be Frequency x multi = clock speed? Same concept, just different number?

It appears that way, just as you raise the HT frequency on AMD platforms to overclock the multi-locked CPU's so too you will raise the QPI frequency on Intel platforms to overclock their multi-locked CPU's.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Amazing cpu, it's a monster.
you can still run a single Nvidia card with this cpu (SLI is not imperative), i believe GT200 will be amazing too and more than enough to match this baby speedwise.

 

[firewolfsm]

Amazing, but I'll wait for 32nm, my Q6600 is happy how it is.

 

[Stoneburner]

Time_to_upgrade_a_CPU01! (Sorry, I played everquest beta years ago.)

These better launch on time, my opteron 165 is long in the toof. Speaking of opteron, I don't see how AMD can survive this one.

 

[NoStateofMind]

HOLY FV@K! Wow! The jump from Conroe to Nehalem is like P4 to Conroe. I'm going to start hold back bank for this!

for a 20 - 50% increase in performance, total system power consumption only went up by 10%.

:shocked:

EDIT: Not to mention its not even overclocked yet! From the article:

The CPUs are quite mature and are running extremely cool (surprisingly cool actually), their clock speeds are being artificially limited by Intel in order to avoid putting all cards on the table at this time.

Overclocking headroom anyone?

and add in:

First keep in mind that these performance numbers are early, and they were run on a partly crippled, very early platform. With that preface, the fact that Nehalem is still able to post these 20 - 50% performance gains says only one thing about Intel's tick-tock cadence: they did it.

So after Overclocking and fine tuning I would NOT be surprised to see 60% jump!

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: ricleo2
Damit. I have waited it seems like forever for the new graphic cards to come out. I was all set to build a new gaming machine with a new video card this month. Now I feel like I should wait (again) on this new CPU. Unless this new powerful chip will not effect gaming much. Anybody know or have an opinion?

wait until sandy bridge...that's supposed to be the bomb...

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: PascalT
Yikes, these Nehalems are going to be monsters. It makes me feel bad about upgrading last month. Then again I get to buy new hardware soon again.

Upgrading on the Ticks is probably the better strategy versus upgrading on the Tocks.

Folks who upgraded to Penryn (the tick to Conroe's tock) get better performance clock/clock and lower power consumption than folks who upgraded to the tock (C2D).

Same will be true for Nehalem (tock) versus holding out for the tick (westmere). Since you already have a Q9450 it would seem the better thing to do here is keep with the tick-upgrade cycle and hold-out for Westmere.

I thought tick was conroe and tock was penryn?

 

[Winterpool]

According to this article in Technology@Intel, their 'cadence' model is

based on what Intel calls the ?tick-tock? model of silicon and microarchitecture that delivers a common processor architecture across all volume market segments. Each ?tick? represents the silicon compaction beat rate, which has a corresponding ?tock? representing the design of a new microarchitecture delivered in a cycle approximately every two years.

So that would suggest 'Penryn' was a 'tick', and 'Nehalem' is the next 'tock'.

Isn't the 'tock' when the time (second) actually changed? I wish I owned an analogue clock...

Edited: now that I imagine it in my head, it sounds like both ticks and tocks would mark seconds, so neither would have more precedence.

 

[Foxery]

Originally posted by: Winterpool
Isn't the 'tock' when the time (second) actually changed? I wish I owned an analogue clock...

Edited: now that I imagine it in my head, it sounds like both ticks and tocks would mark seconds, so neither would have more precedence.

Your first guess was correct. Imagine a large grandfather clock, not a wristwatch. For some reason, though, I also imagine the product cycle terminology in reverse just like Bryan.

Originally posted by: Hulk
Kudos to Anandtech for pitting Nahalem against Penryn and not Conroe.

That's the logical comparison, since what we want to know is, how much better is it than the current best? Not 2 year old tech

Much <3 to Anand for including power consumption info as well. It looks like "performance per watt" should show up more and more on Intel's marketing slides. Corporate customers will love these things!

 

[hooflung]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Time_to_upgrade_a_CPU01! (Sorry, I played everquest beta years ago.)

These better launch on time, my opteron 165 is long in the toof. Speaking of opteron, I don't see how AMD can survive this one.

Shanghai also has 8 cores. It will be built on 45nm and will have more cache than a phenom. As long as it can work on the cache subsystems they have time to gear up. Considering a phenom is already pretty much clock for clock with a C2D the extra 6 months from B3 gives AMD time to tune their launch.

Intel isn't going to have consumer parts for a while anyway and why bother? P45s are going to sell like hot cakes and there is plenty of C2D loving to go around. AM3 will also be backwards compatible with AM2 so you can buy a phenom now and get a shanghai later, or so the speculation goes.

Either way, Intel is just the first to show off their new toy to keep market interest in their favor. Meh, I use both so its all academic to me.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: ricleo2
Damit. I have waited it seems like forever for the new graphic cards to come out. I was all set to build a new gaming machine with a new video card this month. Now I feel like I should wait (again) on this new CPU. Unless this new powerful chip will not effect gaming much. Anybody know or have an opinion?

Most modern games are not CPU bound at high settings.

It will make a difference, but it wont be a dealbreaker.

Except for the people that coded Everquest2. I have never seen a more CPU bound game in my life.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: hooflung

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Time_to_upgrade_a_CPU01! (Sorry, I played everquest beta years ago.)

These better launch on time, my opteron 165 is long in the toof. Speaking of opteron, I don't see how AMD can survive this one.

Shanghai also has 8 cores. It will be built on 45nm and will have more cache than a phenom. As long as it can work on the cache subsystems they have time to gear up. Considering a phenom is already pretty much clock for clock with a C2D the extra 6 months from B3 gives AMD time to tune their launch.

Intel isn't going to have consumer parts for a while anyway and why bother? P45s are going to sell like hot cakes and there is plenty of C2D loving to go around. AM3 will also be backwards compatible with AM2 so you can buy a phenom now and get a shanghai later, or so the speculation goes.

Either way, Intel is just the first to show off their new toy to keep market interest in their favor. Meh, I use both so its all academic to me.

Phenom is NOT clock for clock with C2D, as indicated here
Its 7-30% slower, and it won't overclock as well. Where did you come to that conclusion ?

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: hooflung

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Time_to_upgrade_a_CPU01! (Sorry, I played everquest beta years ago.)

These better launch on time, my opteron 165 is long in the toof. Speaking of opteron, I don't see how AMD can survive this one.

Shanghai also has 8 cores. It will be built on 45nm and will have more cache than a phenom. As long as it can work on the cache subsystems they have time to gear up. Considering a phenom is already pretty much clock for clock with a C2D the extra 6 months from B3 gives AMD time to tune their launch.

Intel isn't going to have consumer parts for a while anyway and why bother? P45s are going to sell like hot cakes and there is plenty of C2D loving to go around. AM3 will also be backwards compatible with AM2 so you can buy a phenom now and get a shanghai later, or so the speculation goes.

Either way, Intel is just the first to show off their new toy to keep market interest in their favor. Meh, I use both so its all academic to me.

I thought Phenom was bit slower than C2D clock for clock? a 2.5 ghz Phenom is generally slower than a 2.4 ghz Q6600.

If that's the case then a Nehalem, which is quite a bit faster than a penryn should slaughter a Shanghai if all it brings is more cache and not a architecture change.

 

[JACKDRUID]

bad news for AMD...really bad.. losing in both fronts

intel Nehalem beats phenom by 30%
nvidia 9800gtx beats 3870 by 30%...

which mean, in general, if you use an AMD only machine, it will consistantly be 30% slower than any other system.

AMD really need to get their act together...

 

[Idontcare]

Folks this isn't my thread but I'd like to say please keep all your Intel vs AMD arguments at least confined to the context of performance/price.

Will Nehalem slaughter Shanghai? I have no doubt the flagship top-end Nehalem will slaughter the top-end flagship Shangahi...but at what cost to the consumer to acquire that Nehalem flagship versus AMD's?

Only when put into context of price/performance does it make much sense to say things about Intel vs. AMD.

To whatever extent Shanghai/Phenom underperforms Nehalem you can rest assured AMD will price accordingly (maybe not perfectly, maybe not aggressively, but at least accordingly) to account for performance delta's.

Given that we all are not likely to see Nehalem's for the desktop in any form except $1200 extreme edition Bloomfield for another year (or longer if you read any of the speculation websites out there) it really isn't much to get crazy excited about outside of getting excited over exciting tech for exciting tech sake. (I fall into this category, count me +1 excited)

 

[firewolfsm]

Yeah, GPU physics isn't really needed anymore, with an 8 core nahalem we can do anything.

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
Yeah, GPU physics isn't really needed anymore, with an 8 core nahalem we can do anything.

640K is enough memory for anybody.

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Folks this isn't my thread but I'd like to say please keep all your Intel vs AMD arguments at least confined to the context of performance/price.

Will Nehalem slaughter Shanghai? I have no doubt the flagship top-end Nehalem will slaughter the top-end flagship Shangahi...but at what cost to the consumer to acquire that Nehalem flagship versus AMD's?

Only when put into context of price/performance does it make much sense to say things about Intel vs. AMD.

To whatever extent Shanghai/Phenom underperforms Nehalem you can rest assured AMD will price accordingly (maybe not perfectly, maybe not aggressively, but at least accordingly) to account for performance delta's.

Given that we all are not likely to see Nehalem's for the desktop in any form except $1200 extreme edition Bloomfield for another year (or longer if you read any of the speculation websites out there) it really isn't much to get crazy excited about outside of getting excited over exciting tech for exciting tech sake. (I fall into this category, count me +1 excited)

What your saying is true. But unless Shanghai is a very big leap in speed, Intel still has high clocked C2D in the mix when you are arguing price/performance. So maybe Nehalem won't slaughter Shanghai in the area of price/peformance, but Intel's line looks very good compared to the AMD line unless Shanghai brings big surprises.

 

[Foxery]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
Yeah, GPU physics isn't really needed anymore, with an 8 core nahalem we can do anything.

Be careful of the word "need." It's a very relative term which changes every year. (When have we ever "needed" GPU physics? I must have completely missed that requirement.) But, this isn't a graphics thread, so:

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Folks this isn't my thread but I'd like to say please keep all your Intel vs AMD arguments at least confined to the context of performance/price.

Will Nehalem slaughter Shanghai? I have no doubt the flagship top-end Nehalem will slaughter the top-end flagship Shangahi...but at what cost to the consumer to acquire that Nehalem flagship versus AMD's?

I keep hoping we'll see some differentiation through power consumption, too. "Close enough" performance that comes with a lower price tag and lower electric bill could work out pretty nicely for AMD when they shrink to 45nm.

isn't much to get crazy excited about outside of getting excited over exciting tech for exciting tech sake. (I fall into this category, count me +1 excited)

Squeeeee!
<dance>

 

[Sable]

Hench. AMD in a whole world of trouble methinks.

 

[vexingv]

I know Nehalem won't be mainstream until '09, but my s939 X2 can't wait much longer! Still, I'll probably have to defer any new desktop builds as my 4 yr-old Powerbook G4 is due for an upgrade. I'm curious is there a comparable Nehalem mobile part in the works? Given that Apple has been fairly quick with the uptake of new intel processor models in its product lines in the past, I would imagine it'll have these new intel parts in their laptops and desktops soon after launch.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Wow, amazing numbers!

Now if only the software developers would catch up and create some general desktop apps that can utilize all this new found CPU power. Current penryn quads are overkill for everybody except scientific research types, 3d graphic artists and video encoding junkies which make up a small percentage of the computing community

 

[EarthwormJim]

I don't think AMD is in as much trouble as people think. Since they can't compete on the desktop front with their current hardware, they're dominating the server market (more profit).

That may continue with the next generation of chips.

 

[Cogman]

My goodness, I remember feeling the same way when I first read the Conroe benchmarks. Holy Crap this thing will be fast. 20-50%, My goodness. AMD might as well kiss the upper market goodbye, no way they will be able to compete with intels top of the line.

Do we know yet for sure if intel has really locked the FSB? (IE did they kill overclocking) That would be the saddest thing for me to see.