How will the new P55 mobos compare to AMD?

[perdomot]

The new chipset seems like a crippled version of the i7 mobos since they lack the triple channel memory and who knows what else. Am I missing something here?

 

[imported_Scoop]

Yeah Who knows what else they lack! Who knows a lot.

Who also knows that AMD boards lack triple channel memory as well. And Who knows what else.

 

[Beanie46]

So, in that mindset OP, the P45 chipset motherboards are really just crippled X48 motherboards and aren't worth a damn either?

Geez.....get yer head out yer bung hole.

 

[perdomot]

Whoa! What's with the hate? You guys need to cool out and back off. I was asking a legitimate question about Intel releasing a product that is less than their i7 line which has been on top of the performance charts and how it would compare with AMDs top products. Giving up triple channel ram and going back to dual channel loses performance. Plain and simple. I don't know what other differences will be in the products so I was hoping for some feedback, not a personal attack. If you can't offer intelligent discourse, do us all a favor and shut your pieholes.

 

[mozartrules]

First thing is that you should not compare P55 with i7, one is a chipset for the 1156 socket the other a family of CPUs. But I assume that you are looking at P55 vs. X58.

You mention the dual vs. triple channel memory, most tests I have seen show that this is of little practical importance. The more fundamental difference is the graphics interface which is limited to 16x (or 2 8x) on the P55 whereas the X58 as 2 16x. This sounds like a win for the X58, but the P55 will have lower latency since there is a direct link. This means that P55 will be "better" with a single card and that the picture is unknown with two graphics cards since you have to balance latency vs. bandwidth. Other differences are going to be related to the boards rather than the chipsets.

My feeling is that socket 1156 is the best choice for almost everybody. The advantages of 1366 is mostly relate to stuff that was needed for SMP servers. But there is nothing wrong with X58+i7-920 if you want to buy now.

 

[perdomot]

Thanks for the feedback. I guess I'm looking at both the cpu and the new chipset line and wondering how they will compare with AMD. The i7 line has been so dominant and I'm wondering how the new products will stack up to it and AMDs line as well. Planning on upgrading in Oct when Win7 comes out and want to get the best bang for the buck.

 

[heyheybooboo]

As far as the AMD thing IIRC the first sb8xx has been delayed until Q4 - yah might want to google-up on that. I think it's sb810 and sb850

 

[perdomot]

I've heard about the delay but the new AMD chipset don't seem to be exciting many people. If I remember correctly, they're more of a refinement of the 700 series than anything else.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: perdomot
I've heard about the delay but the new AMD chipset don't seem to be exciting many people. If I remember correctly, they're more of a refinement of the 700 series than anything else.

That would be incorrect. You should study the sb8xx a bit more closely.

And for the most part triple channel RAM is a gimmick (is that too strong? ). Check out this Triple versus Dual-channel memory from Guru3d. Impressive in synthetics but generally no benefit in gaming and transcoding. WinRAR (the ultimate 'test' ?) shows about a 15% gain BUT that can easily be explained by the drop from 6Gb 3-chann to 4Gb 2-chann for testing on the i7 platform. Can't really call that a fair evaluation.

A new AMD microproceesor with exceed the gain from 2-chann ---> 3-chann for the most part by simply increasing the IMC/NB speed 20% (which should result - depending upon your CPU clock - in an increase of 6-8% in bandwidth with a 6-8% reduction in latency).

And folks seem to be increasing the IMC/NB speed well over 20% :shocked: .

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: perdomot
The new chipset seems like a crippled version of the i7 mobos since they lack the triple channel memory and who knows what else. Am I missing something here?

absolutely wrong.

They have dual chanel instead of triple channel ram, which has been shown to make a huge difference in large fileservers and NO difference for the home user.
They replace a northbridge with 2 slots of 16x pcie for 1 slot of 16x or two of 8, but built into the CPU giving 1/3 the latency. which is like comparing DDR3 1600mhz 6-6-6-18 to DDR2 800mhz 1-1-1-3 ONLY IF YOU RUN TWO CARDS. It is hard to say which is faster, yet...
BUT it is CERTAIN that if you ONLY use ONE card than the P55 is going to be faster. Because at that point it is like comparing DDR3 1600 @ 6-6-6-18 (X58) to DDR3 1600 @ 2-2-2-6 (P55), giving P55 a huge advantage.

and that is IT. no "who knows what else"... it is known EXACTLY what is different between those two and that is it. oh wait no... there is also price and power consumption and size, all three are much lower (better) on the P55

those are the only differences between the boards themselves, it also happens that the new chips for P55 promise higher clockspeed for the same exact price. And a turbo mode of +5 instead of +2.

 

[perdomot]

The i5/P55 seems like a much better combo than I had thought. Will it still be better than AMD's Phenom II solutions or is it closer to them than the i7 was?

 

[taltamir]

the i7 absolutely demolishes the phenom2. the i5/P55 will compete against the i7/X58 quite well, with some i5/P55 parts beating the lower end i7/x58 parts.

 

[hans007]

i think since some of the I5 models do not have hyperthreading that AMD will still be competitive with those. the hyperthreading makes the i7 / i5 destroy amd at specfic benchmarks (seems to be mostly 3d rendering type stuff or encoding).

I think in gaming the higher end phenom IIs will still be competitive with the lower i5's even the i5's with hyperthreading and definitely the non HT ones.

I'm assuming this will allow amd to limp along financially until they finally come up with an answer to HT and macro OPs fusion in the future. I5 will be a great platform since its cheaper to build. triple channel will obviously only help in bandwidth constrained situations. THe other thing with i5 is that IGPs are on the chips. So if you want to build an HTPC amd based setups will still probably be better unless intel pulls out a miracle (since there will be no nvidia based I5 IGPs).

 

[taltamir]

i think since some of the I5 models do not have hyperthreading that AMD will still be competitive with those. the hyperthreading makes the i7 / i5 destroy amd at specfic benchmarks (seems to be mostly 3d rendering type stuff or encoding).

I think you are wrong, and I have no idea what you are basing those conclusions on

I think in gaming the higher end phenom IIs will still be competitive with the lower i5's even the i5's with hyperthreading and definitely the non HT ones.

by definition an i7 is a four core with HT, and an i5 is either dual core with HT or quad core withOUT HT.

I'm assuming this will allow amd to limp along financially until they finally come up with an answer to HT and macro OPs fusion in the future. I5 will be a great platform since its cheaper to build. triple channel will obviously only help in bandwidth constrained situations. THe other thing with i5 is that IGPs are on the chips. So if you want to build an HTPC amd based setups will still probably be better unless intel pulls out a miracle (since there will be no nvidia based I5 IGPs).

HT gives -1% to +10% performance. The better optimized your code is, the less benefit HT gives. intel has the advantage, but not because of HT.