Nehalem and 4850 goodness.

[Nemesis 1]

Nice scored.

http://translate.google.com/tr...2Cnews-590.html&hl=en&*****&sl=zh-CN&tl=en

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Nice scored.

http://translate.google.com/tr...2Cnews-590.html&hl=en&*****&sl=zh-CN&tl=en

INTEL Nehalem 2.93GHz <--- means

oh gosh 5k cpu score on 3dmark means he's clocked equivalant to a penryn @ 3.6ghz or Higher.

nemesis i hate you. You just made me want that processor even more now.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Ya . I know what ya mean . I was holding off on penryn till the 8600 is released . But Not going to do it. I will wait on nehalem and go dual socket . I can somehow make that seem cheap if I don't penryn . LOL. It is the 7 month. I hope Intel releases right on the 9 month. its looking good. The other part I hate is having to buy a gpu with nehalem . The good stuff won't be here yet. R800/ Larrabee. But 4870x2 will have to do . DDR3 x3 is going to be cheaper by than and so should SSD.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I bad

 

[aigomorla]

lol DP!!


yeah, but looking at that bench, all i can say is wow.

so neha is going to have a 600mhz clock advantage. :\


Sigh... looks like im definitely grabbing one at launch.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
Sigh... looks like im definitely grabbing one at launch.

I'm not, I was an early adopter with the C2D generation (e6400 for $265 the first week) simply because the performance was in a different league altogether from what was available at the time (e6400 @ 2.66GHz faster than an X2 6000+ put a smile on my face).

However, this time around I already have a nice fast system, Nehalem will probably not be that dramatic an improvement and will also quite likely be tremendously overpriced like the C2Ds were when they launched.

So I'll probably wait until sometime at least mid 2009 before I seriously start looking at a total upgrade (motherboard, cpu, DDR3, maybe an SSD HDD if the prices have gotten reasonable by that time).

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Denithor
However, this time around I already have a nice fast system, Nehalem will probably not be that dramatic an improvement and will also quite likely be tremendously overpriced like the C2Ds were when they launched.

I'm in similiar situation. Would love to retire my five Q6600 rigs but being clocked at 3.3GHz and only 7 months old there is no way I can justify an accelerated depreciation just to replace them with Nehalem rigs that likely won't give me more than about 20-30% additional performance for quite a bit more in price.

Looks like I am going to be waiting for westmere myself. We know who's fault this is...big oil. Er I mean AMD.

 

[GundamF91]

I'm in the same boat. I went from AMD 2600+ to C2D E4500, and now to Penryn Q9450. I think I'll wait a generation because my quadcore is more than enough for everything that I do.

 

[Mwing]

Originally posted by: GundamF91
I'm in the same boat. I went from AMD 2600+ to C2D E4500, and now to Penryn Q9450. I think I'll wait a generation because my quadcore is more than enough for everything that I do.

Total agree, I have Q9450 too, I will wait til next die shrink.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Denithor

However, this time around I already have a nice fast system, Nehalem will probably not be that dramatic an improvement and will also quite likely be tremendously overpriced like the C2Ds were when they launched.

ack.. you guys i messed up on the 3dmark score.

it looks like it will not be 5k but 2.5k.

1280x1024 noAA
3DMark Score 3DMark Score 12786
SM2.0 Score SM2.0 Score 4605
HDR/SM3.0 Score HDR/SM3.0 Score 5600


so 5600 + 4605 = 10205 subtract that by the main score.

12786 - 10205 = 2579 ish..

bah... the cpu is weak. And im having a hardtime believing thats its really a quadcore.

Heres the Stock Q9650
http://i125.photobucket.com/al...aigomorla/3dmark06.jpg

ignore the top two points please. GPU has nothing to do with cpu score.

 

[Nemesis 1]

You sir are sharp. But go to extreme systems and read that thread on the subject. Nehalem is a lot faster .Your not the first to see that. Also its only dual channel in this bench . It just depends on the apps. Whats this about C2D being high priced at release. Pure BS. What was the price of an AMD FX x2 befor Merom I think you guys must be thinking of the x2 prices befor merom . Prices go down with each die shrink not up. So nehalem will cost more but chipset should be cheaper = Cheaper M/B.

Penryns are nice . I like my Merom so does wife. But Nehalem is very interesting to me as I will never have to here about FSB ever again . Lord be praised. If its even better than AMDs HT. Than Intel hasn't pulled a rabbit from a hat . But the whole dam petting zoo. Also aigomorla could you link to more info on the Bench of the 8800gt.

After you read the thread at Xs. maybe you can rethink your thinking.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Also aigomorla could you link to more info on the Bench of the 8800gt.

After you read the thread at Xs. maybe you can rethink your thinking.

what more would you want to know?

evga 780i
xfx 8800GT
Q9650 ES Stepping A.

Team Xtreme or Crucial Tracers. If im going for fsb, its the tracers for sure.

PSU is a PCnC 750W

 

[OCGuy]

Am I wrong on the fact that Nehalem isnt going to launch mainstream this year at all? I could swear it was going to be servers and EE chips until 2009.....?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Also aigomorla could you link to more info on the Bench of the 8800gt.

After you read the thread at Xs. maybe you can rethink your thinking.

what more would you want to know?

evga 780i
xfx 8800GT
Q9650 ES Stepping A.

Team Xtreme or Crucial Tracers. If im going for fsb, its the tracers for sure.

PSU is a PCnC 750W

I would like to know were those numbers came from thats all . Here is why . This was with a Intel @3.6.
Here are apples to apples.

http://www.techpowerup.com/rev...Force_9800_GTX/20.html

You may not be impressed with the Nehalem score . But I am . Nehalem @2.93. I would say that Maybe the GPUs are running on empty myself.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Also aigomorla could you link to more info on the Bench of the 8800gt.

After you read the thread at Xs. maybe you can rethink your thinking.

what more would you want to know?

evga 780i
xfx 8800GT
Q9650 ES Stepping A.

Team Xtreme or Crucial Tracers. If im going for fsb, its the tracers for sure.

PSU is a PCnC 750W

I would like to know were those numbers came from thats all . Here is why . This was with a Intel @3.6.
Here are apples to apples.

http://www.techpowerup.com/rev...Force_9800_GTX/20.html

You may not be impressed with the Nehalem score . But I am . Nehalem @2.93. I would say that Maybe the GPUs are running on empty myself.

oh my 15k score is because im running sli.

thats why i said ignore the first 2 scores and look directly at the cpu score.

Nemisis you cant look at the first two scores. They reflect GPU power and not cpu power.

Those numbers would change if you changed a different video card on it.

What im looking at is the cpu score.

All 3 scores added together = 3dmark score.

So i took the first 2 scores given subtracted it by the overall 3dmark score, and that gives me the cpu score.


The cpu is showing unable to chase a penryn @ 3.0ghz so thats why im a bit unimpressed.


Freya:
http://i125.photobucket.com/al...aigomorla/IMG_1123.jpg

Heres how the cpu score looks like @ 3.6ghz
http://i125.photobucket.com/al...igomorla/36benches.jpg

 

[Khato]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
All 3 scores added together = 3dmark score.

This is incorrect. Just take a look at the score you posted earlier - last I checked 15465 != 6001 + 7431 + 4274.

Doing a quick search for 3dmark 06 score calculation yields that total score = 5/(1.7/((SM2 + SM3) / 2) + 0.3/CPU). Which in the case of the linked benchmark comes out to a CPU score of about 5185.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Thanks Klato.

You taught me something.

I was simply looking at the 9800gtx+ running at 3.6 and compared to the Nehalem setup at same res. Running a 6850 Vs. The 6850 in the 3.6 ghz setup. Nehalem looks strong to me.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Excuse my ignorance, I'm not very familiar with 3DMark scores and haven't paid too much attention to Intel stuff... but from what I've read here, it's saying that a 3GHz Nehalem is about as fast as a 3.6GHz Penryn, at least in 3DMark? Just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly... thanks.

 

[Nemesis 1]

You got it . That seems to be the case in 3Dmark 06. But at the same time the other 3D marks look strong to me also .

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Khato

Originally posted by: aigomorla
All 3 scores added together = 3dmark score.

This is incorrect. Just take a look at the score you posted earlier - last I checked 15465 != 6001 + 7431 + 4274.

Doing a quick search for 3dmark 06 score calculation yields that total score = 5/(1.7/((SM2 + SM3) / 2) + 0.3/CPU). Which in the case of the linked benchmark comes out to a CPU score of about 5185.

oh is that its calculated?

i always thought it was the sum of all scores = 3dmark06 scores?

Thank you for the correction.

Yes i too learn something new everyday.

 

[Qbah]

So, looks like that:

Nehalem at 2.93GHz gets 5200ish
Yorkfield at 3,6GHz gets 5200ish

Which means that Nehalem has a 600MHz advantage, at least in 3DMark... Wow! :shocked:

Well, my Q9450@3.2 is plenty fast But I'm sure there are some people who will bite the bullet and get them puppies! Especially if they're upgrading from an X2 or the first Core2's.

 

[VirtualLarry]

The question is, will those Nehalem @ 2.93 overclock to 3.6 themselves, or is 2.93 a limit? Because if they cost more, and 2.93 is a limit, then you would be likely better off with a 3.6 Penryn.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
The question is, will those Nehalem @ 2.93 overclock to 3.6 themselves, or is 2.93 a limit? Because if they cost more, and 2.93 is a limit, then you would be likely better off with a 3.6 Penryn.

Nehalem will launch at up to 3.2GHz, so I would assume it will overclock to 3.6GHz+.

In theory at least Nehalem should be as overclockable as Penryn, especially since it has a longer pipeline, but we will have to see if the new Quickpath bus / IMC restrict the oc'ing capability.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

This kinda confirms the the other Nehalem benches we've seen, and shows that it will have a nice performance boost over penryn.

But it won't change the fact that most games are highly GPU limited at higher resolutions, so upgrading to Nehalem on a gaming rig doesn't make much sense IMO

 

[Thor86]

Just remember, Nehlam with on-die memory controller, which will be the limiting factor for ocing, just like AMD cpus. And we will most likely see how much vmem it takes to burn out the cpu as well.