S1156 platform launches sept 8th

[taltamir]

that is a stupid thing to do... turbo mode is an essential feature of the chip, and one specifically targetted at games...

Although, if turbo mode is not easily reproduceable that could cause problems... i hear that turbo mode engages even on 4 cores DEPENDING ON TEMPERATURES and for limited times...

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Jumpem

Why would they do benchmarks with turbo off. That's a key point for the i7 860.

Ya I know it doesn't make a lot of sense. They mentioned something about high temperatures on stock cooler I believe...meh

But even without Turbo Mode, i7 860 won. Hopefully by tomorrow morning there will be 20 websites with benchmarks.

I got an offer today for my Q6600 + P35 board for $205. I can pick up Q9550 for $170 and a Gigabyte P45 board for $88 = $258 (net outlay of $53). Reuse my 4GBs ram and Tuniq Tower to clock that to 3.8-4.0ghz (hopefully).

VS.

Core i7 860 = $244
Cooler (some time down the line due to lack of 1156 choices now) = $45
4GB DDR3 1600 = $90
MSI P55 mobo = $85
Total: $464 (net outlay of $259). So I'd save $206 towards a videocard upgrade from 4890 later...

Hard to convince myself to pay an extra $206 for Core i7 setup. What do you guys think?

 

[taltamir]

But even without Turbo Mode, i7 860 won. Hopefully by tomorrow morning there will be 20 websites with benchmarks.

Makes sense, it has a slightly higher base clockspeed, AND it has much better latency for single video cards... which is why i think it has been beating even the 940 (which it doesn't have a clockspeed advantage over).

 

[Mr Fox]

Originally posted by: taltamir

But even without Turbo Mode, i7 860 won. Hopefully by tomorrow morning there will be 20 websites with benchmarks.

Makes sense, it has a slightly higher base clockspeed, AND it has much better latency for single video cards... which is why i think it has been beating even the 940 (which it doesn't have a clockspeed advantage over).

Anand has beat the clock

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=3634

Old Lal was on it !!

No H/T on the Bargain Chip...

 

[taltamir]

that has been known for months... besides which, the i7 for s1156 DOES have HT, only the i5 doesn't

 

[Pneumothorax]

Looks like I made the right choice with my 920@$200. The lynfield o/c headroom is being quite limited by the onchip pcie.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: taltamir

But even without Turbo Mode, i7 860 won. Hopefully by tomorrow morning there will be 20 websites with benchmarks.

Makes sense, it has a slightly higher base clockspeed, AND it has much better latency for single video cards... which is why i think it has been beating even the 940 (which it doesn't have a clockspeed advantage over).

What are you talking about? The i7 940 is clocked slightly higher at 2.93GHz. Without Turbo i7 940 should be faster than i7 860. It's however extremely good to hear the 860 is faster than 920 without TM. I think the final revision of the motherboard and increased uncore speeds took out the +1 speed grade difference in performance they had in the pre-release samples.

That said, they upped the uncore speeds from the ES samples that were floating in sites like XS few months ago. It used to be 2GHz, now they are at 2.4GHz for 860/870 and 2.13GHz for i7 750.

Intel pulled few surprises with Lynnfield

-Uncore clock is higher
-Lynnfield has absolutely NO QPI
-Die size and transistor count is higher than Bloomfield(I've actually predicted this but its good to see confirmed )

From the comments section, Intel seems to be right on about marketshare for Bloomfield and Lynnfield. It should be much more than Bloomfield but it'll still account for less than 10% of overall sales.

I said it before but I'll say it again, Nehalem uArch will seem more impressive with every successive release.

Now watch what surprises Clarkdale will have in store.

 

[taltamir]

What are you talking about? The i7 940 is clocked slightly higher at 2.93GHz. Without Turbo i7 940 should be faster than i7 860.

That is what i said, and yet it beats it in many tests.

-Lynnfield has absolutely NO QPI

Southbridge was connected to via DMI, QPI was only use to connect to northbridge which has been integrated into CPU... CPU integration is FASTER than QPI link to separate chip
Also, not a surprise, known for months.

Now watch what surprises Clarkdale will have in store.

None, like lynnfield before it, all the info is already out. It does have very interesting changes, just no SURPRISES.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: taltamir

What are you talking about? The i7 940 is clocked slightly higher at 2.93GHz. Without Turbo i7 940 should be faster than i7 860.

That is what i said, and yet it beats it in many tests.

-Lynnfield has absolutely NO QPI

Southbridge was connected to via DMI, QPI was only use to connect to northbridge which has been integrated into CPU... CPU integration is FASTER than QPI link to separate chip
Also, not a surprise, known for months.

Now watch what surprises Clarkdale will have in store.

None, like lynnfield before it, all the info is already out. It does have very interesting changes, just no SURPRISES.

1. Are you sure about that? Because from what I read those tests(that has 860 beat 940, besides majority of the reviews don't even test 860) have TM enabled. BTW, I'm talking about post by RussianSensation from PCGamesHardware. Which suggests only 920 is tested.

2. Not to majority of the people who believed with all their hearts content that Lynnfield has a PCI Express controller connected to the CPU with QPI. For them it'll be a surprise to find out they are indeed sticking to the "modular" approach and Lynnfield has a separate die.

3. Depending on people a surprise might be an "interesting change". But as always taltamir will say he knew it all along. :roll:

 

[taltamir]

I only knew all along because i read preview after preview, leaked spec sheet after spec sheet, and info about engineering samples given out.

 

[Genx87]

I have to wait and see what the next gen GPU's offer with the i5\i7. I may end up sticking with my E8400. The review on Anand didnt impress me in terms of gaming performance.

 

[taltamir]

i was impressed, just not enough to justify the cost. I have a Q9400... sure its AN upgrade... but hundreds of dollars worth? no.

 

[drizek]

I was mostly impressed with the idle power numbers and video encoding, but not much else.

Westmere will be nice for laptops, but I think if you have a desktop with a fairly recent Phenom II or C2Q and you mostly just game, it isn't worth it to have to get a whole new system.

 

[Spicedaddy]

I'm currently running C2D E7200 on a P35-DS3L board and was thinking of getting a Q9400 or Q9550, but Core i5 750 with a Gigabyte P55M-UD2 sounds nice, and relatively cheap. Turbo mode is great as I probably wouldn't overclock anymore. (work computer, it's been bugging me that I currently run an overclocked CPU in it )

I think I'll make the move when prices settle in 2-3 weeks...

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: Spicedaddy
I'm currently running C2D E7200 on a P35-DS3L board and was thinking of getting a Q9400 or Q9550, but Core i5 750 with a Gigabyte P55M-UD2 sounds nice, and relatively cheap. Turbo mode is great as I probably wouldn't overclock anymore. (work computer, it's been bugging me that I currently run an overclocked CPU in it )

I think I'll make the move when prices settle in 2-3 weeks...

The cheapest motherboards for P55 seems to be Intel DP55WB and Gigabyte P55M-UD2. $109/$119 CDN pricing for a new motherboard on an Intel chipset is ridiculous.

Southbridge was connected to via DMI, QPI was only use to connect to northbridge which has been integrated into CPU... CPU integration is FASTER than QPI link to separate chip

Apparently according to Toms Lynnfield uses QPI to do internal connection between CPU and PCI Express but its faster(because its internal and can be clocked faster or w/e).

 

[imported_Shaq]

Are there any tests showing that the on board PCIE lanes are doing anything over a 920? In Anand's article he alluded that it made OC'ing more difficult and only 1 of them went over 4.0Ghz. It looks like the 920 D0 is still the way to go if you OC. Unless you get a board with the Lucid Hydra, but those will be coming to X58 later on too.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: drizek
I was mostly impressed with the idle power numbers and video encoding, but not much else.

Westmere will be nice for laptops, but I think if you have a desktop with a fairly recent Phenom II or C2Q and you mostly just game, it isn't worth it to have to get a whole new system.

i was very very impressed with the idle power... but no way it will ever pay for itself as an upgrade for an existing system.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: drizek
I was mostly impressed with the idle power numbers and video encoding, but not much else.

Westmere will be nice for laptops, but I think if you have a desktop with a fairly recent Phenom II or C2Q and you mostly just game, it isn't worth it to have to get a whole new system.

i was very very impressed with the idle power... but no way it will ever pay for itself as an upgrade for an existing system.

Yea, these are for the new buyers that would have previously bought Core 2 Quad or Phenom II. Most upgraders wait at least 1.5 Gen. I am a Core 2 Conroe user waiting for 87W IGP Clarkdale.

It`s rather a telling sign how much chipsets consume even at idle. Nvidia will have a big disadvantage if they make Lynnfield compatible chipset. Especially with laptops.