This memory is arranged and specced in a way that ”should” make it compatible. However, it simply doesn’t work, for unknown reasons. This incompatibility was first reported by NUCblog when reviewing the NUC7CJYH, so I wasn’t expecting it to work. Had some bog-standard Crucial 2133 MHz sticks in another NUC (Skylake i3), so I simply swapped (the Skylake NUC had no issues with the HyperX sticks).Why did it not boot? Doesn't GLK support DDR4-2400?
It seems again Linux based Operating Systems perform noticeably better on Geekbench than Windows. Using your Ubuntu score, I compared it to the SD845 Xiaomi, using the best results that get close to 2600: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/7847683?baseline=8071021While I finish up the rest of the testing, here's my Geekbench 4 result for the Pentium J5005 from Ubuntu 18.04:
Out of curiosity, does anyone care to check how this compares to Cortex-A72, A73 and A75 running under a 64-bit OS?
You sure about that frequency on BOINC? Because it has burst frequency of 1.83GHz.Intel Atom Z3735F Silvermont 1583 MHz
What does a Goldmont core chip get per MHz? I assume that it takes advantage of multiple cores? Is it nearly linear, that a 2 core Z3735F would make it half the score? Meaning a Penryn is 2.6x as fast per core? Or does it gain less than 2x with double the cores?Yes, the all-core frequency: checked in Windows using HWiNFO, and then in Linux Mint (64-bit on Bay Trail) using lscpu.
I spent an hour trying to get BOINC Manager to add the project, but it would always fail with a message along the lines of "Couldn't add the project. Please try again later". Yay... Tried two different BOINC versions and even attempted using boinccmd. Got a different error message there and decided to give up.personally, I want to see throughout in BOINC project TheSkyNet POGS. Intel Atom Z3735F Silvermont 1583 MHz can do 815 credit/day per core (0.515 credit/day per MHz); Core 2 Duo E8600 Penryn 3580 MHz can do 2422 credit/day per core (0.677 credit/day per MHz). I wonder how far the Atom class progressed here. Extreme memory latency looking onerous..
I don't have a Goldmont processor to run. The project tasks are single-threaded. First, I get throughput by running an instance on each thread, then divide by number of cores. So, one can say the Penryn is 2.6x the performance per core of the Silvermont, when all cores are active.What does a Goldmont core chip get per MHz? I assume that it takes advantage of multiple cores? Is it nearly linear, that a 2 core Z3735F would make it half the score? Meaning a Penryn is 2.6x as fast per core? Or does it gain less than 2x with double the cores?
That's fine. The project doesn't have any tasks ready to send at the moment.I spent an hour trying to get BOINC Manager to add the project, but it would always fail with a message along the lines of "Couldn't add the project. Please try again later". Yay... Tried two different BOINC versions and even attempted using boinccmd. Got a different error message there and decided to give up.
From CPU performance perspective somewhere between Snapdragon 835 and 845. However if looking at SoC level in particular GPU the J5005 is far behind.While it might be pointless to compare to ARM, it's still fun from a "what-if" perspective. It does appear Goldmont Plus is very competitive with current high-end ARM-designs (excluding the big cores such as Apple's A11), from a pure performance perspective. It's of course almost impossible to draw any firm conslusions regarding power efficiency, though. Completely different systems, design goals and far too many unknowns.
Maybe drivers? I assume CPU is helping quite a bit as well.Identical graphics configuration, but graphics performance went up by that much?
That is no excuse if we assume that Intel 14nm is as advanced as TSMC 10nm. Others have advanced well ahead of Intel while not having a better process.As a what-if, we have to consider their graphics has been standstill since late 2015. They've been hit by the unexpected delays to their process, not only their 10nm, but 14nm as well. The same problem their CPU division has been hit with affected their GPU team. It looks like the "Atom" team has planned in advance though.
TDP is a quite useless measure if we are talking actual power draw at a given workload (aka power efficiency). For certain low power workloads the performance between N5000 and J5005 might be similar but at one point the 6W limit kicks in and the 6W SoC starts to throttle, which widens the gap. This is typically the case if you look at combined CPU/GPU workloads.A desktop oriented chip like the J5005 also exaggerates the TDP differences. I doubt the 6W TDP N5000 is more than a little bit slower than the 10W J5005.
Your post should include the fact Intel did not plan on having 14nm for so long. Skylake's Gen 9 architecture is what's used in Goldmont, and Goldmont Plus. Had they planned for it, we might have seen a variant of future GPU architecture(Gen 10 and 11) on the 14nm, improving performance and efficiency over current graphics. For the CPU cores in Geminilake, it was planned on 14nm, thus we saw significant improvement despite being on 14nm.That is no excuse if we assume that Intel 14nm is as advanced as TSMC 10nm. Others have advanced well ahead of Intel while not having a better process.
The difference compared to some year ago is, that Intel cannot bank anymore on technological superiority - and the weakness of architecture starts to show.
Laughs why would you want to use power vr with atom?Intel should use Power VR instead of their own GPU if they are continuing like that on Atom...
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|I||Question Is there really any need for Intel to keep AVX-512 alive now?||CPUs and Overclocking||7|
|Question The Intel G6400 / 4.0Ghz Pentium Love Fest thread.||CPUs and Overclocking||12|
|Z||Review Intel Core i9 10850K Review (TechPowerUp)||CPUs and Overclocking||62|
|News Intel figured out how to compete with AMD!||CPUs and Overclocking||96|
|Discussion Cinebench Results for 2 Intel and 2 AMD Hex Core Systems at equivalent clock speed of roughly 4Ghz||CPUs and Overclocking||30|
|Question Is there really any need for Intel to keep AVX-512 alive now?|
|Question The Intel G6400 / 4.0Ghz Pentium Love Fest thread.|
|Review Intel Core i9 10850K Review (TechPowerUp)|
|News Intel figured out how to compete with AMD!|
|Discussion Cinebench Results for 2 Intel and 2 AMD Hex Core Systems at equivalent clock speed of roughly 4Ghz|