Previews - Intel Nehalem benchmarked: muscling to victory

[sawyen]

you'd never know really.. the R670 was relatively poo compared to the G98..

Then based on the same architecture.. a few tweaks.. bumped up the shaders and voila.. instant GTX260 killer..

AMD could possibly do the same thing for Barcelona shrink.. bring on the same architecture.. tweak things now that makes bloody sense.. and maybe bump up some interger performance and interconnect willies.. they might have something to compete with iC7...

The bigger L3 helps in these new chips but AMD has to up the HT3 speeds to fend off the QPI which current has better bandwidth..

[Sumanji]

I still dont like where intel is going with their roadmaps.

lol the roadmaps show their CPU's getting smaller, cooler and quicker - what's not to like?!

[mercyground]

I didnt like that its taken them till now to replace the FSB with QPI.
Scaling to multicores has always been better on AMD's side. Multicore Barcelona's are better than Xeons. (Mainly FSB contention).

And honestly? What the hell are you going to do with 8 cores or more? Quads have little advantage to a regular user. Most hardcore gamers want a fast dualcore.

The CPU as we know it is coming to an end. Software needs to change before multicores will truely shine.

[tomasp]

well, well, so nehalem sucks at games, this is not good for intel, nehalem was supposed to beat the existings core 2 architecture to be successful.

nehalem has a big yield and hyperthreading is known for been power greedy.

shangai is power efficient (50% compered with 65nm), smaller yield, and is going to be better at games than nehalem for what it seems.

and another thing, the overclocking, i dont think well see 6ghz nehalems (try to overclock this big chip)


so if i'm an intel gamer fanboy, i will have to be content with the old core 2... or maybe get a new phenom

more info about in anandtech

[Sumanji]

well, well, so nehalem sucks at games, this is not good for intel, nehalem was supposed to beat the existings core 2 architecture to be successful...

Nooooo

Since i7 is basically an improved C2Q on steroids, it is impossible for it to be worse clock for clock.

One look in Device Manager showed that not all the correct drivers had been installed, which did little to hinder 2D performance, but played a part in sub-optimal 3D results... But take a look at the CPU-only score and Nehalem's power rears its head.

I'm surprised the Hexus guys actually bothered to do any 3D benches at all, when fully knowing the results would be unfair.

i7 will destroy all in games, this is surefire.

[Tarinder]

You gotta do what you can when the opportunity presents itself.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

well, well, so nehalem sucks at games, this is not good for intel, nehalem was supposed to beat the existings core 2 architecture to be successful.

point me to a benchmark stating that a core 2 is faster at games AT the same clock speed please. what was the last architecture before core 2? the transition from the architecture before core 2 in comparison to core 2, did it show any increase in game performance? link me please

[tomasp]

read anandtech article ''What Nehalem is really about''

i cant post links yet

[Tweaker]

Been using a E6600 since launch, this will be a good upgrade. I think it will be better for early adopters like me to buy the i7.

[TooNice]

Leave it 6 months from launch and DDR3 will be dirt cheap. The same always happens when there is a major shift in the mainstream memory type.

Probably at least 18 months before the price bottoms out though. DDR2 became 'affordable' a year after Core 2 was released, but I still remember that price dropped by a lot even 6 months before memory price bottomed at around 15 quid per GB (during that time, people were constantly going 'Oh gosh, and I thought I had a bargain when I paid XX). Bit of a dilemma for me, had I built a Core 2 based desktop, I would be happy to sit out the first iteration of the i7. Now though, I am not too sure - prices of the Core 2 CPU seems to have stabilised, so I no longer have the impulse to buy one (unless I can grab one off someone for cheap). Maybe I will just settle with my laptop for another year. Time to see whether the 8400GS can cope with casual gaming.

Edit: Actually, what do we know about heat/power consumption? It is becoming more important to me to have a power efficient machine than something that is massively overclockable while doubling CPU power consumption (technically, my bill's included in my rent, but it can change if the machine is a hog on idle).

[armistitiu]

This benchmark is full of crap. How can you use the Vista Sp1 default driver for AMD MB? Why did you use DDR3 for the intel CPUs? That's just not fair for AMD. If the memory works at 1600Mhz (twice as DDR2 used for AMD CPU) of course you get the better results. I think AMD's scores will improve greatly after they realease the support for DDR3.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

This benchmark is full of crap. How can you use the Vista Sp1 default driver for AMD MB? Why did you use DDR3 for the intel CPUs? That's just not fair for AMD. If the memory works at 1600Mhz (twice as DDR2 used for AMD CPU) of course you get the better results. I think AMD's scores will improve greatly after they realease the support for DDR3.

wtf? you ok?

[Lee H]

This benchmark is full of crap. How can you use the Vista Sp1 default driver for AMD MB? Why did you use DDR3 for the intel CPUs? That's just not fair for AMD. If the memory works at 1600Mhz (twice as DDR2 used for AMD CPU) of course you get the better results. I think AMD's scores will improve greatly after they realease the support for DDR3.

The reason DDR3 was used was down to the fact that it's running on an X58 chipset board for the LGA1366. If Intel had a DDR2 board available I bet it would have been tested, but seeing as it's all going to DDR3 I can't see them bringing a DDR2 supporting board out. Also, don't forget that the Nehalem is TRIPLE CHANNEL hence the 6 memory slots and this helps with the memory performance scores as well

I cannot see AMD coming close to the performance of the intel processors for a while now. They already pulled their ace out of the sleeve a few years ago with the 939 series of processors, but now intel have learnt from their mistakes and appear to have the market sewn up for what could be a few years to say the least judging from their roadmaps.

Oh and if you feel the need to retort to this post with the immortal words "Intel fanboi", please take a look at my system configuration over on the left

[j.o.s.h.1408]

The reason DDR3 was used was down to the fact that it's running on an X58 chipset board for the LGA1366. If Intel had a DDR2 board available I bet it would have been tested, but seeing as it's all going to DDR3 I can't see them bringing a DDR2 supporting board out. Also, don't forget that the Nehalem is TRIPLE CHANNEL hence the 6 memory slots and this helps with the memory performance scores as well

I cannot see AMD coming close to the performance of the intel processors for a while now. They already pulled their ace out of the sleeve a few years ago with the 939 series of processors, but now intel have learnt from their mistakes and appear to have the market sewn up for what could be a few years to say the least judging from their roadmaps.

Oh and if you feel the need to retort to this post with the immortal words "Intel fanboi", please take a look at my system configuration over on the left

nicely put it.

[Noxvayl]

I cannot see AMD coming close to the performance of the intel processors for a while now. They already pulled their ace out of the sleeve a few years ago with the 939 series of processors, but now intel have learnt from their mistakes and appear to have the market sewn up for what could be a few years to say the least judging from their roadmaps.

Wait until the river cards are dealt... AMD could very well hit a flush(ace high ) for all we know

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem is that we never actually know how things will pan out... take the R600, R670 and R770 for example. R600 was marketed very well with major interest spun from rumours and leaked benchmarks. Everyone and there grandma expected ATI to pull something off yet it was the biggest flop ever. Then quietly and unexpectedly the R670 comes out and takes a little bit of there dignity back. Then WHAM ATI release the HD4850/HD4870 and obliterate the competition... Was unexpected but it happened though.

Seeing though AMD and ATI are one and the same I'd say they are learning from there mistakes and quietly gaining ground without stirring the pot. We don't know what to expect but don't toss them aside because they made one mistake, often mistakes lead to breakthroughs...

I'm not saying AMD will beat Intel but I am not going to jump the gun saying Intel is for sure going to beat there competitors hands down. Truth is we don't know and that's the way its going to stay until the CPU's are released.

[armistitiu]

sorry about my ignorance (i didn't know that Intel's new CPU's don't support DDR2 anymore) but i was trying to point out that AMD will have some serious performance boost when they will start to support DDR3 and of course their HT3.1 which will make a fool out of Intel's brand new integrated memory controller(btw it's kind of late to get rid of the old FSB tech).