|
4 Day Weekend posted:Those are pretty awesome. I'll probably pick them up once they get a bit cheaper. Be careful with the WD drive. I have had nothing but trouble with the Enterprise version of the 2TB 7200 RPM drive. I am talking about 40% failure (5/12 drives went).
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 05:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
Alereon posted:and the platform is more efficient overall. Wait, what makes it more efficient? The overclocking benchmarks I've seen, with both chips at the same speed, generally put the X58 ahead (there are also the SLI/Crossfire benefits with X58, but that's for crazy people so it doesn't really count).
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 06:52
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Your link seems to show DoWII NOT scaling significantly with cache size, so I'm not sure why they said it did. They compared the Core 2 Duo E8400 and Intel Core 2 Duo E6850. Same clock speed. Different cache size. 10% faster with 2MB more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 08:19
|
|
|
Fats posted:Wait, what makes it more efficient? The overclocking benchmarks I've seen, with both chips at the same speed, generally put the X58 ahead (there are also the SLI/Crossfire benefits with X58, but that's for crazy people so it doesn't really count). KingEup posted:They compared the Core 2 Duo E8400 and Intel Core 2 Duo E6850. Same clock speed. Different cache size. 10% faster with 2MB more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 09:03
|
|
|
Alereon posted:It has an on-die PCI-E controller and the memory controller supports higher clockspeeds. I guess, though I wonder what the practical differences between having the PCIe controller on the die versus on the QPI are. QPI seems insanely quick. Anyway, I digress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 20:01
|
|
|
Do we have a solid release date? A friend of mine wants to buy a PC, trying to convince him to wait for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 03:03
|
|
|
4 Day Weekend posted:Do we have a solid release date? A friend of mine wants to buy a PC, trying to convince him to wait for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 03:45
|
|
|
movax posted:By legacy, I mean more offering up BIOS services to the OS. If you remember DOS and its ilk, they used direct BIOS interrupts for nearly everything. Like EnergizerFellow mentioned, even 32-bit Win7 still needs to use int 19h to actually *boot*. The newest Dell PE servers have a BIOS/firmware update utility built right in to the motherboard and I cannot begin to describe how completely awesome it is. Set the IP, pulls down updates from Dell's FTP repository, and goes. No muss no fuss.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 15:28
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Probably early January, during the Consumer Electronics Show (Jan 7-11). Officially Intel is just saying "Q1" right now, though they've released forecasts expecting that Sandy Bridge will make up 20% of desktop CPU shipments in Q1, which indicates an early and heavy launch. Board manufacturers are demoing complete product lines of LGA-1155 boards now, so it can't be that far off. What the hell is the other 80? C2Ds?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 15:31
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:What the hell is the other 80? C2Ds? Old-school i3/i5/i7's, I'd imagine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2010 00:23
|
|
|
Any word yet on pricing? An i5-2500K for ~$200 would be nice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2010 01:50
|
|
|
Also there are still 1366 CPUs due Q2/Q3 next year- 990x from memory, so flipping the production switch between Nehalem & Sandy Bridge will take all of 2011 I expect
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2010 01:59
|
|
|
Fudzilla is reporting that Apple will switch to AMD Fusion processors in their upcoming products (update with additional confirmation here). This is probably a direct response to Sandy Bridge's on-die graphics not supporting OpenCL, as Apple has committed to shipping every computer with support for GPGPU acceleration. On products without dedicated GPUs, they do this by pairing an older Core 2 Duo processor with an nVidia Geforce 320M chipset that provides CUDA and OpenCL support. Since the Core 2 Duo is getting old and nVidia won't be making any more chipsets, they pretty much have to switch to AMD unless they're willing to put a dedicated GPU in every product (including the Macbook Air) or abandon their GPU acceleration plans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 05:15
|
|
|
dud root posted:Also there are still 1366 CPUs due Q2/Q3 next year- 990x from memory, so flipping the production switch between Nehalem & Sandy Bridge will take all of 2011 I expect Is this confirmed? I held off on 1366 because it was built with a evolutionary dead endness in mind with the 6 core CPUs that were launched.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 07:19
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Fudzilla is reporting that Apple will switch to AMD Fusion processors in their upcoming products (update with additional confirmation here). This is probably a direct response to Sandy Bridge's on-die graphics not supporting OpenCL, as Apple has committed to shipping every computer with support for GPGPU acceleration. On products without dedicated GPUs, they do this by pairing an older Core 2 Duo processor with an nVidia Geforce 320M chipset that provides CUDA and OpenCL support. Since the Core 2 Duo is getting old and nVidia won't be making any more chipsets, they pretty much have to switch to AMD unless they're willing to put a dedicated GPU in every product (including the Macbook Air) or abandon their GPU acceleration plans. I don't really like the idea of Intel dominating the mobile market so that's a win for us all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 07:45
|
|
|
AMD can't make decent mobile chips to save their lives, that's why Intel dominates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 08:04
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Probably early January, during the Consumer Electronics Show (Jan 7-11). Officially Intel is just saying "Q1" right now, though they've released forecasts expecting that Sandy Bridge will make up 20% of desktop CPU shipments in Q1, which indicates an early and heavy launch. Board manufacturers are demoing complete product lines of LGA-1155 boards now, so it can't be that far off. Then I only have to wait until the beginning of Jan for the i5-2500k? That'd be awesome. Will all these sockets be EFI? Its a new tech, so I'm a little concerned about being a 1st gen beta tester for it. Are there any worries in that regard, or has EFI been tested for a while?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 13:48
|
|
|
Siroc posted:Then I only have to wait until the beginning of Jan for the i5-2500k? That'd be awesome. Will all these sockets be EFI? Its a new tech, so I'm a little concerned about being a 1st gen beta tester for it. Are there any worries in that regard, or has EFI been tested for a while? Pretty sure that every Intel based Mac uses EFI rather than BIOS.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 16:32
|
|
|
Lum posted:Pretty sure that every Intel based Mac uses EFI rather than BIOS. This is true, I think board manufacturers have been playing with EFI since 2004ish (no real sources to back it up other than Intel based Macs coming to the scene) so I wouldn't worry about being a test dummy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 16:44
|
|
|
fishmech posted:AMD can't make decent mobile chips to save their lives, that's why Intel dominates. The new fusion mobile chip is a monster. Read the most recent articles regarding Zacate or Brazos.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 23:07
|
|
|
Sandy Bridge has been my baby for the past 18 months. It's exciting seeing the media and everyone elses reactions and comments. Looking forward to getting one of my own to replace my Yorkfield.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 23:08
|
|
|
Medikit posted:The new fusion mobile chip is a monster. Read the most recent articles regarding Zacate or Brazos. That's the trouble with AMD mobile chips, they're always monsters. Nice if you like desktop replacements.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 23:21
|
|
|
fishmech posted:That's the trouble with AMD mobile chips, they're always monsters. Nice if you like desktop replacements.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2010 23:28
|
|
|
leppo posted:You couldn't be more wrong for these upcoming chips (based on all the info released so far). It'll be interesting if any site does a top to bottom lineup comparison test of brazos-llano-bulldozer compared with atom-sandy(2c)-sandy(4c) using just integrated GPUs. ilkhan fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Nov 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 04:25
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Everything I've heard says they're atom with a better GPU. CPU better/worse depending on model, GPU better than current atom paired GPUs. Eh, I'm not looking at the $400 market anyway when I can buy a refurb latitude or the like ($1200 orig) for $600. Ontario and Zacate are structured similarly to an Atom processor (similar pipeline depth) except that they have an out-of-order instruction set rather than the Atom's antiquated in-order instruction set. The out-of-order instruction means it will consume more power with Ontario and Zacate having a TDP of 8 and 18 W compared to the Atom N450's 5.5 W. However, it will be vastly more powerful with claims that at least the faster Zacate will be 90% as powerful as a similarly clocked desktop processor. So, Zacate may end up being almost as powerful as an Arrandale ULV processor with better graphics and lower price. I'm quite excited for Zacate despite having graphics weaker than I would like. Not to knock on the graphics since it'll be as powerful as a discrete Radeon HD 5450 and I would have preferred a discrete Radeon HD 5650-level card. The Ontario/Zacate spec does have provisions for discrete graphics on a PCIe 2.0 x4 bus. It'll offer a massive advantage over Ion 2's PCIe x1 bus. I hope that some OEMs will offer some models with a mid-end discrete graphics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 06:00
|
|
|
Edward IV posted:Ontario and Zacate are structured similarly to an Atom processor (similar pipeline depth) except that they have an out-of-order instruction set rather than the Atom's antiquated in-order instruction set. The out-of-order instruction means it will consume more power with Ontario and Zacate having a TDP of 8 and 18 W compared to the Atom N450's 5.5 W. We'll just have to see how pricing turns out. Zacate is supposed to be about 75mm^2 (40nm) while sandy-2C is probably going to be 140mm^2+-5mm^2. Thats a lot of extra die space for economies of scale to make up for. But AFAIK the Atom SoCs are even smaller (for less performance). AMD has really been executing well on a die space perspective, lately.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 07:24
|
|
|
Siroc posted:Then I only have to wait until the beginning of Jan for the i5-2500k? That'd be awesome. Will all these sockets be EFI? Its a new tech, so I'm a little concerned about being a 1st gen beta tester for it. Are there any worries in that regard, or has EFI been tested for a while? There's nothing to worry about, EFI-based BIOS have been in Macs, and vendors like AMI have very mature EFI implementations; there were full EFI-based BIOSes available for Calpella & it's accompanying generation, if any vendors felt so inclined. On topic, I can't wait, an i7-2500 is in my future. My E6600 is choking miserably on CoD Black Ops, and I'm beginning to think it was my E6600 bottlenecking a ton of games, not a 8800GTS. (Just bought a GTX460, and I think the E6600 is bottlenecking it...) Downside, new mobo, CPU and RAM, but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 21:57
|
|
|
Since I never follow pricing trends, I'm looking to get a build a whole new system, what are the odds the new cpus are going to be prohibitively expensive the first few months?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 22:36
|
|
|
movax posted:There's nothing to worry about, EFI-based BIOS have been in Macs, and vendors like AMI have very mature EFI implementations; there were full EFI-based BIOSes available for Calpella & it's accompanying generation, if any vendors felt so inclined. The E6600 has had a good service life though. Mine has been dutifully chugging away for 4 years now, it's really not surprising that my next upgrade is going to involve a total platform overhaul. In hindsight it really amazes me how much hardware requirements for applications stagnated over that period of time. Between purging of old hardware and greater adoption of .NET and the overhead it costs, they seem to be going up in earnest for the first time in years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 22:47
|
|
|
The other side of the coin is that over this generation processors are doing more work per clockcycle than before. I would bet a dollar or two that my E8400 (assuming I could turn one core off) can do more work faster than any of the p4 era 3.0GHz processors. AMD really started this trend with their Athlon 64 line, lower clocks but faster. Numbers for requirements were probably inflated a bit (like the wattage on crappy power supplies are) to make sure you could get the performance you needed
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
KKKLIP ART posted:The other side of the coin is that over this generation processors are doing more work per clockcycle than before. I would bet a dollar or two that my E8400 (assuming I could turn one core off) can do more work faster than any of the p4 era 3.0GHz processors. AMD really started this trend with their Athlon 64 line, lower clocks but faster. Numbers for requirements were probably inflated a bit (like the wattage on crappy power supplies are) to make sure you could get the performance you needed To give you some sense of scale, the slowest C2D at debut was the 1.86GHz E6300 and that was just as fast as the most powerful Netburst 3.73GHz dual-core + HT Extreme Edition chip. A 3GHz E8400 which is 10% more efficient per clock than the original C2Ds is going eat any P4 for breakfast, regurgitate it as lunch and chew through it as dinner. On the on the hand of the spectrum, A 2.2 GHz P4 released in 2002 is on par with a 1.6GHz Atom. That should show how terrible Atoms are in terms of performance/price even if netbooks are pretty cheap to start with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 00:48
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:The E6600 has had a good service life though. Mine has been dutifully chugging away for 4 years now, it's really not surprising that my next upgrade is going to involve a total platform overhaul. In hindsight it really amazes me how much hardware requirements for applications stagnated over that period of time. Between purging of old hardware and greater adoption of .NET and the overhead it costs, they seem to be going up in earnest for the first time in years. Oh god yes. I am really excited that the CPU I bought 4 years ago has just now hit a game it's bottlenecking (and patches for Black Ops are helping out). It's close to the limit, definitely (Mass Effect 1 would lag with my 8800GTS 640, had to be the CPU), but for just generic tasks + development, VM, etc, it is pretty solid. I've pushed it's overclock up to 3.1GHz in an effort to hold out until I can get my paws on a new Asus mobo + i7-2500.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 01:37
|
|
|
freeforumuser posted:On the on the hand of the spectrum, A 2.2 GHz P4 released in 2002 is on par with a 1.6GHz Atom. That should show how terrible Atoms are in terms of performance/price even if netbooks are pretty cheap to start with. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 01:53
|
|
|
Disgustipated posted:Atoms aren't about price/performance, though. They're performance/watt. If a 1.6 GHz Atom really is as fast as a 2.2 GHz P4 that's pretty fantastic given how little power they use, especially compared to how ridiculous Netburst was. This is really a point in Atom's favor in my opinion. Yeah that Pentium 4 took as much power as a bright incandescent and could cook dinner, that atom takes as much power as a couple of remote control IR bulbs and might be mildly uncomfortable if you pressed it against your skin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 02:12
|
|
|
Disgustipated posted:Atoms aren't about price/performance, though. They're performance/watt. If a 1.6 GHz Atom really is as fast as a 2.2 GHz P4 that's pretty fantastic given how little power they use, especially compared to how ridiculous Netburst was. This is really a point in Atom's favor in my opinion. I used to own a Latitude C640 with a P4-M 2.2GHz. Battery life peaked at a hour, I think. Atom performance may be "atrocious", but it is kind to batteries. Too bad the first-gen netbooks paired a retarded powerhungry 9 series chipset with the Atom.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 02:13
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:UEFI, I was told anyway, also allows for the operating system to do a warm reboot without UEFI re-executing. So there is that. OpenSolaris could do a warm reboot on its own, as long all drivers could make their devices shut up. The Linux kernel came out with their own possibility of warm rebooting shortly after, altho they still seem to keep it for kernel testing only.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 04:08
|
|
|
movax posted:It's close to the limit, definitely (Mass Effect 1 would lag with my 8800GTS 640, had to be the CPU), but for just generic tasks + development, VM, etc, it is pretty solid. I think ME1 was pretty much a fluke in terms of performance. The sequel runs better on my crappy old E6750/Radeon 3870 than the original, even with the settings turned up higher.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 04:23
|
|
|
The Dark One posted:I think ME1 was pretty much a fluke in terms of performance. The sequel runs better on my crappy old E6750/Radeon 3870 than the original, even with the settings turned up higher. Could be something to do with ATI/Nvidia drivers. Both flew on my E6600/9800GT, I don't think one performed better than the other/.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 04:38
|
|
|
I want to say I'm going to play it smart and keep my current i5 750 build, but I know in my heart I'm gonna blow a cashwad on this. It'll still use the same DDR3 ram though, please?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 10:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
Do you guys think I'll be able to attach my Cooler Master V8 to a LGA 1155 motherboard? It's fine on my LGA 775 for now, and my friend used it on LGA 1156 before. I really want to reuse it, it looks so massive
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 14:09
|
|
