Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
oblomov
Jun 20, 2002

Meh... #overrated

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).

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Fats
Oct 13, 2006

What I cannot create, I do not understand

Fun Shoe

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).

KingEup
Nov 18, 2004
I am a REAL ADDICT
(to threadshitting)


Please ask me for my google inspired wisdom on shit I know nothing about. Actually, you don't even have to ask.


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.

Alereon
Feb 6, 2004

Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed

College Slice

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).
It has an on-die PCI-E controller and the memory controller supports higher clockspeeds. The LGA-1366 platform has an extra memory channel, but that's not really beneficial outside of data compression applications. The improved power efficiency also enables more aggressive Turbo Modes.

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.
Yeah but the E6860 is a 65nm Conroe CPU, the E8400 is a 45nm Wolfdale CPU. There's a lot more going on there than the change in cache size. If they had thrown in a Q9500 for example that would have been diagnostic.

Fats
Oct 13, 2006

What I cannot create, I do not understand

Fun Shoe

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.

4 Day Weekend
Jan 16, 2009


Do we have a solid release date? A friend of mine wants to buy a PC, trying to convince him to wait for it.

Alereon
Feb 6, 2004

Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed

College Slice

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.
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.

BangersInMyKnickers
Nov 3, 2004

I have a thing for courageous dongles



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*.

Device compatibility shouldn't change, but you can do some really cool poo poo in just the EFI shell environment. There's a full TCP/IP stack available, and vendors like AMI have tools like AMIDiag, which is essentially EFI-memtest86 + other tools, with a shiny GUI!

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.

Crosby B. Alfred
May 20, 2006


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?

JnnyThndrs
May 29, 2001

HERE ARE THE FUCKING TOWELS

Tab8715 posted:

What the hell is the other 80? C2Ds?

Old-school i3/i5/i7's, I'd imagine.

spasticColon
Sep 22, 2004

In loving memory of Donald Pleasance

Any word yet on pricing? An i5-2500K for ~$200 would be nice.

dud root
Mar 30, 2008


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

Alereon
Feb 6, 2004

Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed

College Slice

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.

incoherent
Apr 24, 2004

01010100011010000111001
00110100101101100011011
000110010101110010


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.

freeforumuser
Aug 11, 2007


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.

fishmech
Jul 16, 2006

by VideoGames


Salad Prong

AMD can't make decent mobile chips to save their lives, that's why Intel dominates.

Siroc
Oct 10, 2004

Ray, when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "YES"!


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?

Lum
Aug 13, 2003



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.

KKKLIP ART
Sep 3, 2004



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.

Medikit
Dec 31, 2002

que lástima

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.

Henrik Zetterberg
Dec 7, 2007




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.

fishmech
Jul 16, 2006

by VideoGames


Salad Prong

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.

leppo
Jul 12, 2003


fishmech posted:

That's the trouble with AMD mobile chips, they're always monsters. Nice if you like desktop replacements.
You couldn't be more wrong for these upcoming chips (based on all the info released so far).

ilkhan
Oct 7, 2004

IF I JUST LICK ENOUGH BOOT LEATHER, BIG DADDY TRUMP WILL SURELY LOVE ME

leppo posted:

You couldn't be more wrong for these upcoming chips (based on all the info released so far).
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.

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 03:43 on Nov 14, 2010

Edward IV
Jan 15, 2006



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.

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.

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.

ilkhan
Oct 7, 2004

IF I JUST LICK ENOUGH BOOT LEATHER, BIG DADDY TRUMP WILL SURELY LOVE ME

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.

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.
As much as I think the APU is a good idea, we'll have to see how it ends up comparing to sandy-2C-LV. 18W isn't out of the realm of possibility for a 1.6Ghz ULV chip, and I expect at equal clocks sandy will be faster for CPU. If they don't mangle the GPU clocks too badly, it'll probably be just as fast there, too. Accordig to this its showing about 50% faster than westmere's GPU, and sandy is supposed to be about 2x as fast. Even if that gets cut down for ULV, equal speed is probably.

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.

movax
Aug 30, 2008



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.

VextheGrey
Dec 3, 2000

"No, Sasquatch! NOOOOO!!"

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?

BangersInMyKnickers
Nov 3, 2004

I have a thing for courageous dongles



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.

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.

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.

KKKLIP ART
Sep 3, 2004



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

freeforumuser
Aug 11, 2007


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.

movax
Aug 30, 2008



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.

Disgustipated
Jul 28, 2003

Black metal ist krieg

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.
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.

fishmech
Jul 16, 2006

by VideoGames


Salad Prong

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.

movax
Aug 30, 2008



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.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

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.
That's not really a function of UEFI, altho it might facilitate 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.

The Dark One
Aug 19, 2005

I'm your friend and I'm not going to just stand by and let you do this!


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.

4 Day Weekend
Jan 16, 2009


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/.

SRQ
Nov 9, 2009



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?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

texting my ex
Nov 15, 2008

I am no one
I cannot squat
It's in my blood


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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply