Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2

[Ed]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

It was hard to resist being glib and titling this article, "Much Ado
about Very Little". That feeling of disappointment comes from seeing so
much new technology introduced all at once, and then finding out the
real performance benefit is extremely small - if it exists at all. If
Intel wants us to turn our computer world upside down, there should be a
real tangible benefit to the bucks we are expected to spend.
Unfortunately, that performance advantage is pretty hard to find - at
least for now. There are certainly a few gems in the total package, but
if you're looking for a big performance advantage, overall, it just
isn't there.

http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2088

 

[rush]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote :

> finding out the real performance benefit is extremely small - if
> it exists at all.

I really like this -3% (that's minus) performance increase

> http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2088

thats not the way to view it, try :
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=2088
no clicking thru, one simple page.


Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:53:15 -0500, Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote:

>It was hard to resist being glib and titling this article, "Much Ado
>about Very Little". That feeling of disappointment comes from seeing so
>much new technology introduced all at once, and then finding out the
>real performance benefit is extremely small - if it exists at all. If
>Intel wants us to turn our computer world upside down, there should be a
>real tangible benefit to the bucks we are expected to spend.
>Unfortunately, that performance advantage is pretty hard to find - at
>least for now. There are certainly a few gems in the total package, but
>if you're looking for a big performance advantage, overall, it just
>isn't there.
>
>http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2088
>
>
>

I'm not running aout to buy one of these. AMD64 is next up for me.

 

[Ed]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 21:36:00 +0000 (UTC), RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl> wrote:
>
>thats not the way to view it, try :
>http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=2088
>no clicking thru, one simple page.

OK

Is this Intel's all new platform or is this just the low end part of it?
I thought the new boards were to have a 1066 FSB and Intel was to
release a 3.8GHz P4 to go with it? Why else would AMD release a 3800+?

Ed

>
>
>Pozdrawiam.

 

[rush]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote :

> Is this Intel's all new platform or is this just the low end part
> of it? I thought the new boards were to have a 1066 FSB and Intel
> was to release a 3.8GHz P4 to go with it? Why else would AMD
> release a 3800+?

Intel is all about low end recentrly .

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Ed wrote:
> It was hard to resist being glib and titling this article, "Much Ado
> about Very Little". That feeling of disappointment comes from seeing so
> much new technology introduced all at once, and then finding out the
> real performance benefit is extremely small - if it exists at all. If
> Intel wants us to turn our computer world upside down, there should be a
> real tangible benefit to the bucks we are expected to spend.
> Unfortunately, that performance advantage is pretty hard to find - at
> least for now. There are certainly a few gems in the total package, but
> if you're looking for a big performance advantage, overall, it just
> isn't there.
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2088

I read that and something did occur to me... A long long time ago I was
talking to a guy about the various socket designs (a decade ago), before
people started packing 100W parts into sockets. He mentioned that some
designs were preferable to others (eg PGA) because they helped dissipate
heat through the pins. *IF* that wasn't just BS, I can't help but wonder
if the LGA socket is going to remove some of that (probably miniscule)
benefit. Anyone with more current knowledge of board design able to
debunk/comment on that ?

Cheers,
Rupert

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Rupert Pigott wrote:

> Ed wrote:
>> It was hard to resist being glib and titling this article, "Much
>> Ado about Very Little". That feeling of disappointment comes from
>> seeing so much new technology introduced all at once, and then
>> finding out the real performance benefit is extremely small - if
>> it exists at all. If Intel wants us to turn our computer world
>> upside down, there should be a real tangible benefit to the bucks
>> we are expected to spend. Unfortunately, that performance
>> advantage is pretty hard to find - at least for now. There are
>> certainly a few gems in the total package, but if you're looking
>> for a big performance advantage, overall, it just isn't there.
>>
>> http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2088
>
> I read that and something did occur to me... A long long time ago
> I was talking to a guy about the various socket designs (a decade
> ago), before people started packing 100W parts into sockets. He
> mentioned that some designs were preferable to others (eg PGA)
> because they helped dissipate heat through the pins. *IF* that
> wasn't just BS, I can't help but wonder if the LGA socket is going
> to remove some of that (probably miniscule) benefit. Anyone with
> more current knowledge of board design able to debunk/comment on
> that ?

Of course a PGA package will help pull heat out of a widget, but
only if the design of the board (and infrastructure) under it is
designed to sink it to another lower thermal potential. The fact
is that PCs are designed to be *cheap*, so this place doesn't
exist. BGAs and LGAs simply aren't compatible with the PC
*market*. This has nothing to do with technology. It's the market
that drives these huge PGAs.

....frankly I'm amazed it's gone on so long. I thought technology
would trump business before this. I guess the socket engineers are
smarter than I gave them credit for!

--
Keith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote:
> Is this Intel's all new platform or is this just the low end part of
> it? I thought the new boards were to have a 1066 FSB and Intel was to
> release a 3.8GHz P4 to go with it? Why else would AMD release a 3800+?

So far it looks like AMD is releasing faster parts into the wild, with no
response from Intel whatsoever.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Ed]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:58:26 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

>Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote:
>> Is this Intel's all new platform or is this just the low end part of
>> it? I thought the new boards were to have a 1066 FSB and Intel was to
>> release a 3.8GHz P4 to go with it? Why else would AMD release a 3800+?
>
>So far it looks like AMD is releasing faster parts into the wild, with no
>response from Intel whatsoever.
>
> Yousuf Khan
>

Oh you must of missed it, same response as always...

"There is no need for (competitors better product here] on desktops
today".

;p

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 22:12:52 -0500, Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:58:26 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:
>
>>Ed <uranidiot@behappy.com> wrote:
>>> Is this Intel's all new platform or is this just the low end part of
>>> it? I thought the new boards were to have a 1066 FSB and Intel was to
>>> release a 3.8GHz P4 to go with it? Why else would AMD release a 3800+?
>>
>>So far it looks like AMD is releasing faster parts into the wild, with no
>>response from Intel whatsoever.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>>
>
>Oh you must of missed it, same response as always...
>
>"There is no need for (competitors better product here] on desktops
>today".

Well when you have "the most significant platform in 12 years" and you can
get analysts to spout the same, why worry! It does kinda make you wonder
how "significant" on-die memory controller and standardized I/O bus (HT) is
as a "platform" though?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??