Anand does Nehalem!!!
Last response: in CPUs
Related ressources
- Anand has a sandbridge i5 - Forum
- Anand disects K10 numbers at CeBit - Forum
- General discussion AMD vs Intel, LGA775, Nehalem , etc - Forum
- Dual-Socket Nehalem Kills Quad-Socket Barcelona - Forum
- Nehalem memory limitiations?!?! - Forum
mi1ez said:
Are we expecting a major price drop on LGA775 when Nehalem is released?I'm tight!
I hope so since even a slow clocked Nehalem will destroy anything quad-like. The other possibility is, that prices remain as they are and a Nehalem will, once released, cost an arm and a leg... and then some.
Slobogob said:
I hope so since even a slow clocked Nehalem will destroy anything quad-like. The other possibility is, that prices remain as they are and a Nehalem will, once released, cost an arm and a leg... and then some.Then again, given the prices of DDR3, intel has to make the platform itself attractive and affordable. So maybe we really see some dropping prices.
edit: Wow, instead of editing my previous post i obviously hit the reply button. I'm really turning into a posterboy for Post-whoring.
JDocs said:
We should get together and start a vasoline saving fund to help a certain processor company in its darkest hour...Update: I've decided that if need be I'll administer the fund...
Well, when i'm done buying and assembling a complete Phenom platform somewhere in 2009, i will sponsor the change i get back from the 100$ i planned to invest on it. Should be roughly 60$+ for the fund.
Andrius said:
Nehalem looks awesome.I guess it will be priced in the "skulltrail region" for early adopters.
I think by 2015 we'll have CPUs the price of a small city car, AMD will be history and NVIDIA will be in AMDs current position in the graphics market.
Intel world domination is next.
Intel Skynet: More than you can imagine...
DDR3 may be cheaper, but how much will this cpu be? $$$
Ok noob overclocker, has a FSB - multiplier question.
If it has a FSB of 133 and a multiplier of 20, how does that translate into overclocking potential with DDR3. If you bump of the FSB to 399 would 8Ghz OC be possible? 399FSB would be synced with DDR3.
The heat is the limiting factor again. I can't imagine temps with 4 core - 8 threads at 8Ghz.
Like i said i am a OC noob, but i am sure you guys know what i am getting at with the FSB, Mulitplier and DDR3.
Ok noob overclocker, has a FSB - multiplier question.
If it has a FSB of 133 and a multiplier of 20, how does that translate into overclocking potential with DDR3. If you bump of the FSB to 399 would 8Ghz OC be possible? 399FSB would be synced with DDR3.
The heat is the limiting factor again. I can't imagine temps with 4 core - 8 threads at 8Ghz.
Like i said i am a OC noob, but i am sure you guys know what i am getting at with the FSB, Mulitplier and DDR3.
I think I have been one of the only ones saying this whole time that Intel was more than likely right on Nehalem. This, to say the least, is very impressive. Its almost like what Phenom was supposed to do to Core 2 is being done by Nehalem.
And jaydee, I don't think intel will stop any of the chips from being able to be OC'ed. Of course there will always be the EE versions that will have a unlocked multi but I still think we will be able to OC the mainstream ones. Even without the ability to OC this chip does look to deliver what it promised to, which is a higher IPC. I will also bet that the power consumption is not as low as it will be with the final product.
And jaydee, I don't think intel will stop any of the chips from being able to be OC'ed. Of course there will always be the EE versions that will have a unlocked multi but I still think we will be able to OC the mainstream ones. Even without the ability to OC this chip does look to deliver what it promised to, which is a higher IPC. I will also bet that the power consumption is not as low as it will be with the final product.
Actually I wasn't that impressed <cough ... splutter> *wipes sticky shoe*
Still no real reason to update from socket 939 ... heh heh.
Anand the Shrimpi is never wrong ... so the benchies don't lie.
We won't see these systems for ages though ... Intel still have to make a buck from their 45nm node ...
65nm is still paying most of their bills (if they had any).
I can't see them releasing it and effectively steamrolling their current offerings ... which are more than good enough for what most want. And in high gear production wise.
I bet Nehalem is a mongrel .... or impossible to overclock.
That's the scary land we are heading for ... Iv'e said this before.
Ycon ... your so clever ...
Still no real reason to update from socket 939 ... heh heh.
Anand the Shrimpi is never wrong ... so the benchies don't lie.
We won't see these systems for ages though ... Intel still have to make a buck from their 45nm node ...
65nm is still paying most of their bills (if they had any).
I can't see them releasing it and effectively steamrolling their current offerings ... which are more than good enough for what most want. And in high gear production wise.
I bet Nehalem is a mongrel .... or impossible to overclock.
That's the scary land we are heading for ... Iv'e said this before.
Ycon ... your so clever ...
JAYDEEJOHN said:
There isnt one thing that says the lower end will be oceable. The high end yes, but not the low end. And as Ive said, even the low end is going to bump prices, I just hope its not a trendWell the funny thing is that Intel has never said any of their CPUs are OC'able, minus the EEs. When I got a Q6600 there was nothing from Intel that stated the chip was OC'able. Although I assumed Intel knew it was easy for it to do.
As for the chip Anand had was a locked chip for good reasons. But I still think that all the chips will be OC'able. No reason for Intel to take away the one thing that a lot of people prefer about their chips.
50bmg said:
DDR3 may be cheaper, but how much will this cpu be? $$$Ok noob overclocker, has a FSB - multiplier question.
If it has a FSB of 133 and a multiplier of 20, how does that translate into overclocking potential with DDR3. If you bump of the FSB to 399 would 8Ghz OC be possible? 399FSB would be synced with DDR3.
The heat is the limiting factor again. I can't imagine temps with 4 core - 8 threads at 8Ghz.
Like i said i am a OC noob, but i am sure you guys know what i am getting at with the FSB, Mulitplier and DDR3.
Not the place to post about OCing, and at 8GHz your processor will be able to set fire to things (assuming the thing even boots with the voltage that would need!)
Ram would be fine, but processor wouldn't. Not short of N2O...
Andrius said:
Nehalem looks awesome.I guess it will be priced in the "skulltrail region" for early adopters.
I think by 2015 we'll have CPUs the price of a small city car, AMD will be history and NVIDIA will be in AMDs current position in the graphics market.
Intel world domination is next.
Intel video sucks and there is no way that they will be able to pass NVIDIA and ATI in video cards.
I very well understand that 8G was simple math and that it probably wasnt posible. Not like i am running out to buy one and OC it. The 8Ghz was just a little BS. "not the place to post about OCing", funny 3 others have mentioned OCing the nehalem. It looks like a popular topic.
My point was how the FSB, the multiplier and DDR3 would work? I am impressed with the low FSB and 20x multiplier.
My point was how the FSB, the multiplier and DDR3 would work? I am impressed with the low FSB and 20x multiplier.
jimmysmitty said:
Well the funny thing is that Intel has never said any of their CPUs are OC'able, minus the EEs. When I got a Q6600 there was nothing from Intel that stated the chip was OC'able. Although I assumed Intel knew it was easy for it to do.As for the chip Anand had was a locked chip for good reasons. But I still think that all the chips will be OC'able. No reason for Intel to take away the one thing that a lot of people enthusiasts prefer about their chips.
Fixed.
And dont be shocked when the Big Blue Steamroller locks you out of OCing unless you fork over major $$$$. Never forget that 'enthusiasts' like us are a tiny little portion of the market.
Joe_The_Dragon said:
Intel video sucks and there is no way that they will be able to pass NVIDIA and ATI in video cards.I agree that their IGP is not good for gaming but they are obviously great for low cost business PCs cuz they have the most market share there.
But don't knock Intel yet. They have a very large R&D to boot. And the thing is that Intel took the IMC and from what we can see has already made it more effective than AMD who has had it for 4 years. So when Intel is serious they don't mess around.
I personally think nVidia needs another company to push them. They over charge like crazy since they have the best card at the uber high end.
Related ressources:
- Forumnehalem design will force power users to use extreme cpu's
- ForumAnandtech: Nehalem - Everything you Need to Know...
- ForumHexus.net benchmarks Nehalem
- ForumIs this compatible?
- ForumNehalem and current CPUs
- ForumA few pics a lil info on Nehalem
- ForumTemp upgrade my AMD and wait for Nehalem?
- ForumNehalem goes mainstream in Q4 2009
- ForumWait for Nehalem Chips?
- ForumLooking for a High CFM/low DBA 120mm Case fan... does it even exist?
- ForumHow much power does a 9800GTX require?
- Forumhow much watts does the stock Q6600 fan/heatsink use??
- More resources
!
last November) SLI capable system.