Xeon X5570 "Nehalem" benchmarked.

http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3536

Very impressive numbers.

lol

yeah, it looks like an amazing chip.

^LMAO

you are aware these are server benchmarks, and everything you just said has ZERO relevance.

LOL...

The 6-core version of Shanghai is supposed to launch later this year, right? That'll help close the gap to maybe Grand Canyon size. In the meantime, it looks like Nehalem is doing for server what C2 did for desktop.

well AMD does have a point. i mean the i7 is basically all prior AMD technology is it not? its easy to take someone elses stuff and beef it up but credit and respect should be given to the innovator... but then again we do live in a capitalistic society so to hell with it.

2x post ;<

built in memory controller, 64 bit, actual quad core.... these are all pre existing AMD technologies bro... everything that is in Intel cpus these days were created on an AMD lab table.

I think we all knew nehalem was going to be the king of the server market, but what surprises me is by how large of a margin.

Why when we can be just as amused here?

Out of those, the only actual AMD technology is the x86-64. Some processors as old as a Dec Alpha 21066 have an IMC, so it is neither a new concept nor is it really specific to either company. Also, Intel has done a native 80 core before, so a native quad is not exactly AMD specific.

Actually no. Intel already built an IMC way back in the 90s when they tried to create a SoC for the masses. Both HP and DEC also created IMC for the same reason back in the 90s.

64bit was actually first developed by Intel as IA64.

Intel came up with the first quad core x86 processor.

Of course, I agree. I'm just simply pointing out that 64bit wasn't AMD's pioneering, but rather x86-64 extension. That was one of the many few true innovations (not "native" quad core BS) from AMD.

Intel can design something by themselves, like the whole x86 thing that made AMD exist - as a clone company in order to satisfy IBM. I think it's memorable that AMD has gone out of that route and made some pretty advancements of their own, but they had their ticket to ride with K8 and their management thought it would last forever. Besides, back then Intel was as big as it is today, so stop the "David vs Goliath" thing. AMD just sat on their laurels and released a broken product that almost made them unable to release anything else. When a competitor's product with half the cores performs 50%-90% better than yours [with your "inventions"] you obviously need to go back to the design table.

Curiously, your "inventing company" only exists because of the copycat one and the tech they let the other party use.

No offense, but you need to brush up your definition of "patent infringement". It does not necessarily mean "copy and paste"

Oh yea that. You also forgot how Intel found patents that Transmeta had infringed upon as well and pulled a counter suit. Turns out Intel didn't pay money on that one. They allowed Transmeta to keep their tech and Transmeta allowed Intel to use the tech they had.

In the end, your "intel is evil" is not true.

AMDZone is not comedy to these clowns. It is reality. They live in some fantasy world.

I think you Intel fanboys need to read up on Intels shady business practice. They have been sued by more than 10 companies for patent infringement and lost every case.
Not only that, how many countries are suing Intel for "unfair business practices", at least 10 that I know of. They tried there hardest to put AMD out of business, not by making a better product, which they did, but buy abusing their monopoly power and forcing companies to not sell AMD products.
Pull your head out of Intels ass for a moment of your uneventful life and google "Intel Sued" and do some reading of your own.
The funny thing is, little AMD can still compete big time.

And the same thing can be said about Apple, Google, HP, and IBM.

Its not about business practices, but how big the company is, and how much money it is making. Again, you need to brush up the definition of "patent infringement". You think Intel with some of the brightest engineers would have to resort to "copying"?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=patent+infringement+definition

Wow. Such anger. You need to take your head out of your own self righteous ass and realize that there is no such thing as a 100% perfect company. And yes that includes AMD.

So me as a consumer, should I base my decision on a companies business practisces or their products performance and quality? If I did it based off of their business practices I wouldn't have anything since no company really is 100% legit. But based off of performance means I can get the best product for my money. Easy choice.

As for this, server Admins will look at the price and performance. And when they see this can easily beat their current server setups by such a large margin they will buy it.

Because Hector is still the head of the board. I told everyone he never truly left. And he wont ever leave as long as he can stay and act like some sort of power figure. And make money off of it too.

Hmmm....why would server admins disable Turbo and HT when they in fact help the overall system performance? Perhaps a wishful thought there?

The problem with that thought is that HT actually increases throughput more than it increases power. Therefore, if power is what they are looking for, the Intel chips will give them significantly more performance per watt than the AMD. Turbo will be on in some cases, and off in others, but I see no reason why an admin would disable it. All it does is make the chips faster. Finally, even if they do turn off turbo and hyperthreading, the Intel chips maintain a healthy lead due in many cases to the significantly lower memory latency and higher bandwidth. Also, the Intel chips have always been ahead in integer, and Nehalem can really use this advantage because the FSB bottleneck is removed.

The people that think that the toy marketing features will be left enabled on server machines are definitely going to be in for a rude awakening.

Sure SOME people may use these toy features, but these benchmarking features WILL most definitely be disabled on a vast majority of machines; especially on mission critical servers.

Actually I digress: that statement will NOT be true for mission critial servers for awhile. This is because mission critical servers won't use these chips for awhile; it will probably be several years before this architecture is trusted enough to be put into those types of situations.

Or a qualified and experienced server Admin that isn't interested in opinions posted by people on internet forums.

(Apparently you have no idea how serious this issue would be in that situation. It is only YOUR OPINION that it doesn't hurt stability. There is NO GUARANTEE that these features do not and will not have adverse affects on a system that MUST remain available 24/7.)