Monday, October 29, 2007
The lie of the year !
"Unfortunately, what it looks like we're seeing here today is an artificial slowing of Intel's roadmap in response to the competition."
This is the lie of the year, without any doubt !
Yes, we all know that Intel slows down, however, not because of competition , but because of 150W TDP fire wall ahead of Yorkfield. We will have to wait till Nehalem in Q4 2009, to see anything better in
Intel's performance. And in Intel's power consumption redux. We all know how the last time finished Intel's "care" about weak competition. With product named Prescott, after two years of stall in clock rise and year profit slide from $36B to $5. $5B is still a big profit, but nothing special compared to Intel's yearly $100B of revenue."Today we're looking at a damn good Intel. "
BAD HARDWARE comment: Seems that we today are looking damn laying Anandtech.
EDIT: Wait a bit, here is yet another serious candidate:
"Intel achieves between four and eight times higher peak CPU and FPU throughput in two years. Yet only 25 per cent higher memory bandwidth and 15 per cent lower latency.
As far as we hear from other testers, the performance is same or better, so 4GHz Yorkfield desktops might not be uncommon."
But, the dude in his own article gives 3 Ghz Yorkfield picture, where everything is water cooled !.
So, 4 Ghz Yorkfield desktops might not be uncommon?.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. TDP for the air and water cooled systems is not the same, you fool.
They might be common only in the fraud musems. Even being water cooled. Beside, that dude should know the crucial difference between prefetch hit success and system overall throughput.
Thus, in quad core design Intel is born sucker, for the whole year, until Nehalem arrive. In Q4 2008.
| Family | Core | Model | Clock Speed (GHz) | Core / Thread | L2 Cache | FSB (MHz) | Socket | TDP |
| Core 2 Extreme | Yorkfield | QX9775 | 3.2 | 4/4 | 12MB | 1600 | LGA771 | 150W |
| QX9750 | 3.2 | 4/4 | 12MB | 1600 | LGA775 | 136W | ||
| QX9650 | 3.0 | 4/4 | 12MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 130W | ||
| Core 2 Quad | Q9550 | 2.83 | 4/4 | 12MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 95W | |
| Q9450 | 2.66 | 4/4 | 12MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 95W | ||
| Q9300 | 2.5 | 4/4 | 6MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 95W | ||
| Core 2 Duo E8000 Series | Wolfdale | E8500 | 3.16 | 2/2 | 6MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 65W |
| E8400 | 3.0 | 2/2 | 6MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| E8300 | 2.83 | 2/2 | 6MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| E8200 | 2.66 | 2/2 | 6MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| E8190 | 2.66 | 2/2 | 6MB | 1333 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| Core 2 Duo E4000 Series | TBD | TBD | 2/2 | 3MB | 1066 | LGA775 | 65W | |
| Conroe | E4700 | 2.6 | 2/2 | 2MB | 800 | LGA775 | 65W | |
| E4600 | 2.4 | 2/2 | 2MB | 800 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| E4500 | 2.2 | 2/2 | 2MB | 800 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| E4400 | 2.0 | 2/2 | 2MB | 800 | LGA775 | 65W | ||
| E4300 | 1.8 | 2/2 | 2MB | 800 | LGA775 | 65W |
THIS LINK posted by Joseph Bell : 11:35 AM
Comments:
<< Home
I'm not sure if you noticed but their power usage benchmarks show Penryn taking ~30W less on idle and ~45W less under load. If it really were 150W at 45nm wouldn't it put 65nm around 200W?
Or it could be that this whole site is just a on going comedy similar to sharikous. I just saw it the first time and I might have missed that :)
Or it could be that this whole site is just a on going comedy similar to sharikous. I just saw it the first time and I might have missed that :)
The key of Intel's pre Nehalem processor strategy is halt command.
When processor overheat it simply stops. Low idle power? Who needs idle processor? Is that a joke? AFAIK, no one normal ever tried quad core with 12 MB L2 and 1600 Mhz FSB in 65nm. Its die would be simply too big to be manufactured using standard manufacturing equipment. But if possible, you would get short lived space heater. Very expensive one.
When processor overheat it simply stops. Low idle power? Who needs idle processor? Is that a joke? AFAIK, no one normal ever tried quad core with 12 MB L2 and 1600 Mhz FSB in 65nm. Its die would be simply too big to be manufactured using standard manufacturing equipment. But if possible, you would get short lived space heater. Very expensive one.
"Low idle power? Who needs idle processor? Is that a joke?"
Idle? I wasn't talking about idle CPU power usage, I was talking about usage under full load.
Also I've seen a system with 3GHz 45nm quad under full load taking 118W from the wall socket. Kind of makes it hard to believe that TDP has anything to do with actual power use (and dissapation). Having motherboard taking around 20W, RAM ~10W, GPU ~15 and PSU with 85% efficiency it leaves around 60W or less. Of course that was an ES so retails might be different.
Btw, did you notice that Anandtech ran the chip with default cooling at 4GHz?
"AFAIK, no one normal ever tried
quad core with 12 MB L2 and 1600 Mhz FSB in 65nm"
I'm quite sure it would have been feasible. Cache takes very little power and one can put a whole lot of it on a die. Also Intel has 2GHz 50W quads o 65nm already.
"Its die would be simply too big to be manufactured using standard manufacturing equipment"
With 2M added cache the die size would be around 170-180mm^2, way below Barcelonas 280mm^2, not to mention Intel MP Xeons and Itaniums
"But if possible, you would get short lived space heater"
Depending on what to compare against.
Post a Comment
Idle? I wasn't talking about idle CPU power usage, I was talking about usage under full load.
Also I've seen a system with 3GHz 45nm quad under full load taking 118W from the wall socket. Kind of makes it hard to believe that TDP has anything to do with actual power use (and dissapation). Having motherboard taking around 20W, RAM ~10W, GPU ~15 and PSU with 85% efficiency it leaves around 60W or less. Of course that was an ES so retails might be different.
Btw, did you notice that Anandtech ran the chip with default cooling at 4GHz?
"AFAIK, no one normal ever tried
quad core with 12 MB L2 and 1600 Mhz FSB in 65nm"
I'm quite sure it would have been feasible. Cache takes very little power and one can put a whole lot of it on a die. Also Intel has 2GHz 50W quads o 65nm already.
"Its die would be simply too big to be manufactured using standard manufacturing equipment"
With 2M added cache the die size would be around 170-180mm^2, way below Barcelonas 280mm^2, not to mention Intel MP Xeons and Itaniums
"But if possible, you would get short lived space heater"
Depending on what to compare against.
<< Home
