Lynnfield benchmarks up

[jennyh]

the above was for TC, not you dna.

 

[dna708]

Oh crap I read the x264 wrong..... but I already acknowledged Pov-ray was significant...

 

[dna708]

oh... again

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

And with mobo and cooler?

Motherboards are slightly more expensive for the i5 at launch (this will change as time goes on), but you can still come out cheaper at the end than a similiarly featured PII motherboard.

Both the AMD part and the Intel parts come with coolers, so no need to buy a cooler unless you're going to OC the crap out of it.


Getting into motherboard selection is a bit more subjective, so I'm not going to start putting together combos, but keep in mind that you're saving ~$40 on the CPU, you can afford to put a little more into the motherboard and still save money AND get a better lower power processor.



PS - Newegg just dropped the 965BE by $5 to $245.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Where am I discrediting i5?

The only place i5 beats the 965 'significantly' is in synthetics. You know what sysmark is right?

As for the multi gpu thing, just wait until the 5800's are released in a couple of weeks and then we'll see how strained those 8x lanes are when xfired. It's a potential issue and one that needs to be made clear while you and fazers would much rather just brush it under the carpet.

Considering, by your own prior statements, just how big the Xfire or SLI multi-GPU market is, I'd say we're brushing it under the throw-rug, not a full-sized carpet 😀.

Just wait - there'll be performance P55 mobos out catering to the 2x, 3x even 4x GPU markets, if not out already.

 

[jennyh]

More likely it's better due to HKMG which AMD don't have yet.

Point is, AMD will lower the price of the 965 BE, probably within a week. Then you'll have what is a practically identically performing cpu for significantly less than the i5 when the entire platform is considered.

I'd also want to wait until ATI get the 5xxx radeon's out too just to see how much two of them will strain the 8x pci-e on these i5's.

 

[Scotteq]

Nice to see the anti Intel FUD machine is getting it's excercise today... Though I do note it's TDP seems to has gone up.

 

[jennyh]

Wait a minute...

Anand benching with turbo enabled? ROFL. What do you have to say about that TC?

I'm looking to forward to this.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Point is, AMD will lower the price of the 965 BE, probably within a week. Then you'll have what is a practically identically performing cpu for significantly less than the i5 when the entire platform is considered.

I'd also want to wait until ATI get the 5xxx radeon's out too just to see how much two of them will strain the 8x pci-e on these i5's.

Ahhh, now that I've proven that the i5 is cheap you've gone 88 miles an hour into the future! Nice!


#1 - AMD will have to REALLY lower the price of the 965BE, down into the sub $200 USD basement. AMD's flagship processor, selling for $190-200 to be competitive.

#2 - We already acknowledge that gaming performance is near identical (no significant difference is there). However, non-gaming (including real world) performance is significantly better with i5 across many benchmarks done by many sites.

#3 - The i5 also uses less power




But if you do want to 88 miles an hour time-warp into the future then this would happen:
- AMD lowers pricing on products to better compete with i5 750
- More i5 motherboards are released and start to become more inline with the pricing of AMD motherboards (so the total cost of an i5 system is going to go down)
- i5 750 pricing goes down as initial demand starts to lower down into what the normal demand will be (this should shave $5-$10 off the cpu price)
- Better i5 motherboards are released that allow multi-GPU setups using two x16 lanes as the processor has 32 lanes available on the on-die controller (and as Fanboys always proclaim, an on-die control are teh superiority platformance megatasker)


You can't fast-forward into the future and only benefit your side of the argument and not the other.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

But Fazers, over at AMDZone they like to pretend that people would actually play modern games at 15-20 FPS and be happy! Drink the koolaid!

LOL - well I believe I'm allergic to green food coloring .

AMDZone is rapidly going downhill IMO, after making Abinstein a mod. Even the AMD fanbois who drink the koolaid, but dare question anything about AMD's product lineup or business acumen usually wind up getting the banhammer after a while.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Anand benching with turbo enabled? ROFL. What do you have to say about that TC?

I'm looking to forward to this.

Why wouldn't you benchmark with Turbo enabled? It's a true product offering and it comes out of the box like that. I'd be interested to see what the numbers are with it off, but who is going to buy an i5 750 and turn turbo off?


It would be like me saying, "Ha, benchmarking an AMD processor with the HT link at stock frequency. What do YOU have to say about THAT!?!?!"

 

[jennyh]

Rofl what a total fraud.

Benchmarks with turbo enabled, GG. Now tell me that these reviews weren't paid for out of intel's propaganda department.

 

[dna708]

I mean, even with turbo at its highest (3.2ghz) it is still at a disadvantage clockspeed wise. But it manages to basically be even with the pII 965 which is at 3.4ghz.

Didn't anand explain turbo was going to be used throughout the review?

 

[jennyh]

Why wouldn't you benchmark with Turbo enabled? It's a true product offering and it comes out of the box like that. I'd be interested to see what the numbers are with it off, but who is going to buy an i5 750 and turn turbo off?

What about people in hot countries...with bad cases, or maybe they just have a hot room.

Is turbo guaranteed to work? What does it say about turbo on the warranty?

Are these benchmarks just an overclocked i5 vs a stock 965 BE?

The very nature of the turbo made makes it too difficult to say, but hell if turbo is working as it should, you're talking almost 600mhz above norm.

You want to OC the 965 BE to 4ghz then do those benches again?

Once again, intel prove that they are superb marketers, and a lot of people will fall for it.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

More likely it's better due to HKMG which AMD don't have yet.

Point is, AMD will lower the price of the 965 BE, probably within a week.

So will AMD be offering refunds to the OEMs stocking up on P2s who paid a higher price already? Not likely, considering their financial situation. So now HP will have to eat the higher CPU cost with their lower-priced systems...

This won't earn AMD much goodwill with said OEMs, who like to plan out their inventory purchases in advance and with knowing how much the components cost and how much they can sell their products for, in the all-important 4th quarter holiday season.

Nuttin' like getting blind-sided by your supplier, eh??

 

[jennyh]

I mean, even with turbo at its highest (3.2ghz) it is still at a disadvantage clockspeed wise. But it manages to basically be even with the pII 965 which is at 3.4ghz.

Didn't anand explain turbo was going to be used throughout the review?

The exact same could be said about the core2s. The intel's have a higher ipc, that's why they are faster clock for clock.

On the other hand, if this i5 could have been released at 3.4ghz, I'm sure it would have been (at a much higher price ofc).

Cpu's have to meet certain thresholds at certain temps etc. Turbo mode? Why not just release it at 3.2ghz?

 

[dna708]

Hrmm I never though about it that way (as in I never thought of it as an oc over a feature).

Well looking at power consumption, even at max load (a 4 cores up to 2.93ghz) it's within its specifications.

 

[jennyh]

Overclock your Q9650 (if you have one 😛) to 3.2ghz and see how your scores compare to this 'wonderful' i5. You might be quite suprised.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

What about people in hot countries...with bad cases, or maybe they just have a hot room.

One second... Still laughing...

 

[jennyh]

One second... Still laughing...

You know it's 3.2ghz *maximum* right TC?

Do you really believe that this turbo would go to 3.2ghz (on a stock cooler especially), in the middle of summer in someplace like Australia?

Or do you think it would decide to stay at 2.6ghz?

 

[Scotteq]

...because everyone knows Australians haven't invented air conditioning yet. Rumor has it their power grid involves treadmills, bunches of carrots, several donkeys, and the odd illegal immigrant.... Puhleeeze - This entire line of questioning is asinine.

Quit whining: It's a stock feature of the chip. End of discussion.



{Edit to add the following. The reason why will become abundantly clear to any/all readers of this thread}


Thought the below might be helpful:

http://www.techterms.com/definition/overclocking

Overclocking involves increasing the clock speed of the computer's CPU past the rate at which it was originally designed to run.

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/o/overclock.html

To run a microprocessor faster than the speed for which it has been tested and approved.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

You know it's 3.2ghz *maximum* right TC?

Do you really believe that this turbo would go to 3.2ghz (on a stock cooler especially), in the middle of summer in someplace like Australia?

Or do you think it would decide to stay at 2.6ghz?

So let me get this straight, you're trying to diminish a Core i5 feature because someone might be operating it a condition with no climate control in 100F+ heat?



So your argument is that Phenom II is better if you shut off certain features of i5, must use multiple GPUs, must have the urge to run pov-ray, and must also have the urge to fly to the outback and run your machine outside in the middle of the freaking desert in a case of a former e-machine with the fans unplugged?

Quit whining: It's a stock feature of the chip. End of discussion.

+1


Still laughing...

 

[jennyh]

Lol whining? I'm the one laughing at you lot.

This is a step backwards from core2 lol. At 3.2ghz it barely beats the 965 BE at 3.4ghz. Even the core2's were better than that.

Sad, sad intel sycophants who would believe anything.

If you consider anand got theirs to 3.9ghz, and a 965 BE will reach 4ghz without breaking sweat...that's really close even at top overclocks.

So yep, can you say backwards step? I wonder how many of you will be 'upgrading' to this mediocre cpu?

 

[jennyh]

You realise I can 'turbo' my 940 BE by running overdrive and fusion for gaming right?

Wonder why we don't see those 'features' in reviews huh?

Complete farce, intel found out, intel fanbois proving they are as gullible as ever.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

This is a step backwards from core2 lol. At 3.2ghz it barely beats the 965 BE at 3.4ghz.

LOL

Intel's brand new mid-range processors beats AMD's best processor which is clocked signifcantly higher? You do know that turbo doesn't run the entire chip at 3.2? And costs $40 less? And AMD somehow wins in your mind? Right? You're slinging more falsehoods and misinformation.

Just wait until Intel releases the next, higher clocked i5. AMD is already at 140 watts and is running out of headroom.



JennyH - Misrepresentations, lies, and complex "what if you needs to run multiple GPU's in the Aussie desert" scenarios. Another hopeless AMD FanTool.



ALL HAIL HECTOR!