Lynnfield benchmarks up

[Dekasav]

But... Almighty Hector doesn't run AMD anymore.... *cries*

Actually, I'd say Dirk's been doing a good job so far, AMD's releases since he came in have been on-time (wasn't Istanbul 6 months ahead?) and priced well. Hopefully AMD lives long enough to see Bulldozer see the light of day, and hopefully do well, too.

And Jennyh does have a point, while comparing the 750 to the 965BE isn't affected much by the inclusion of turbo-boost, it makes IPC comparisons harder, simply because in many cases Lynnfield isn't running at it's "advertised" speed, it's very likely running a bit faster.

Also, if you're overclocking, do you turn it off to get the highest stable clock, or do you leave it on? If you take calculated Lynnfield IPC vs. Deneb IPC at stock clocks and apply that to OC clocks, you may get skewed numbers if you turn it off. Point is, turbo-boost makes all our calculations vastly less accurate/useful.

 

[archibael]

- 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)

In the interest of accuracy, I must point out that there are only 16 lanes available on the on-die controller for Lynnfield.

Some motherboard manufacturers are placing an NF200 bridge down in order to leverage more lanes, but the CPU itself is not 32 lanes wide in PCIe.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

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?

You're Irish, aren't you?? So what do you care about hot countries?? 😀 Anyway, just how well do you think your 965 would overclock under identical conditions?

One of the many reviews I looked at today mentioned the i5-750 and i7-860 ran at significantly cooler temps - 10 or 15 degrees C. cooler - than the i7-9xx CPUs under the same clocks & loads, because of the memory controller changes. Also take a look at the stock cooler Intel provides - definitely a lot smaller than the one they include with the i7-9xx series.

You can keep spinning, but personally I'd be a-checkin' for the wee leprechauns under me hat, seein' if they left me a pot o' gold!

 

[fazers_on_stun]

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?

Actually Anand got their 750 to 4.2GHz, and this on a really early BIOS. I wouldn't be surprised to see 4.5GHz clocks average next quarter. And where is your proof that the 965 will reach 4GHz without 'breaking a sweat'? More like 3.7 - 3.8 from what I've seen.

Again with the 'mediocre'?? Seems you are about the only AMD fanbois here who would characterize it as such.

 

[xcrusher]

so happy i'm getting a core i5 750

 

[fazers_on_stun]

In the interest of accuracy, I must point out that there are only 16 lanes available on the on-die controller for Lynnfield.

Some motherboard manufacturers are placing an NF200 bridge down in order to leverage more lanes, but the CPU itself is not 32 lanes wide in PCIe.

That's what I've mentioned a few times already, but the AMD fanbois pretty much ignored it - what else is new?? 😀

With the external bridge I'd imagine the low-latency benefits of the on-die controller are gone, but at least you wouldn't lose any PCIe-16x SLI or Xfire capability. Or could you use the on-die for the first 16 lanes and the external bridge for the 2nd?

Personally, I don't see myself upgrading to a multiple-GPU setup, esp. with the next gen cards just around the corner. If some super-Crysis game comes out requiring multi-GPUs just to get decent FPS, I'll pass on it until they optimize it .

 

[jennyh]

Actually Anand got their 750 to 4.2GHz, and this on a really early BIOS. I wouldn't be surprised to see 4.5GHz clocks average next quarter. And where is your proof that the 965 will reach 4GHz without 'breaking a sweat'? More like 3.7 - 3.8 from what I've seen.

Again with the 'mediocre'?? Seems you are about the only AMD fanbois here who would characterize it as such.

No, the 750 only got to 3.9ghz, it was the 870 i7 that got to 4.2ghz.

I can post you a screenshot of my 940 BE stable at 3.9ghz. The Phenom II's have issues with 64 bit operating systems but they go past 4ghz on 32 bit.

As for mediocre? This cpu was benched at 3.2ghz, not the advertised 2.66ghz. That is an overclocked cpu no matter how you want to dress it up with 'turbo' or whatever. 'Turbo' a Q9650 to 3.2ghz and you know what? It'll be just as fast as that new i5. Intel have nothing left on 45nm, it couldnt be more obvious.

 

[jennyh]

Personally, I don't see myself upgrading to a multiple-GPU setup, esp. with the next gen cards just around the corner. If some super-Crysis game comes out requiring multi-GPUs just to get decent FPS, I'll pass on it until they optimize it .

I doubt you'll be 'upgrading' to this i5 either fazers. You're good at deceit and putting a positive spin on bad news, but you aren't stupid enough to actually believe this is an 'upgrade' over any current quad cpu.

 

[B-Unit]

No, the 750 only got to 3.9ghz, it was the 870 i7 that got to 4.2ghz.

I can post you a screenshot of my 940 BE stable at 3.9ghz. The Phenom II's have issues with 64 bit operating systems but they go past 4ghz on 32 bit.

As for mediocre? This cpu was benched at 3.2ghz, not the advertised 2.66ghz. That is an overclocked cpu no matter how you want to dress it up with 'turbo' or whatever. 'Turbo' a Q9650 to 3.2ghz and you know what? It'll be just as fast as that new i5. Intel have nothing left on 45nm, it couldnt be more obvious.

Congrats. My 940 wont do over 3.65Ghz no matter how much voltage I feed it. Dont see what any of that has to do with 965 chips tho...

Also, can you show me where the 'Turbo mode' option is for the 9650? I would love to turn that on...

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

In the interest of accuracy, I must point out that there are only 16 lanes available on the on-die controller for Lynnfield.

Yes, thanks for the correction. I got a Bloomfield slide mixed up with a Lynnfield slide.

Thanks!

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

I doubt you'll be 'upgrading' to this i5 either fazers. You're good at deceit and putting a positive spin on bad news, but you aren't stupid enough to actually believe this is an 'upgrade' over any current quad cpu.

We're not telling people to trade in their Q9XXX for an i5.

JennyH loves to shift the subject when she's proven wrong with facts and links again and again.

What we're trying to compare is i5 to other products, including cheap i7s and the AMD Phenom II 965BE.


JennyH says, "Shoot, I'm loosing the argument. I must now start throwing out desperate hail mary's like, WELL ARE YOU BUYING IT?!? Are you telling EVERYONE TO UPGRADE to it!?!@?!? HUH!?!?! HAIL HECTOR!"



I can admit when I was incorrect or wrong, such as the post above 🙂

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I doubt you'll be 'upgrading' to this i5 either fazers. You're good at deceit and putting a positive spin on bad news, but you aren't stupid enough to actually believe this is an 'upgrade' over any current quad cpu.

LOL - I guess I'm just an evil unpaid Intel pumper!

Actually I am considering the i7-860 in lieu of the 920 - I'll wait a bit and see how the board BIOSes progress in the next few weeks, plus I learned years ago never buy version 1.0 of anything 😛

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

LOL, the FanTools at AMDZone are having a civil war:

http://www.amdzone.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=136697&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

The moderators keep proclaiming that all reviews are Intel bought while some of the people who still have some independent thought capacity are questioning if the i5 750 really might be faster than their precious 965BE.

 

[masterasia]

Sorry AMD fanboys and fangirls. AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE is still at the bottom of the list when compared to Intel's Core i5 and i7. AMD sucks forever. And Core i5 was suppose to be on par with Phenom II? No Way!

The core i7 870 looks very promising beating the Core i7 920 (1366) in almost all the benchmarks. But I expected that because it cost twice as much. So with the price you save on cheaper motherboards and ram for a P55 setup, you can put that money towards the best 1156 processor. It was Intel's scam from the get-go.

Why is the i7 870 twice as much as the i7 860? All the specs look the same to me execept the extra 130mhz.

I just got done building an i7 920 rig. After all the reviews on Lynnfield, it makes me wanna go out and get an i7 860. But I'm going to stick out until next year when i9 is released because I can just pop the procoessor right in my X58 motherboard.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

No, the 750 only got to 3.9ghz, it was the 870 i7 that got to 4.2ghz.

Oops you're right! Stop the presses! 😀 I guess it was one of the many other reviews I read this morning where they got the 750 over 4GHz.

I can post you a screenshot of my 940 BE stable at 3.9ghz. The Phenom II's have issues with 64 bit operating systems but they go past 4ghz on 32 bit.

And in the meantime much of the modern world is going right past 32-bit OSes . Wonder why it is that AMD, inventor of X64, can't seem to get their CPUs to oc well on 64-bit OSes. Intel doesn't seem to have that problem..

As for mediocre? This cpu was benched at 3.2ghz, not the advertised 2.66ghz.

Well part of it was, anyway. One or two cores that is. Of course, it more than held its own compared to P2-965 on stuff such as encoding or photoshop that is known to perform well with multiple threads, which is where the Turbo mode gets throttled way down to 2.8GHz with 3 or 4 active cores.

That is an overclocked cpu no matter how you want to dress it up with 'turbo' or whatever. 'Turbo' a Q9650 to 3.2ghz and you know what? It'll be just as fast as that new i5. Intel have nothing left on 45nm, it couldnt be more obvious

From X-bit's review:

Granted this is the i7-870 and not the i5-750 under discussion, but I'd bet the Turbo result percentages are similar.

 

[jennyh]

Good review at a quality website, lostcircuits :-

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=63&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=21

"The Core i5 750 falls a bit behind the performance expectations"

"This said, some of the folks at AMD who had sleepless nights throughout the last 2 months can probably ween off the "PM" pills, the Core i5-750, which is positioned pretty exactly against the high-end Phenom II 900 series is not the expected AMD killer"

 

[jennyh]

So fazers, turbo mode is showing a 10% increase or so on those overall? (just a quick guesstimate at a glance).

Anand claims that turbo mode gives a 17% increase for the i5.

How much 'faster' was it overall compared to the 965 BE? 5-10% mby...so the reality is it's 7-12% slower than a 965 BE at stock?

Again I have to say...TURBO IS NOT A GUARANTEE.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Must... defend... AMD... at... all... costs...

 

[jennyh]

Must... defend... AMD... at... all... costs...

Must....continue....to....be....blinded....by....marketing....

 

[fazers_on_stun]

LOL, the FanTools at AMDZone are having a civil war:

http://www.amdzone.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=136697&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

The moderators keep proclaiming that all reviews are Intel bought while some of the people who still have some independent thought capacity are questioning if the i5 750 really might be faster than their precious 965BE.

LOL - somehow I missed that thread entirely - was looking at the first i5 thread instead. Anyway, I predict the big banhammer will be out swinging shortly.

However, the poster smyrgol makes a lot of good points about fanbois troll behavior - picking on one point and ignoring the rest, shifting topics & other misdirection, etc etc. With all the backpeddling, squirming & twisting they do, could make for a mean breakdance 😀.

Somehow I believe jennyh can shimmy & shake with the best of them over on UAEZone 😛

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Must....continue....to....be....blinded....by....marketing....

Yeah Jenny, people are going to buy i5 but disable Turbo. That's what people like to do, disable stuff to make their stuff slower. While we're at it, why not underclock the i5 750 as well.

 

[jennyh]

Shifting what huh?

Overclock any Phenom II by 600mhz and it will lay the smackdown on this i5. That's all that is happening here...core2 with 'turbo' is still core2...

Intel realised that they were losing the performance crown at the mainstream market, so they did what they could to get it back...ie invent a new name for 'overclocking' that idiots would believe is something entirely different. It's not, it's overclocking plain and simple.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Good review at a quality website, lostcircuits :-

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=63&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=21

"The Core i5 750 falls a bit behind the performance expectations"

"This said, some of the folks at AMD who had sleepless nights throughout the last 2 months can probably ween off the "PM" pills, the Core i5-750, which is positioned pretty exactly against the high-end Phenom II 900 series is not the expected AMD killer"

Yep - your fellow fanbois over at AMDZone already picked up on that line several hours ago . And of course Lostcircuits is the only trustworthy review site because the reviewer works for OCZ - all the rest -which just about uniformly show the i5 as equal or exceeding the P2-965 - are just paid Intel pumpers 😛.

However I believe Intel does not want to kill off AMD yet - they easily could have enabled hyperthreading and 32 PCIe lanes in the on-die controller, at the expense of higher power usage of course and maybe more real estate usage. Instead they are sticking the knife in just far enough to bleed AMD again. Eventually AMD will either fold or get bought out, in which case no more x86 license, and no antitrust actions...

 

[mindless728]

wow, what a flame war

being a fanboi of AMD, i have to say the price points of the i5 are crazy to say the least
$210 for the i5-750
$135 for ASUS P7P55D LE

thats a good price point for a new build
figure the AMD PII 965 BE is $250
a decent mobo about $135

i really wouldn't say AMD is "much" cheaper

 

[jennyh]

Yeah Jenny, people are going to buy i5 but disable Turbo. That's what people like to do, disable stuff to make their stuff slower. While we're at it, why not underclock the i5 750 as well.

Why not? TURBO IS OVERCLOCKING.

Anybody who didn't overclock their cpu before? Why would they want this cpu that overclocks itself?

What about those people who only like to push their overclocks a little bit? Take, for example, the many Q6600 owners who would only go as far as 3ghz. 600mhz overclock? No huge surprise to see 600mhz as intels chosen maximum oc is it?

Add 600mhz to any Phenom II and the i5 will be beaten soundly in every benchmark. If you oc an intel by 600mhz why not oc an amd by the same?