Monday, February 4th 2008

First Intel Skulltrail SLI Tests Posted

4Gamer, prior to the soon to be announced formally Intel Skulltrail platform, has posted some first look benchmark results. You may consider this as full review perhaps the first full review of Intel Skulltrail, since the system was fully assembled and running with the Intel D5400XS Extreme Desktop Board, 2x Core 2 Extreme QX9775 (3.20GHz, 2x6MB L2 cache) processors, 2x 2GB Micron PC2-6400 DDR2 SDRAM FB-DIMM, and pair of ELSA GLADIAC 988 GTX 768MB (GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB) in SLI configuration. The Google translated review can be accessed here. Enjoy the system and don't try to calculate the overall price (each CPU is expected to cost USD $1,399).

Source: 4Gamer.net
Add your own comment

6 Comments on First Intel Skulltrail SLI Tests Posted

#2
mandelore
hmm, those 3dmark scores are not insane, similar (ish) to a single 3870X2 and a single cpu
Posted on Reply
#3
validuz
All that money and look at the Crysis benchmarks LOL!!!! I don't understand who gets fooled into buying these things looking for a real world advantage. Hey, at least you can brag about your 3dmark score but not your FPS lol.
Posted on Reply
#4
DanTheBanjoman
SeƱor Moderator
by: validuz
All that money and look at the Crysis benchmarks LOL!!!! I don't understand who gets fooled into buying these things looking for a real world advantage. Hey, at least you can brag about your 3dmark score but not your FPS lol.
The average server costs more and can't even boot Crysis. The 5400 platform was never meant for gaming, it does excel at many things though. The fact that Intel used it as the basis for a gaming platform helps a bit for performance though since no game can utilize the available processing power it's quite pointless. Doesn't mean it's not a lot faster at other things though.
Do some workstation tasks and you will notice the difference a lot more.
Posted on Reply
#5
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Impressive. They are at least doing something different though similar to AMDs 4x4 FX setup. Looks decent, but some of the numbers arent as high as I thought. Regardless of utilizing all that power or not, should top out a quad system, in my estimation.
Posted on Reply
#6
lemonadesoda
Review could have been better... since comparing a DUAL CHANNEL DIMM 1066 vs DUAL CHANNEL FB-DIMM 800 is a bit of a handicap to the FB-DIMM.

RATHER, they should have run the FB-DIMMs as QUAD-CHANNEL which would provide an effective DIMM 1600 equivalence. I bet the numbers would favour the skulltrail on every test then.
Posted on Reply