| Wednesday, July 9 2008 |
ChipHell carried out the first comprehensive evaluation of the Intel Bloomfield 2.66 GHz processor, a derivative of the eagerly anticipated Nehalem architecture, which already has fan-sites mushrooming all over the internet.
The most prominant benchmarks used by enthusiasts and overclockers, 3DMark Vantage (CPU Tests), Super Pi 1M, Cinebench and SANDRA were run on this processor.
In the 3DMark Vantage test, the processor secured a CPU score of 16294. It crunched Super Pi 1M in 15.475 seconds. With the Cinebench, it secured 3048 with a single thread, the multi-threaded bench belted out 12627 CB-CPU hinting at the processor's high multi-core efficiency. And finally, Bloomfield takes SANDRA out on a date. You have to look at the red dot compared to a QX9770 yourself.
I'm appetised and looking forward to a great processor architecture and so could you.
Source: ChipHell
The most prominant benchmarks used by enthusiasts and overclockers, 3DMark Vantage (CPU Tests), Super Pi 1M, Cinebench and SANDRA were run on this processor.
In the 3DMark Vantage test, the processor secured a CPU score of 16294. It crunched Super Pi 1M in 15.475 seconds. With the Cinebench, it secured 3048 with a single thread, the multi-threaded bench belted out 12627 CB-CPU hinting at the processor's high multi-core efficiency. And finally, Bloomfield takes SANDRA out on a date. You have to look at the red dot compared to a QX9770 yourself.
I'm appetised and looking forward to a great processor architecture and so could you.
Source: ChipHell
User comments
by: InnocentCriminalWell, considering that AMDs don't clock nearly as far as Intel cpus (whether by percentage or just raw MHz), I'd be inclined to disagree.
I wouldn't have thought it'd hinder them that much, maybe it does with the Phenoms but before that I've never seen it as a major issue.
Fair enough, but I wouldn't just put that down to the integrated memory controller, it's a load of other crap as well. You do have a point though, when comparing a Phenom to the Core 2 it makes sense, but back when AMD first released the Athlon64 it pissed all over the Pentium 4's in memory intensive applications (and the rest).
All I'm saying is, I don't think the integrated memory controller is the main reason to blame the bad performance and overclockablity of the Phenoms. It's a factor.
Going back to Bloomfield, I can see that having the memory controller integrated can bring only be a benefit, but we'll see, it may not be as efficient as I'm hoping.
All I'm saying is, I don't think the integrated memory controller is the main reason to blame the bad performance and overclockablity of the Phenoms. It's a factor.
Going back to Bloomfield, I can see that having the memory controller integrated can bring only be a benefit, but we'll see, it may not be as efficient as I'm hoping.
by: InnocentCriminalI wasn't denying the performance capabilities of the IMC at all. Of course it will be more efficient, all else being equal. I'm only worried from an overclocking standpoint. Even back when the A64's were crushing P4, the A64's still didn't clock as far.
Fair enough, but I wouldn't just put that down to the integrated memory controller, it's a load of other crap as well. You do have a point though, when comparing a Phenom to the Core 2 it makes sense, but back when AMD first released the Athlon64 it pissed all over the Pentium 4's in memory intensive applications (and the rest).
All I'm saying is, I don't think the integrated memory controller is the main reason to blame the bad performance and overclockablity of the Phenoms. It's a factor.
Going back to Bloomfield, I can see that having the memory controller integrated can bring only be a benefit, but we'll see, it may not be as efficient as I'm hoping.
It didn't need to, but I see your point.
by: Wile Ei pointed this out in another one of these threads i'm thinking this 1st batch will look a lot like clawhammer on s754 i'm thinking HUGE limit on ram oc's to start
I wasn't denying the performance capabilities of the IMC at all. Of course it will be more efficient, all else being equal. I'm only worried from an overclocking standpoint. Even back when the A64's were crushing P4, the A64's still didn't clock as far.
by: cdawall
i pointed this out in another one of these threads i'm thinking this 1st batch will look a lot like clawhammer on s754 i'm thinking HUGE limit on ram oc's to start
Yeah, and not just ram, but the overall OC as well. I believe the IMC is a big factor in why we don't see many extreme clocks on AMD chips.
by: Wile Ei'm thinking that to bet these new chips top out lower than the AMD's to maybe 3.4ghz max
Yeah, and not just ram, but the overall OC as well. I believe the IMC is a big factor in why we don't see many extreme clocks on AMD chips.
these cpu's easly hit 4ghz ;)
by: Morgothno the unlocked multi ES chips hit 4ghz easy you have to remember that these new ones use a 133mhz reference clock and then multi that out so without the unlocked multi you still have to play with the bus speeds which are going to be glitchy. hence all of the rumoprs of no oc'ing these chips
these cpu's easly hit 4ghz ;)