Micro Mart Forum / PC Talk / Micro Mart Forums / Bring on the hurt. / Latest Posts

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Jason — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:45:04 GMT

Apart from its ray-tracing functions, it looks very much as though it could be behind the curve by the time it comes to market. Mid-range, maybe.

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Bruce R — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:14:45 GMT

Jason, you have answered my question, with limited graphics capability being incorporated in the new monster socket chips. :)
Still sounds like the dual-core 'good times' will come to an end with the new boards needed, which Wikipedia provisionally reports as having higher than dual-core power demands but hopefully that will be offset by smarter core selection than SpeedStep, but evaluation boards using 1000watt rather than 750watt PSUs suggests otherwise. ;)
Delays to Larrabee, previously touted as being 'end 2009' must be good news for ATI and even NVidia. :cool:

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Jason — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:46:11 GMT

I'm not sure I follow your question, Bruce. Larrabee, not due until around 2010 the last I heard, will be a GPU for dedicated cards. The graphics in Nehalem (the models with an on-chip (not on-die) GPU, that is) are a mere upgrade of what's already available in Intel's current integrated northbridges.

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Bruce R — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:38:26 GMT

Hi Jason :)
That makes definite sense for early Nehalem support motherboards, in-built graphics being a traditional motherboard maker choice, but are you saying that there will definitely be Nehalem chips incorporating similar limited capability and power-limited graphics along with their octal core etc CPUs ? :w00t:

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Jason — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:23:35 GMT

Larrabee and the graphics in some of the Nehalem chips are two different things. The two are not related.

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Bruce R — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:55:47 GMT

A more basic, rather worrying point is that with the introduction of Nehalem motherboards, dual-core 'good times' will come to an abrupt end with dual-core boards quickly vanishing, as happened when Intel forced a switch from Pentium-III to 'low power' Pentium-4 CPUs. ;)
Board-integrated Larrabee [u]might[/u] offset ever increasing power consumption, but not if that GPU is to compete head-on with existing separate GPUs as currently being touted. :crazy:
At some stage, a spare dual-core board could be a wise purchase ? :cool:

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Tippon — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:07:34 GMT

If they all have a fixed 133 Mhz bus that's somehow locked in hardware, then, as stated, the multipliers would change, depending on the model. This means that motherboards will expect to see varying multipliers between chips, so there will be some control of this outside of the chip, which should be tweakable :)

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Jason — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:36:39 GMT

I'm not following this at all. Won't overclock because of a 133MHz bus? Why not? You just raise the clock of the bus, as you do with the 200MHz of an AMD chip.

RE: Bring on the hurt.

-Wiz!- — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:26:36 GMT

Sounds like a monster...:cool:

RE: Bring on the hurt.

MartenReed — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:05:22 GMT

[quote][b]ricedg (24/08/2008)[/b][hr]Remember the rumour that they wouldn't be able to overclock?[/quote]

Yes, that's what I was referring to, Mr Dave sir :)

RE: Bring on the hurt.

ricedg — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:03:24 GMT

Remember the rumour that they wouldn't be able to overclock?

RE: Bring on the hurt.

ricedg — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:03:01 GMT

Remember the rumour that they wouldn't be able to overclock?

RE: Bring on the hurt.

MartenReed — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:26:56 GMT

[quote][b]Slipstreem (24/08/2008)[/b][hr]I'm not so sure. I find some [url=http://techgage.com/news/more_details_on_overclocking_nehalem/]evidence[/url] dotted around to suggest that it may be otherwise, although it may not be an overclock in exactly the same way we currently define or achieve one. :)

Cheers, Slipstreem. :cool:[/quote]

I'll look after this :)

But, it looks like we won't really need to OC, if the i7 is as powerful as Teaf's link shows!

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Slipstreem — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:20:22 GMT

I'm not so sure. I find some [url=http://techgage.com/news/more_details_on_overclocking_nehalem/]evidence[/url] dotted around to suggest that it may be otherwise, although it may not be an overclock in exactly the same way we currently define or achieve one. :)

Cheers, Slipstreem. :cool:

RE: Bring on the hurt.

MartenReed — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:11:21 GMT

Did you two not read the article then?

It came across as all i7 chips use a bus of 133MHz, and the chips just have different multis.

Which means no OC'ing, I'd presume.

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Slipstreem — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:16:51 GMT

The current power saving methods behave in a totally transparent manner regarding performance and overclocking. Is there any evidence to suggest that the new and cleverer power saving will behave any differently? :)

Cheers, Slipstreem. :cool:

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Teafie — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:19:21 GMT

One aspect of the Nehalem (i7) that bothers me is that it is gonna be energy efficient and rightly so. But this will be done by closing down unneeded cores and perhaps auto throttle back, so overclocking may become some what tricky, in that what you acheive is throttled back and hindering the performance of the app as the chip perceives that it is getting the right amount of processing power.

But when it comes to games the information is moving and on the screen and so may lead to undesirable image quality.

Still, all being well the tools will be inplace to cross the bridge when we come to it.

Like disabling cool and quite on Athlon.

RE: Bring on the hurt.

Him — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:57:10 GMT

I really need to get me one of those and a 4807*2! I'm just having a hard time justifying it since I don't play that many demanding games on my Pc now I have an xbox.

Bring on the hurt.

Teafie — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:13:52 GMT

As posted.:)

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=15015&page=1