![]() |
| | Thread Tools |
| | #1 |
| Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
![]() | Another interesting hunt over at Computex is definitely the Intel Nehalem and we managed to get our hands on a 2.66GHz Bloomfield running on a X58 Tylersburg board. Its 3DMark Vantage CPU score is pretty remarkable at 16334 which is about 45% faster than a similarly clocked Yorkfield. http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Inte...rked/5825.html
__________________ ![]() |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
![]() | mostly due to the hyperthreading though ![]()
__________________ ![]() |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Member Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,640
![]() | But it is still 45% better performance. So if I run 8 versions of F@H I would see measurably higher performance than only 4 versions of F@H... |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
![]() | what I meant is that the performance increase will be directly related to the application you are using. F@H is an example. Single threaded applications however won't see any improvement from HT
__________________ ![]() |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Member Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,640
![]() | True enough. But if still using single-threaded programs, then they have no reason to be using a Quadcore Nehalem anyway, no? |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
![]() | not much choice since CPU race is over and all our going multicore on us :/
__________________ ![]() |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Member Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,640
![]() | No reason to not buy a dual-core, most programs are at least dual-threaded. Or there is always single-core 1.8GHz Conroe-L for $40 |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |