• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Kentsfield quad-core ES benchmarks

There was benchmarks on XS for a while now. They also overclocked it past 3.2 GHz. It does look good, but it's going to cost a lot. I want to see what a Kentsfield made with 2 Step 5/6 overclocks too.
 
Can anyone tell what motherboard they used to run that Kentsfield?

EDIT: Maybe if I actually read: Asus P5W DH Deluxe bios V 0701
 
am71ap1 said:
Can anyone tell what motherboard they used to run that Kentsfield?

EDIT: Maybe if I actually read: Asus P5W DH Deluxe bios V 0701
Click to expand...

That is correct. Past 3.4 GHz now...
 
maybe kentsfield will be intels answer for AMD's 4x4. AMD is 2 + 2 = 4 cores, so is intel (just that intel is on one socket). interesting indeed

 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
maybe kentsfield will be intels answer for AMD's 4x4. AMD is 2 + 2 = 4 cores, so is intel (just that intel is on one socket). interesting indeed

Click to expand...

If 4x4 requires FX series Processors as the rumors indicate it will be a joke.
 
Wait, I was under the impression that Kentsfield was four cores connected the same way Core 2 was (shared cache). You mean it's nothing more than two C2D's connected on the FSB? It's the Pentium D all over again :rolleyes:
 
InorganicMatter said:
Wait, I was under the impression that Kentsfield was four cores connected the same way Core 2 was (shared cache). You mean it's nothing more than two C2D's connected on the FSB? It's the Pentium D all over again :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Nope, it's a quad-core the same way Core 2 is a dual-core. Shared cache, yes.
 
Brickster said:
Kentsfield is a quad core on one die.
Click to expand...

nope. kentsfiled is two conroes on one PCB sharing one FSB

likes someone saids its pentium D all over again *two prescotts on 1 PCB)

first native quad core will be presented by AMD

 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
first native quad core will be presented by AMD
Click to expand...


Yep... and there are SOOOO many people who actually understand the differences. LOL. Not that it'll matter much anyway... because by the time they release their quad core, Intel's next big thing (and it's big) will be right around the corner to lay the bitchslap down. :D
 
Poncho said:
Yep... and there are SOOOO many people who actually understand the differences. LOL. Not that it'll matter much anyway... because by the time they release their quad core, Intel's next big thing (and it's big) will be right around the corner to lay the bitchslap down. :D
Click to expand...

what is it?
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
what is it?
Click to expand...
Kentsfield is four cores on one die connected via cache.
4x4 is two Machesters connected with a Hypertransport link.

Now, which one do you want?
 
InorganicMatter said:
Kentsfield is four cores on one die connected via cache.
4x4 is two Machesters connected with a Hypertransport link.

Now, which one do you want?
Click to expand...

no i dont think you understand. Kentsfield will out way before AMD's native quad core will come out. what poncho was saying is that once AMD quad core drops, intel will come out with something better. i was just inquiring what it will be.

 
InorganicMatter said:
Kentsfield is four cores on one die connected via cache.
4x4 is two Machesters connected with a Hypertransport link.

Now, which one do you want?
Click to expand...

Personally I'll take nither since both are marketing hype. At the moment you'll see NO benifit from running quad core. In the future... sure, but at launch it isn't worth it in the least. Granted... I'll upgrade to quad core (have a kentsfield sitting at home) but I wouldn't pay for one. :D
 
Poncho said:
Personally I'll take nither since both are marketing hype. At the moment you'll see NO benifit from running quad core. In the future... sure, but at launch it isn't worth it in the least. Granted... I'll upgrade to quad core (have a kentsfield sitting at home) but I wouldn't pay for one. :D
Click to expand...

This is not entirely true. For instance, some music production software (like Cubase SL/SX) support multiple processors (more than 2), and would benefit greatly from a quad-core, as you would be able to run more than twice as many CPU-hungry VST instruments/effects compared to a similarly clocked dual-core.

Anyway, Stoolman received 40 gallons of LN2 today, and reckons 5 GHz will be within reach...
 
jon67 said:
This is not entirely true. For instance, some music production software (like Cubase SL/SX) support multiple processors (more than 2), and would benefit greatly from a quad-core, as you would be able to run more than twice as many CPU-hungry VST instruments/effects compared to a similarly clocked dual-core.

Anyway, Stoolman received 40 gallons of LN2 today, and reckons 5 GHz will be within reach...
Click to expand...


I guess I should have been clearer, I've said this in so many threads :D, but what I meant was for the average user... there is no benifits. Sure, in many workstation applications there are noticable gains, but then again for that market you've got dual Clovertowns (Xeon quad core)... in the desktop the market for this is VERY small and specialized.
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
CSI? is that intel's version of the IMA? that is exciting

Click to expand...

Intel is moving to point to point, similar to Alpha.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/12/intel_csi_low/


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/06/tukwila_four_cache/

With Tukwila, Intel will finally give in to the idea of adding an on-chip memory controller and a fresh serial interconnect code-named CSI, which stands for Common Systems Interconnect or Coherent Scalable Interconnect, depending on who you ask.

The good people at Real World Technologies turned up much of this information after catching a batch of Intel slides from a high performance computing conference in Asia.

Tukwila, due out in 2008, "features an on-die FB-DIMM memory controller, which will lower access latency," the site reports. "The FB-DIMM controller likely supports 4 channels of memory, possibly more. As a result of the lower memory latency, Tukwila requires less cache than its predecessor."
Click to expand...
 
robberbaron said:
Holy crap, 7-10 FPS in 3DM05 CPU tests. That's actually pretty damn good.
Click to expand...

<evil laugh> muahahahaha, I will have the biggest e-penis of them all!

Man where THE F____ do all of these people get these ES's!!! I want one! Somebody hook a brudda up!! Poncho, send me a Kentsfield/Cloverton... preferrably a Kentsfield (775) - ie: something I can run on a 975/965.

For weeks FCG, fugger, collar, etc... have been playing around with their Conroes, today they're finally released, and you can't even get what most people want. (6400 or 6600's )
 
Poncho said:
Personally I'll take nither since both are marketing hype. At the moment you'll see NO benifit from running quad core. In the future... sure, but at launch it isn't worth it in the least. Granted... I'll upgrade to quad core (have a kentsfield sitting at home) but I wouldn't pay for one. :D
Click to expand...

No benefit running what?
 
Robstar said:
No benefit running what?
Click to expand...

In running typical day to day applications/games/email/web browsing/etc.... the things that 99% of the desktop market use.
 
well, i am in the last 1%: I fold at home :) More cores = more points = bigger folding-pen0r = I win at the intarweb!1
 
Poncho said:
Goes a bit beyond that.... but you're getting the idea. :D
Click to expand...
based on the info you gave we can assume that 45nm is on track for H2 2007 right? But isn't CSI supposed to debut in 2008 or has Intel gotten impatient and pulled up the launch date.
 
So can we expect CSI and an IMC to be introduced with Nehalem in 2008? From the articles Donnie posted it looks like Intel will be bringing them to servers in that year, but how about desktops?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top