Penryn reviews hit the web

Discussion in 'Intel x86 CPUs and chipsets' started by Agg, Oct 29, 2007.

  1. Agg

    Agg Lord of the Pings

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2001
    Messages:
    30,991
    Location:
    A Reported Post Near You
  2. The OC

    The OC Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,594
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Thanks Agg. :)

    The incremental performance gains are nice, but the lower power consumption and sheer overclockability will be what makes Penryn shine. :thumbup:

    Oh, btw, here is a link comparing an overclocked 3GHz Phenom X4 to 3GHz C2Ds/C2Qs in Crysis, interesting to say the least. ;)

    http://news.expreview.com/2007-10-29/1193590532d6599.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2007
  3. SLi_dog

    SLi_dog Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,283
    Location:
    NT
    Team.AU got to play with an QX9650 for a little while.

    From the early testing we couldn't get it to boot above ~405 FSB but it would clockgen up to ~480Mhz

    It topped out at 4.8Ghz on cascade and Dice with the Gigabyte X38-DQ6.

    Hopefully it's just an early BIOS/motherboard issue holding it back. It didn't seem strained at all at those speeds.


    We had it running very cool at 4.33Ghz on a stock cooler with 1.5v. By very cool I mean the heatsink was cool to the touch and I didn't see the Delta to Tjunction temps go above 70C IIRC (That's delta to Tjunction, not CoreTemp readings ;))

    I wouldn't be surprised if Yorkfield would run 4Ghz+ 24/7 on air :D
     
  4. chainbolt

    chainbolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    103,017
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Yes, the greatest improvements are clearly on the hardware side. Combine this with the upcoming new architecture (Nehalem), and we can expect a double boost. Currently it looks like Penryn and Yorkfield are "only" transition cores.
     
  5. The OC

    The OC Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,594
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Quite clearly, it's an evolutionary product. :)

    If Nehalem can bring a 10% gain over Penryn in non BW intensive tasks, and >20% in BW intensive tasks, then we're talking. :cool:
     
  6. DAVID CLEM

    DAVID CLEM Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    372
  7. davidw89

    davidw89 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    530
    so when do we get to buy this?
     
  8. Elyzion

    Elyzion Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,993
    Location:
    Singapore
  9. SLi_dog

    SLi_dog Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,283
    Location:
    NT
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2007
  10. ADV

    ADV Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,151
    Location:
    P✪RT MACQUARIE
    correct me if I am wrong but i could have sworn penryn's sse4 extensions brought with it a hell of a lot more encoding speed then a mere 20-30 seconds faster, I remember articles claiming something around a 40% increase in divx.

    O_O
     
  11. A||uSiOn

    A||uSiOn Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2001
    Messages:
    824
    Location:
    NSW - SYDNEY
    well its about 28% as per xbitlabs review for divx 6.7
     
  12. mshagg

    mshagg Politburo

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    23,090
    Location:
    Adelaide
    This is the kind of insight that makes me love this site! :thumbup:

    BTW cheers for the links Agg, some reading to do :D
     
  13. chainbolt

    chainbolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    103,017
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Of course I don't know. But for me, a 10% gain is not worth a completely new architecture. I guess Nehalem will perform (in average) better than Penryn by more than "only" 10%.

    Essentially Penryn is a Conroe with 45nm transistor size and additional cache. Nehalem is a new architecture from ground up. No front-side bus anymore. Intel might even (for mobile usage) integrate a GPU into the package.

    Another benefit (less for the individual user though) it its scalability. Fact here:
    http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/Intel_New_Processor_Generations.pdf

    The very interesting thing is that Intel, although Penryn has not even been officially put into the market, is advertising Nehalem already and (also very unusual) committed itself for commercial production within 2008.

    http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20070328fact.htm
     
  14. Whisper

    Whisper Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    8,297
    Location:
    Sydney
    Intergrated memory controller as well chainbolt?

    If it does, that has got to be worth a fair few points, as its one of the AMD features that even allows AMD to remain in the same ballpark as Intel in the benchmarks.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2007
  15. chainbolt

    chainbolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    103,017
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Yes, Nehalem will have a new architecture and an on-die memory controller, called QuickPath Interconnect, or QPI, and obviously (for the mobile version) even an integrated GPU. talking about "enormous performance and energy efficiency gains" with Nehalem. Well, we need new boards, that's for sure.

    As I said, it's very unusual (actually it has happened never before) for Intel to pimp the successor to the successor in such a drastic way.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2007
  16. Ze.

    Ze. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Messages:
    7,871
    Location:
    Newcastle, NSW
    It's the first I've heard about an integrated GPU on the same die for nehalem but I'm not surprised it seems to be the way everything is going.

    However the integrated memory controller and QPI are finally catching up with AMD.

    It's my understannding that QPI is intels version of Hypertransport for connecting between the chips for multiple cpu's and other devices.
    You have to remember that Intels huge caches have been one of the features that have allowed Intel to stay ahead of AMD of late in performance stakes. There are others but the Cache plays a huge role in real world applications, that completely outstrip the other improvements like full width SSE unit.
     
  17. chainbolt

    chainbolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    103,017
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Exactly that it is. And in addition it looks like we are getting a new socket: LGA 1366.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2007
  18. 393

    393 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    Adelaide
    I might have to skip Penryn if Nehalem is going to comme in '08
     
  19. chainbolt

    chainbolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    103,017
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Well, I can only recommend to carefully read the reviews. There is no doubt that Nehalem will offer an even bigger jump than we see now between a QX6850 (kentsfield) and a QX9650 (Yorkfield) running at around 3 GHz. But it will take another year, and you will need in addition a new motherboard. Nehalem will not be available before Q4 2008. As it stands, Penryn based CPU will perform at least 10% better than Conroe (depending on the application far more than that), use around 40% less power, and offers clealry better overclocking potential.

    I think the question is how soon Intel can put the more affordable Penryn dual and quad core versions in the market.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2007
  20. 393

    393 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    Adelaide

    I would have to agree with you if I didn't have a faulty P5K Premium. The way I see it is.... if I can't get a replacement mobo under warranty (and it looks that way) then I aint going to put a Penryn on this mobo . If my mobo wasn't faulty then I could justify forking out for a CPU that'll go in it and then prolong my upgrade to Nehalem and new mobo.....

    Who knows.... maybe I will get a replacement if those ASUS bastards ever get back to me. Either that or I live with it or got to consumer affairs. But now I'm getting a little off topic innit!
     

Share This Page