Nehalem details spill through the Tubes - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 3rd Dec 2007, 08:37

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12...gh_the_tubes/1

Eight cores, tri-channel DDR3, lots of cache and an IGP - it's all happening for Nehalem it seems. But if you want SLI, Intel might make you pay more...

BlackMage23 · 3rd Dec 2007, 09:33

Yeah, they are milking the enthusiasts. Think about how much one of the boards will cost to go with that. Intel could be shooting themselfs in the foot with this one as they find some enthusiasts may go green.

mutznutz · 3rd Dec 2007, 09:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackMage23

Yeah, they are milking the enthusiasts. Think about how much one of the boards will cost to go with that. Intel could be shooting themselfs in the foot with this one as they find some enthusiasts may go green.

I've been looking for an excuse to go back I'll be honest

... that may be it

Nix · 3rd Dec 2007, 11:28

I thought they were sticking with the LGA775 socket until at least q2-q3 2009

Tim S · 3rd Dec 2007, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nix

I thought they were sticking with the LGA775 socket until at least q2-q3 2009

It's impossible, given the change of architecture it's about to embark on. Intel has been with LGA775 since the dawn of PCI-Express, which was in the first half of 2004. The fact it's moving away from MCM to a DC architecture is quite a significant overhaul - as significant as AMD's move from MCM to DC.

sandys · 3rd Dec 2007, 11:45

A new chip, a new motherboard, seems to have been that way with Intel chips for a long time, the number of boards I have had to change for a VRM or some other rubbish when you'd expect a simple drop in is ridiculous, I thought things were changing with 775 what with P$ and C2D and C2Q but with the recent 680i and 45nm incompatibilities it would seem not, I guess it won't change in the future either.

RotoSequence · 3rd Dec 2007, 11:52

It looks complex, sounds powerful, capable, and above all, extremely expensive.

Bindibadgi · 3rd Dec 2007, 12:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandys

A new chip, a new motherboard, seems to have been that way with Intel chips for a long time, the number of boards I have had to change for a VRM or some other rubbish when you'd expect a simple drop in is ridiculous, I thought things were changing with 775 what with P$ and C2D and C2Q but with the recent 680i and 45nm incompatibilities it would seem not, I guess it won't change in the future either.

Absolutely. Intel claim to have the socket for x number of years, but you had to change from 925X to 955X for dual core CPUs, VRM changes during P4, from P4 to Core 2, 680i to 780i and next that.

DXR_13KE · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:08

i hope Intel does not screw up again..... not this time..... and i hope they use the same socket for all their nehalem cpus.....

Bindibadgi · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:13

They aren't, as said in the article - they will be split between two sockets.

TreeDude · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:26

The HT sounds great for a server, but is it necessary for desktops?

If I am playing a game which has 2 threads, how do I know it is using 2 cores and not 1 core and and the HT? This sounds as if it could potentially hurt performance if the processor management can't tell the difference.

We are just starting to see a benefit of 4 cores in a desktop PC (mainly for high end gaming or video encoding), is 8 really necessary right now? Current tech is moving at such a fast pace right now, the software needs time to catch up. My wallet also needs to catch up.

FragileSocks · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:37

I still have only one (p4 631) and its working fine for me. No problems in any games. Don't really see a need for any more cores right now in games. It seems to mainly be the GPU that does the vast majority of the work in games, and while Crysis can take advantage of more cores it seems to do fine with just one.

DXR_13KE · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bindibadgi

They aren't, as said in the article - they will be split between two sockets.

Did Intel say this? i prefer a confirmation from the horses mouth.....

Redbeaver · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotoSequence

It looks complex, sounds powerful, capable, and above all, extremely expensive.

ditto

Bindibadgi · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreeDude

The HT sounds great for a server, but is it necessary for desktops?

If I am playing a game which has 2 threads, how do I know it is using 2 cores and not 1 core and and the HT? This sounds as if it could potentially hurt performance if the processor management can't tell the difference.

We are just starting to see a benefit of 4 cores in a desktop PC (mainly for high end gaming or video encoding), is 8 really necessary right now? Current tech is moving at such a fast pace right now, the software needs time to catch up. My wallet also needs to catch up.

Well it's meant to be a much better implementation of hyperthreading. It's being reintroduced because the pipeline is being extended from Core 2 to Nehalem by several stages so it makes sense to make everything useful. It'll be interesting to see if the CPU works better with HT on or off.

DXR - no, this is *all* still unconfirmed.

Brooxy · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:55

If Intel did use two different sockets, wouldn't this just be what AMD did with the 754 / 939 chips. Cheaper on one socket, more expensive on the other?

Bindibadgi · 3rd Dec 2007, 13:58

Yea, pretty much, but it depends what speeds and prices Intel wants to release the "939" chips at.

salesman · 3rd Dec 2007, 14:46

well when i read this i was thinking about making just an average run of the mill PC using an amd processer, because its going to be so freaking cheap. which is what i like.

LeMaltor · 3rd Dec 2007, 14:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by salesman

well when i read this i was thinking about making just an average run of the mill PC using an amd processer, because its going to be so freaking cheap. which is what i like.

This is all for the end of next year/2009 though, if your building a cheap comp now I would not take much notice of all this

DarkLord7854 · 3rd Dec 2007, 18:38

I kinda got lost.. Which one do I want for gaming

3rd Dec 2007, 08:37	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	Nehalem details spill through the Tubes http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/12...gh_the_tubes/1 Eight cores, tri-channel DDR3, lots of cache and an IGP - it's all happening for Nehalem it seems. But if you want SLI, Intel might make you pay more... __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

3rd Dec 2007, 09:33	#2
BlackMage23 RPG Loving Freak Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Temple of Fiends Posts: 159	Yeah, they are milking the enthusiasts. Think about how much one of the boards will cost to go with that. Intel could be shooting themselfs in the foot with this one as they find some enthusiasts may go green. __________________ I am the Black Mage. I cast the spells that makes the peoples fall down!

3rd Dec 2007, 11:28	#4
Nix Multimodder Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Bristol/Portsmouth(Uni) Posts: 197	I thought they were sticking with the LGA775 socket until at least q2-q3 2009 __________________ Project: Little Rascal - Mini-ITX Gaming Rig, available @ - Wizd Forums - Bit-Tech - The Mod Nation - SFFTech

3rd Dec 2007, 11:45	#6
sandys Hypermodder Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 922	A new chip, a new motherboard, seems to have been that way with Intel chips for a long time, the number of boards I have had to change for a VRM or some other rubbish when you'd expect a simple drop in is ridiculous, I thought things were changing with 775 what with P$ and C2D and C2Q but with the recent 680i and 45nm incompatibilities it would seem not, I guess it won't change in the future either. __________________ Into Gaming and around Bristol, UK, Click Here

3rd Dec 2007, 11:52	#7
RotoSequence Lazy Lurker Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: 'States Posts: 4,529	It looks complex, sounds powerful, capable, and above all, extremely expensive. __________________ Technology Schmecnology

3rd Dec 2007, 13:08	#9
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,473	i hope Intel does not screw up again..... not this time..... and i hope they use the same socket for all their nehalem cpus..... __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!

3rd Dec 2007, 13:13	#10
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,274	They aren't, as said in the article - they will be split between two sockets. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

3rd Dec 2007, 13:26	#11
TreeDude Multimodder Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 239	The HT sounds great for a server, but is it necessary for desktops? If I am playing a game which has 2 threads, how do I know it is using 2 cores and not 1 core and and the HT? This sounds as if it could potentially hurt performance if the processor management can't tell the difference. We are just starting to see a benefit of 4 cores in a desktop PC (mainly for high end gaming or video encoding), is 8 really necessary right now? Current tech is moving at such a fast pace right now, the software needs time to catch up. My wallet also needs to catch up.

3rd Dec 2007, 13:37	#12
FragileSocks Multimodder Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 100	I still have only one (p4 631) and its working fine for me. No problems in any games. Don't really see a need for any more cores right now in games. It seems to mainly be the GPU that does the vast majority of the work in games, and while Crysis can take advantage of more cores it seems to do fine with just one.

3rd Dec 2007, 13:55	#16
Brooxy Powered by the PG Monkey... Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 1,255	If Intel did use two different sockets, wouldn't this just be what AMD did with the 754 / 939 chips. Cheaper on one socket, more expensive on the other? __________________ Scorpion - Opteron 146 - 1GB RAM - 120GB Maxtor ATA133 HDD - 8x DVD-RW - 16x DVDROM - nVidia 7800 GTX Graphics - Gigabyte GA-K8N51GMF-9 Mobo - Undergoing Case Mod Phoenix - Toshiba A120 - 1.73 Celeron (Dothan) - 1GB RAM - 60GB HDD - ATi 200m Graphics Salamander - Intel Pentium III @ 733MHz - 256Mb RAM - Total HDD @ 80Gb

3rd Dec 2007, 13:58	#17
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,274	Yea, pretty much, but it depends what speeds and prices Intel wants to release the "939" chips at. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

3rd Dec 2007, 14:46	#18
salesman Multimodder Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 165	well when i read this i was thinking about making just an average run of the mill PC using an amd processer, because its going to be so freaking cheap. which is what i like.

3rd Dec 2007, 18:38	#20
DarkLord7854 Web Developer Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: West Palm Beach, Florida Posts: 3,840	I kinda got lost.. Which one do I want for gaming __________________ Current Computer: eVGA 780i Motherboard \| Q6600 Core2Quad \| eVGA GTX260 896Mbs 216-core \| 2x Seagate 500Gbs \| 8Gbs OCZ Platinum DDR2 800 \| Creative XtremeGamer X-Fi \| Thermaltake Armor Case Custom WordPress, ZenCart, Joomla, vBulletin, etc installs and skinning, PM/E-Mail for a quote