Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 948 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s December 15 - 09:09am EST 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Intel's Core i7, is it ever enough?
 

  Everyone likes more speed 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, Next >>
Wayne Bradford Nov 07, 2008, 08:02am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List Replies: 96 - Views: 12123
No one likes to wait for any application to open,especially if you are opening several.


Want to enjoy fewer advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Sander Sassen Nov 07, 2008, 08:09am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
That's in 90% of the case due to a (heavily fragmented) harddisk, and has nothing to do with the processor, motherboard etc.

Cheers,

Sander Sassen
Editor in Chief - Hardware Analysis
ssassen@hardwareanalysis.com
Stan Miranda Nov 07, 2008, 08:46am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
I Like my systems to be as fast as possible, this isway I am buyint the 956 Extreme and the 940. I own two QX9650s and a Q6700 , two of these are in test systems that I use for testing hardware for my review site.

I also do alot of gaming, so I love fast machines. here's a list of my systems specs
1st rig
Asus Rampage Extreme, QX9650@4Ghz Freezone Elite, 300Gb VelociRaptor WD750Gb, 6Gb OCZ DDR2 1600Mhz Reapers, 2-HD4870X2s in Crossfire, Silverstone 1200w,Lian Li PC-A77Gateway XHD 3000 30" LCD Extreme HD

2nd rig
eVGA 790i Ultra, QX9650@4Ghz Freezione Elite, 150 Gb Raptor X WD750Gb,4Gbs DDR3 Patriot Extreme Performance 1600Mhz, Silverstone `1200w Two eVGA GTX 280s in SLI Hanns G 28" Full HD

3rd rig
eVGA 780i. Q6700@3.8GHz Freezone Elite, 300Gb VelociRaptor WD500Gb, 8Gbs DDR2 Patriot Vipers PC8500, Two eVGA GTX260s in SLI, Silverstone 1000w, 28" Hanns G Full HD

all three are running Vista 64bit.

As soon as the 965Extreme and the 940 are released I will build two more systems, that I know will blow away all three of these, so more speed ? Hell yes !!! lol

Merc Nov 07, 2008, 08:59am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
It is hard to justify an upgrade from a Core 2 Quad 6600 overclocked to 3400MHz as the performance is incredible and nothing I have run to date, taxes it in the least. That said I am glad that Intel is continuing their tick tock strategy but I belive it is more for the server market than the desktop market. AMD has become an afterthought and Nehalem makes them completely irrelevant in the CPU world, sad as that may be. They will make a comeback when the market changes.

Merc
Modified Lian Li PC 7077A
Dual Watercooling Loops
Asus P5K Deluxe BIOS 0404
Core 2 Duo Q6600 (3600MHz@1.46v)
Max OC 4050MhHz at 1.65v
1 x XFX 8800GTX XXX Watercooled
2 GB Team Xtreme DDR2 800-PC6400
2 x 150gb WD in Raptors in RAID 0
1 x 640
Dave C Nov 07, 2008, 09:10am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Nov 07, 2008, 09:10am EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
My main pc application is AutoCAD Map. How do you think this new processor would affect that application?

Amalfi Marini Nov 07, 2008, 09:11am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
I actually read several i7 reviews and I have to be honest, for that price, I didn't like it.
Core 2 is still ok, and even Phenom X4 has good performance for the price, and I still think its ok for today standard despite it doesn't shines on benchmarks compared to the Core 2.

And if you want your apps to load faster then get 3 of those samsung Spinpoints F1 (coolest and fastest in real life) together in Raid 0 you can reach like 300 Megabytes/s (of course, when using good raid controllers like nforce or intel, I actually tried only on nforce7 and it works). And finally -why not- watch your ram, I have 4GB on WinXP pro 32bit, and I have paging disabled, and it makes a difference.

Just my 2 cents.


B Nov 07, 2008, 09:14am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Having a fast computer is also sometimes an ego thing. For example, I know plenty of people who don't even game but insist on buying 2000USD computers. Thes same people end up using their computers for surfing the internet and word processing. :D

j s Nov 07, 2008, 09:42am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Nov 07, 2008, 09:45am EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
a fragmented hd...??? are you having a laugh..??? couldnt disagree more, wait time has everything to do with processor, m/b speeds

if you honestly think its only a frag hd thats causes speed probs then defrag and see the difference!

Sander Sassen Nov 07, 2008, 10:02am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
a fragmented hd...??? are you having a laugh..??? couldnt disagree more, wait time has everything to do with processor, m/b speeds

if you honestly think its only a frag hd thats causes speed probs then defrag and see the difference!


No, that's only part of the problem, the problem is that data is stored randomly, and the access time and latency of a HD are measured in ms rather than ns (as is common with main memory). So a HD is inherently slow by default. However if you are seeing long load times and a lot of HD activity it really is time to either a) defrag the HD or b) make some room by deleting a bunch of stuff from it and make sure that you have enough main memory so the OS doesn't have to swap to the HD all the time.

Cheers,

Sander Sassen
Editor in Chief - Hardware Analysis
ssassen@hardwareanalysis.com
elliott trevino Nov 07, 2008, 10:03am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
I have to agree with Brendan I am a homegrown system builder and right now with the economy my number one selling build has AMD Sempron 3000 socket 754 with 2gb ram 160gb sata hd, the average user wants to play Bejeweled, have decent sound, and speed, and typically the only multi-tasking they do is chat on more than one client and upload or watch online videos. This system is adequate for that and going from and old P4 Socket 478 this machine is fast. I on the other hand want speed but I want dollar for dollar performance so I currently use AM2 5200 but my boards can easily go up to a quad core so if and when the price drops I can upgrade my motherboards to higher speeds. One good thing about both Intel & AMD is the use of power/electricity has been reduced and both should be complimented for this advancement. Running Faster Cooler is great.

Harry Nov 07, 2008, 10:07am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Well, about 5 years ago I started to transfer home video tape to DVD (mainly to share with relatives). After a learning curve on Pinnacle Studio, I started tape by tape. This process has continued (and enlarged) through 4 home built computers starting with an Intel 800 Mhz CPU, an AMD 1.2 Ghz chip, an Intel 2.6 Ghz chip to the current Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz chip and each new homebuilt has brought a sigh of relief as processing times have dropped from 16 hours (for a 1.25 hour original) to around 3 hours on the current setup.

Would I like something to run circles around the current setup, YOU BET ! However, as usual, that is tempered with time and money.

Having finished off the home movies I am now making backups of old pre-recorded BETA tapes and some pre-recorded VHS tapes. Several years worth of that ahead.

I think with the Core 2 Duo chip currently in use the programming now needs to catch up to take advantage better of this speed. While Pinnacle Studio will sucessfully burn what you create that feature is slow and still has a problem or two. So, I usually let Nero Burn do the burning often burning two discs at once (this is where an increased speed CPU might see a significant reduction in speed) as this must be done at far less than maximum burning speed of one unit alone.

While you might quibble over what's really needed in a home system many such improvements are aimed at commercial and military needs and often appear in home units later on as a matter of course.

Harry

Radomir Jordanovic Nov 07, 2008, 11:33am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
The title is a bit deceiving. I thought Intel had released MORE Core i7 processors. The way it stands now, we still don't have enough. I may not buy a Core i7, but some who believe they need it will get it. The same can be said with most markets that have a hierarchy of competing products. One day, we'll look at these puny Core i7 CPUs and laugh about how fast we thought they were. There's no shame now in wanting the fastest CPU. I actually think that modern technology isn't fast enough. Let's keep going. We need native 100GHz octacores with terabytes of cache!

Silverstone 750W, Asus P5KC, C2 Q6600, 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600
ATI HD 4850 512MB, 1TB Caviar. 1TB Seagate
Trent Creekmore Nov 07, 2008, 11:56am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Sander Sassen said:
That's in 90% of the case due to a (heavily fragmented) harddisk, and has nothing to do with the processor, motherboard etc.

Cheers,



Not true now days. With Vista, it's already setup to do a defrag every week, even without notifying you.

Myself I am starting to use multiple monitors. I love it. I can now play video games, chat, do word processing, and watch videos online all at the same time. All this does tend to overload the computer.

Brian Boerman Nov 07, 2008, 11:59am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
This is another of those "either or" debates that really should be a "both and" conversation.

As to HD latency & load times & swap frequency -- wait until you see the effect of the currently available -- actually commercially viable this time -- solid state (Flash) HD's.
The real "user experience" performance impact is the biggest quantum leap since the original Pentium.

That said, as to CPU: I have a good friend who dumped a bunch of his Intel stock after the introduction of the 386, saying no one would ever need a faster PC. We've all heard that opinion too many times to believe it any more, haven't we?

We can count on the ingenuity & creativity of the Software vendors to find ways to consume all the PC performance capacity that the hardware people create -- and that's good news!

Tim Magraw Nov 07, 2008, 12:33pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed


We can count on the ingenuity & creativity of the Software vendors to find ways to consume all the PC performance capacity that the hardware people create -- and that's good news!


For "ingenuity and creativity" you could also try lazy and ignorant. Almost gone are the days when most programmers and software engineers (And I am one so I can comment) write their code to get the very best out of every last byte of RAM and clock cycle of system speed. Case in point I checked out some of my own most recent code and compared it to the stuff I used to write on 8086 Pcs and I would be ashamed if I could be bothered :blush: Just give me more power and I can just get lazier and lazier :)



dark41 Nov 07, 2008, 01:06pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
The i7 has been benchmarked in a few places already. They've shown speed increases of up to 4x with mutliple core apps and up to 25% for single core apps over the fastest Penryn. That's a simply amazing increase and IMO out does the jump from Pent D to C2D. Imagine being able to decode movies 4x as fast.

Time is money. Problem is, how much time is worth how much money? I think Intel is counting on most people being like Stan Miranda, and needlessly throwing money away on the high end stuff. But I think most people will be buying the 920 and overclocking it to match his 965 Extreme while saving a great deal of money in the process. That's probably why Intel has taken steps to slow down overclocking on the 920 and 940 by locking the voltage (can be unlocked in BIOS).

The biggest problem, as I see it, is needing a new motherboard and DDR3. Both are pricey at this point, on top of the CPU price. I don't think many of my customers will deem it worth the price with the current market turmoil to upgrade so drastically. But I'll be doing everything in my power to get my hands on a 920 ASAP to see what it can do.

Eventually, when and if the prices of DDR3 and i7 boards come down, I think i7 will be a huge seller. In the meantime (and maybe until Intel's "tock" hits the market), it makes more sense to get a reasonably priced C2D or C2Q since the prices will be dropping again, and their performance is adequate for most people.

The question is, how long will Intel keep supplying C2D/C2Q? History has shown that both Intel and AMD drop the older CPUs from production soon after the release of new technology. I'm still sitting on a brand new A64 SLI board that cost a fortune at the time, but there's no CPU available for it. The manufacturers push upgrades by eliminating the option to go with anything else. Ouch even.

One thing that bothers me about this launch is that AMD seems buried by it. I don't see AMD recovering for a long time, if ever. Without competition Intel will basically have full control of the market again. We could well be back to paying twice as much, just because they can charge twice as much. :/

EX38-DS5
E8500@4.0GHz (445x9, 1.40v) TRUE Black
Corsair HX620W
2x2gb Kingston HyperX 9600
HIS IceQ4 HD4850
2X1TB F1s (RAID 0) XP Pro/Win7 Ult 64
Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
Cambridge Soundworks 500w 5.1
G5, Antec 1200
G. G. Nov 07, 2008, 01:11pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Nov 07, 2008, 01:19pm EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
dark41 said:
Without competition Intel will basically have full control of the market again. We could well be back to paying twice as much, just because they can charge twice as much. :/



Well, there are folks that will fall on the blade when all this new stuff hits the market because they have to have it.... and that's ok... they know what they are getting into when it comes to their wallets... and that's ok too.... but for the rest of us... this is what I suggest, if you are going to build a new system, as I am..... I suggest you get as much as you can with the amount of money you are willing to spend on the out going stuff (i.e. q9X50, E8xx0, HD48xx, 98gtx+/GTX260, p45 chipset, ddr2 800~1066, etc.. etc....).... as this will give you the best for your dollars for a good bit until the new stuff pricing comes down to a level that is more reasonable..... get what I am saying? I know the paragraph is probably confusing.. lol......


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-
Brian Boerman Nov 07, 2008, 01:17pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
might you be just a bit too hard on yourself?

getting the features out quickly & cheaply & reliabily (and somewhat interoperably), and letting the hardware guys worry about performance -- that's essentially what built the Microsoft applications empire. and the hardware people have certainly responded -- in spades.

I'm not a software person, but my impression was that back in the day, Excel was the least hardware-efficient spreadsheet program (behind Lotus and Quattro). But, the market certainly didn't seem to care...

Trent Creekmore Nov 07, 2008, 01:23pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Nov 07, 2008, 01:23pm EST

 
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Tim Magraw said:



For "ingenuity and creativity" you could also try lazy and ignorant. Almost gone are the days when most programmers and software engineers (And I am one so I can comment) write their code to get the very best out of every last byte of RAM and clock cycle of system speed. Case in point I checked out some of my own most recent code and compared it to the stuff I used to write on 8086 Pcs and I would be ashamed if I could be bothered :blush: Just give me more power and I can just get lazier and lazier :)




I guess it has been 30 years since you coded. Back then, hardware was expensive and limited. You were also dealing with only with hundreds to thousands of lines of code only.

Now we are up to millions to take advantage of the far more advanced hardware.Hardware is also a commodity.

Let's see you try going through millions of lines of code just to free up an extra KB of ram or refine the code to run faster when just in 6 months another CPU will be out that will make no difference in what you did.

Try that and you will be out of business. Look how long it took MS to come out with vista. 7 years. That is the longest time MS has ever taken to go to a new version.

That is dealing with 10s of millions, if not 100s of millions lines of code.



Not to mention coders can no longer keep up with the hardware changes.

Thempleton Aart Nov 07, 2008, 01:35pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
Radomir Jordanovic said:
One day, we'll look at these puny Core i7 CPUs and laugh about how fast we thought they were. There's no shame now in wanting the fastest CPU. I actually think that modern technology isn't fast enough. Let's keep going. We need native 100GHz octacores with terabytes of cache!


Next Intel's plans for the near future are to add up to +80! cores on the same dye, and to lower as much as possible the clock to obtain the less possible power consumption (AKA heat generation).

So the old maxima "more speed rising the clock freq." is deprecated. ;-)

Robert Eachus Nov 07, 2008, 01:44pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Everyone likes more speed
I have to laugh about the debate here. First, on the subject of whether defragmenting hard disks will reduce load speeds. Yes, for some people it will, but for most, the biggest improvement is more memory--and not shutting your computer off.* I have three hard disks in my system--a RAID-1 and a second disk for non-critical data. I also have migrated, as much as possible, various log files, e-mail directory, etc., to a memory stick. As a result, I'm often surprised to hear one (or two) disks spin up. Not that it is loud, just that I grow so used to not hearing it. (When do I hear it? Mostly when Windows Update goes to work. ;-) I currently have 4 Gig of (DDR2-1066) main memory. If/when I switch from WIndows XP to Vista, I will most certainly double that--at a minimum.

So let's now assume that you have a decent amount of main memory, your hard disks are mostly idle and you still want/need more speed. If you are running a server farm, that is certainly understandable, so let's consider that case first.

Servers, much more than desktop systems, are memory hogs. My current rule of thumb is 4 Gig per core in high-end database servers. Less than that, and even if you do all the best tuning in the world, hard disk speed will dominate processor speed in determining performance. Yes flash disks, and disks with their own DRAM caches, help reduce the (time) cost of going to disk, but best is not to go there in the first place. That means that when your server is 100% loaded, you don't want to be doing significant paging.

Probably the only time I ever laughed in my boss's face was when he told me that I should spend so much time looking at (real-time) server paging data. I usually did this from around 9:30 to 11:00 on Monday morning. I said "I do it to prevent server problems from getting out of hand."

"But, we haven't had any server problems recently."

I couldn't help it, I burst out laughing. After about thirty seconds, I saw a sickly grin that indicated my boss understood. End of conversation.

If your servers have enough memory 90% of the time, and only start paging at high loads, what happens? Once you hit a certain point, your server(s) will start thrashing, and the only possible cure is to shut down and restart. What I was doing was to set a load limit before thrashing started, and then look at the applications that were doing paging at that point, and doing what I could to reduce the problem.

The easiest cure was more memory, but you should be able to figure out that it wasn't worth my time to worry about problems that could be fixed by installing more memory. If the hardware was limited to 4 or 8 Gigs or whatever, then throttling load was a much better solution than thrashing.

So where does this leave Core i7? Very good question. As the editor pointed out, Core i7 single and dual socket systems will quickly become the system of choice for small servers and workstations. But for now you are going to be limited to 6 DDR3 DIMMs per socket. For a webserver, no problem. Three Gig per core would be limiting in a database server, but even one or two Gig per core should be enough for most webservers.

Beyond that, Intel systems are going to be memory limited. A fully decked out Shanghai server (the recently announced 45 nm Opteron from AMD) can have eight sockets, 32 cores, and 64 2 Gig DDR2 registered DIMMs. An Opteron server with fewer sockets will still have the same main memory capacity per core. So for now, AMD willl continue to own the (high-end) database server market. Shanghai is a significant CPU performance leap from the current Barcelona chips, and it is nice that they will be drop-in replacements. But if you are paying attention, you will realize that for current AMD customers, the (much smaller) increase in memory bandwidth is more interesting.

Most interesting, of course, is when will 4 GB (registered ECC) DDR2 and DDR3 DIMMs be available at a reasonable price. Probably mid-2009 for both. Shanghai was designed to work with DDR2 or DDR3, but for now only DDR2 motherboards are available. This should also change sometime next year. With 4 Gig DIMMs, dual-socket Core i7 servers will cut into the current quad-socket server market. When Intel releases Dunnington and Becton next year, 4 GByte DDR3 DIMMs will be a necessity to take advantage of the 6 or 8 cores per chip. AMD's 8-core version of Shanghai is named Montreal. In all cases though, for realistic server use, large amounts of DRAM are going to be the limiting factor in performance.

Finally, and I hate to keep saying this--well I haven't said it here yet--but Intel is not eating AMD's lunch. Intel is pushing AMD higher and higher up the server hierarchy. The eventual losers to Nelahem are IBM mainframes and IBM Power, UltraSPARC, and other high-end non-x86 server platforms.

* Worried about power costs? You shouldn't be. If your system is set up to shut down hard drives, monitor, and processor cores when not in use, a system can drop way down in power consumption. Since the hard disks have to be spun up when rebooting the system, and the processor has to work hard during the process, etc., turning off your system can cost the equivalent of several hours of low power consumption. A lot of that power will not be consumed during initial reboot, but while you are staring at your screen as the same program you used yesterday is loaded into memory.

Notice though, that you need to have a high-efficiency power supply, that is efficient at low power draw. Also you need to turn on Cool'n'Quiet or the Intel equivalent, have an efficient monitor with a very low power draw when idle and so on.

Having said all that, I personally run my computer 24/7 mostly as part of Einstein@Home, looking for gravitational waves. ;-)


Write a Reply >>

Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, Next >>

 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.