Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another Look At Intel's Lynnfield Linux Performance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • justapost
    replied
    Originally posted by lem79 View Post
    justapost, what sort of cooling are you using? Curious about this turbo thing with the stock cooler in a closed case. Intel sending out monster coolers in the review kits is kind of questionable too, says to me "hey our stock cooling is crap, you'll have to buy something better if you want results like you see here".
    I use the stock cooler but the board is not yet in a case. I just received an corsair h50 water cooling kit and plan to run those benches whom benefit from turbo again for comparison.

    Leave a comment:


  • sabby
    replied
    Originally posted by Ant P. View Post
    Why does it have to be BIOS-controlled? Give us back the Turbo button or at least bring back the tacky LCD MHz readouts
    Had to reply since I got such a chuckle thinking about it... Funny that we went back from a nice push button/lcd combo to bios control. They should remember since it was with their cpu, perhaps the engineer weren't around in the push button days

    Leave a comment:


  • Ant P.
    replied
    Why does it have to be BIOS-controlled? Give us back the Turbo button or at least bring back the tacky LCD MHz readouts

    Leave a comment:


  • lem79
    replied
    Kano that's not right for Lynnfield. There's this table on Anandtech detailing Lynnfield's turbo modes.

    Leave a comment:


  • sabby
    replied
    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    Thats easy, only with good cooling and 2 cores in sleep mode the max turbo is activated. Apps which are accellerated with turbo mode use 1 core only in most cases. I don't know if there are apps with 2 threads hardcoded.
    That's not my understanding of what I have read from the reviews. Turbo mode can be enabled anywhere from 1-4 core active, table being below for the i750 (stock/4/3/2/1)

    2.66GHz 2.80GHz 2.80GHz 3.20GHz 3.20GHz

    So it should never happen to have benchmark that produce double performance improvement from just having turbo enabled since from stock to the maximum turbo scaling possible is about 30% increase in clock speed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    Thats easy, only with good cooling and 2 cores in sleep mode the max turbo is activated. Apps which are accellerated with turbo mode use 1 core only in most cases. I don't know if there are apps with 2 threads hardcoded.

    Leave a comment:


  • sabby
    replied
    Benchmark result oddities

    Does anybody else find it extremely strange that a few benchmark shows about double performance improvement from enabling turbo mode which is at most ~30% increase in clock speed (nas, lame, john the ripper md5)?

    Leave a comment:


  • lem79
    replied
    justapost, what sort of cooling are you using? Curious about this turbo thing with the stock cooler in a closed case. Intel sending out monster coolers in the review kits is kind of questionable too, says to me "hey our stock cooling is crap, you'll have to buy something better if you want results like you see here".

    Leave a comment:


  • justapost
    replied
    Hmm their apache benchmark results are much lower than mine, can it be that ext4 is slower than ext3 here? Or is it the Intels SSD beeing lower than the OCZ vertex?
    Also their stream results are lower, i used DDR3 1333 CL7 dunno what intel used.
    Their EIST and Turbo off results are all much lower than mine, as if they ran at sub 2.66GHz.
    Beside that turbo on results look valid.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    i5 and i7-8xx is for dual channel boards (currently only P55) and i7-9xx is for triple channel boards (X58). i5 has got no HT while i7 has it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X