Hi,I dont understand if intel i7 processor have only hypertreading tecnology or have also multicore support?
in other words ,is only HT and not multicore?
best regards
Intel I7
Re: Intel I7
All i7's (whether they're LGA-1366/x58 chipset or LGA-1156/p55 chpset) have both hyperthreading & "TurboBoost" as well as multiple physical cores. i5's retain the TurboBoost & multiple physical (logical) cores but have no hyperthreading (virtual cores.) I'll explain this further below, but don't get TOO sucked in by performance numbers and cpu features.
An i5 is no slouch for audio tasks and while the i7-860 (Lynnfield LGA 1156) sits at a really nice place on the price/performance curve, having 'only' 4 logical cores the i5-750 is more affordable and quite capable at audio tasks, and still has the ability to turbo under loads that don't hit all 4 cores (raising the clockrate of the cores that are active.)
I'll post a bunch of technical crap below that will be probably too dense for most to care about. All of that can be found in articles and the linked wikipedia coverage anyway. What that doesn't tell you though is that Intel's Manufacturing & Materials cost works out to be about 20 cents for every LGA-1156 cpu.
LGA-1366 i7's costs are a bit higher but in no way does either 'lose' money even in its cheapest form, having things separated into pricing tiers not just based on clock-rate alone, but also based on 'enhanced' turbo & hyperthreading features allows Intel to create a nice spread of price points by simply disabling features on cpu's that would have had lesser binned parts thrown away anyway (thus also increasing 'yields'.) Win-Win for Intel's R&D & expansion, corporate structure and their Shareholders, all of which are the primary beneficiaries of the delta between 20 cents of 'cost' to produce the cpu and what each cpu model actually sells for.
An i5 is no slouch for audio tasks and while the i7-860 (Lynnfield LGA 1156) sits at a really nice place on the price/performance curve, having 'only' 4 logical cores the i5-750 is more affordable and quite capable at audio tasks, and still has the ability to turbo under loads that don't hit all 4 cores (raising the clockrate of the cores that are active.)
I'll post a bunch of technical crap below that will be probably too dense for most to care about. All of that can be found in articles and the linked wikipedia coverage anyway. What that doesn't tell you though is that Intel's Manufacturing & Materials cost works out to be about 20 cents for every LGA-1156 cpu.
LGA-1366 i7's costs are a bit higher but in no way does either 'lose' money even in its cheapest form, having things separated into pricing tiers not just based on clock-rate alone, but also based on 'enhanced' turbo & hyperthreading features allows Intel to create a nice spread of price points by simply disabling features on cpu's that would have had lesser binned parts thrown away anyway (thus also increasing 'yields'.) Win-Win for Intel's R&D & expansion, corporate structure and their Shareholders, all of which are the primary beneficiaries of the delta between 20 cents of 'cost' to produce the cpu and what each cpu model actually sells for.
Re: Intel I7
Technical bla bla:
Hyperthreading in its initial P4 era form was basically a second set of a the basic x86 registers (pointers and data for basic ops) in an effort to be able to slide a bit more into the pipeline (and counteract the P4's very low IPC, or "instructions per clock" cycle.) Although Intel would claim 30% improvement even in the early P4 era, this just wasn't true for every situation. However for users of software like MS Office (which is largely pushing stuff around in memory, ie, using basic pointers) the net effect was a small benefit in performance but still only 30% in specific benchmarks and not actually across the board (gaming is well known for designing new software to meet specific benchmarks as well.) Hence those were the benchmarks quoted in this era. Steinberg also claimed similar performance benefits in this era, but I was under the first 2 Nuendo licenses during this time and tbh never saw that with HT enabled (even after I moved Scope to a 2nd PC.) Leaving HT disabled and having a proper dual CPU machine brought far more gains, but even in that case it was typically only 30-50% more 'dsp' power for audio applications that supported multiple cpus. There are some differences between multi cpu and multicore (in regards to having data local to caches--contention--and memory latency issues) but overall this is much closer to what multicore cpu's are today (ie, more than 1 'complete' logical processor.)
The problem back then for users who are relying on their cpu for DSP operations or heavy number crunching was that the OS had a tendency to try to make use of the extra 'virtual' HT core to schedule additional work that was unrelated to your audio tasks (basic background services etc) and (in many cases) that reduced the performance of the audio operations you were interested in because the OS was treating your workload the same as it would any average office user at the expense of the DAW application. Setting things to background scheduling actually made this a bit worse, something that is still common now and was necessary in the single core era to keep the ASIO buffer handling happy (delivering the buffer to the card in a timely fashion under high cpu load.) Intel made improvements in the Hyperthreading implementation over time as did OSes (win/linux) and applications until certain benchmarks showed improvements even for audio users (though I personally kept it disabled especially with Scope & software running alongside.)
The modern implementation of HT is much more robust and mature, and basically allows for the scheduling of a far more complete cpu state than the P4 cpu's did, so the benefit of having it enabled is now far greater, even though modern nehelem based cpu's don't have the IPC issues that the p4 era cpu's did.
Modern Multicore cpu's with the i7 brand name (both Lynnfield LGA-1156 i7's and the "full" LGA-1366 i7 versions) also have hyperthreading enabled, while the i5's (and upcoming i3 etc) do not (though it's still present on the core, just disabled by burning the traces as with celerons and other products with 'cut down' features to be able to 'save' some poorly binned products which would otherwise have lower yield.)
---------------------
Also modern i7 branded cpu's will have different levels of "TurboBoost". To understand what this means you need to track power saving features back to the introduction Speedstep and of early clock/sleep/power states.
In more detail: the early P3 the cpu multiplier would switch between its lower and upper settings (Speed"step" between 2 states) and mobile cpu's could also additionally control voltage (Enhanced SpeedStep).
The next implementations (P4 mobile) had only a few speed increments, for example a 1.7 GHz Pentium 4M would clock down to 1.6 GHz, 1.2 GHz, and786 MHz (lowest sleep state besides suspend.)
The next iteration after that (full p3 derived Pentium M used under the Centrino brand) introduced "EIST" which could be "stepped" over the range from 600 Mhz to 1.6 GHz (200 Mhz at a time) while adjusting the voltage from 1.484 V to 0.956 V in addition to controlling the cache as well (which is external to the core and runs at a different speed.)
Since the Core1 & Core2 were derived from the Pentium-M, this became "Enhanced EIST" where even desktop cores could have relatively fine-grained control over power states, giving us multiple "C" states and "P" states as a result (clock/voltage.) By Core2 each core could be controlled independantly as well as the independant cache & shared L2 cache (Enhanced EIST is defined as that which is present on multicore cpu's with a shared L2 cache.)
Something not mentioned yet, but the time window for these 'power saving' states also get smaller and smaller with each iteration, up to the point where the modern "Enhanced EIST" has very fine-grained ability to clock cpu parts up & down as needed to make efficiency higher.
Which brings us to the present Nehelem family i5 & i7's, where the cores can not only be individually clocked down, but also UP (Turbo) and additionally completely turned OFF (something which wasn't possible before, as even the lowest sleep states still had the cpu cores & caches drawing power.) So this clocking UP is known as "TurboBoost", and takes advantage of the fact that the cpu is designed to work within a certain "thermal envelope" that equates to heat output based on power draw. When all cores are not needed for a given workflow, the energy & heat that is 'saved' from disabling 1 or more cores is 'used' to clock up the cores in use to provide a "TurboBoost" to the tasks being handled. The idea is that applications which aren't optimized to make best use of all cores present will still get a benefit of a modern cpu (as otherwise nehelem isn't always a win compared to Core2 with applications which don't rely heavily on memory bandwidth.)
------
Incidentally there is also some evidence that the increased interrupts caused by E-EIST and turbo modes can degrade certain realtime operations, you can limit the power saving features by choosing your Power modes in Windows (and in Vista/Win7 you have the ability to dig in a bit deeper without relying on additional tools as was necessary in Xp to tweak specific profile settings.)
Hyperthreading in its initial P4 era form was basically a second set of a the basic x86 registers (pointers and data for basic ops) in an effort to be able to slide a bit more into the pipeline (and counteract the P4's very low IPC, or "instructions per clock" cycle.) Although Intel would claim 30% improvement even in the early P4 era, this just wasn't true for every situation. However for users of software like MS Office (which is largely pushing stuff around in memory, ie, using basic pointers) the net effect was a small benefit in performance but still only 30% in specific benchmarks and not actually across the board (gaming is well known for designing new software to meet specific benchmarks as well.) Hence those were the benchmarks quoted in this era. Steinberg also claimed similar performance benefits in this era, but I was under the first 2 Nuendo licenses during this time and tbh never saw that with HT enabled (even after I moved Scope to a 2nd PC.) Leaving HT disabled and having a proper dual CPU machine brought far more gains, but even in that case it was typically only 30-50% more 'dsp' power for audio applications that supported multiple cpus. There are some differences between multi cpu and multicore (in regards to having data local to caches--contention--and memory latency issues) but overall this is much closer to what multicore cpu's are today (ie, more than 1 'complete' logical processor.)
The problem back then for users who are relying on their cpu for DSP operations or heavy number crunching was that the OS had a tendency to try to make use of the extra 'virtual' HT core to schedule additional work that was unrelated to your audio tasks (basic background services etc) and (in many cases) that reduced the performance of the audio operations you were interested in because the OS was treating your workload the same as it would any average office user at the expense of the DAW application. Setting things to background scheduling actually made this a bit worse, something that is still common now and was necessary in the single core era to keep the ASIO buffer handling happy (delivering the buffer to the card in a timely fashion under high cpu load.) Intel made improvements in the Hyperthreading implementation over time as did OSes (win/linux) and applications until certain benchmarks showed improvements even for audio users (though I personally kept it disabled especially with Scope & software running alongside.)
The modern implementation of HT is much more robust and mature, and basically allows for the scheduling of a far more complete cpu state than the P4 cpu's did, so the benefit of having it enabled is now far greater, even though modern nehelem based cpu's don't have the IPC issues that the p4 era cpu's did.
Modern Multicore cpu's with the i7 brand name (both Lynnfield LGA-1156 i7's and the "full" LGA-1366 i7 versions) also have hyperthreading enabled, while the i5's (and upcoming i3 etc) do not (though it's still present on the core, just disabled by burning the traces as with celerons and other products with 'cut down' features to be able to 'save' some poorly binned products which would otherwise have lower yield.)
---------------------
Also modern i7 branded cpu's will have different levels of "TurboBoost". To understand what this means you need to track power saving features back to the introduction Speedstep and of early clock/sleep/power states.
In more detail: the early P3 the cpu multiplier would switch between its lower and upper settings (Speed"step" between 2 states) and mobile cpu's could also additionally control voltage (Enhanced SpeedStep).
The next implementations (P4 mobile) had only a few speed increments, for example a 1.7 GHz Pentium 4M would clock down to 1.6 GHz, 1.2 GHz, and786 MHz (lowest sleep state besides suspend.)
The next iteration after that (full p3 derived Pentium M used under the Centrino brand) introduced "EIST" which could be "stepped" over the range from 600 Mhz to 1.6 GHz (200 Mhz at a time) while adjusting the voltage from 1.484 V to 0.956 V in addition to controlling the cache as well (which is external to the core and runs at a different speed.)
Since the Core1 & Core2 were derived from the Pentium-M, this became "Enhanced EIST" where even desktop cores could have relatively fine-grained control over power states, giving us multiple "C" states and "P" states as a result (clock/voltage.) By Core2 each core could be controlled independantly as well as the independant cache & shared L2 cache (Enhanced EIST is defined as that which is present on multicore cpu's with a shared L2 cache.)
Something not mentioned yet, but the time window for these 'power saving' states also get smaller and smaller with each iteration, up to the point where the modern "Enhanced EIST" has very fine-grained ability to clock cpu parts up & down as needed to make efficiency higher.
Which brings us to the present Nehelem family i5 & i7's, where the cores can not only be individually clocked down, but also UP (Turbo) and additionally completely turned OFF (something which wasn't possible before, as even the lowest sleep states still had the cpu cores & caches drawing power.) So this clocking UP is known as "TurboBoost", and takes advantage of the fact that the cpu is designed to work within a certain "thermal envelope" that equates to heat output based on power draw. When all cores are not needed for a given workflow, the energy & heat that is 'saved' from disabling 1 or more cores is 'used' to clock up the cores in use to provide a "TurboBoost" to the tasks being handled. The idea is that applications which aren't optimized to make best use of all cores present will still get a benefit of a modern cpu (as otherwise nehelem isn't always a win compared to Core2 with applications which don't rely heavily on memory bandwidth.)
------
Incidentally there is also some evidence that the increased interrupts caused by E-EIST and turbo modes can degrade certain realtime operations, you can limit the power saving features by choosing your Power modes in Windows (and in Vista/Win7 you have the ability to dig in a bit deeper without relying on additional tools as was necessary in Xp to tweak specific profile settings.)
Re: Intel I7
Thankyou valis, a good read.
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
Re: Intel I7
Yes, thanks Valis.
Glad you're here.
Meanwhile I'm researching laptops for Xite.
Will use this as the move to W7 and more RAM.
The rest of my current projects and developments (R&D/beta testing/magazine reviews) can still be done on my current Alienware dual core laptop and main quad DAW.
Thanks again,
Greg
Glad you're here.
Meanwhile I'm researching laptops for Xite.
Will use this as the move to W7 and more RAM.
The rest of my current projects and developments (R&D/beta testing/magazine reviews) can still be done on my current Alienware dual core laptop and main quad DAW.
Thanks again,
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
Re: Intel I7
No problem. Jimmy sent a pm with a good point, the upcoming 32nm Clarkdale & Arrandale parts (32 nm mainstream desktop & mobile respectively) will actually have HT enabled in the i5 & i3 versions (not the pentium/celeron versions) but this is a DUAL core part so the HT is to enable 4 threads.
Also at the same time the 'full' enthusiast "Core i7 Extreme" (Gulftown) will move to 6 cores plus HT for 12 threads total.
I believe that both of these are however meant to co-exist with current i5 & i7 parts on the market for at least some time, as the 'original' i7's have already been through 1 minor core revision (and the earlier models are being dropped from market) and Lynnfield/Clarksfield will likely also go through at least 1 revision (reduction in thermal envelopes &/or increases in speed as the die is further debugged and the production process for htem matured.)
Ie, again more tiers:
How the upcoming Clarkdale & Arrandale parts perform for audio tasks with 2 cores @ 32nm versus the Lynnfield with 4 cores @ 45nm I cannot say, but Jimmy might have some insight into this since he's researching it. I would also personally be interested in this because there is some question in the mobile sector whether Apple will adopt the Clarksfield quadcore (like the HP envy has now), move to Arrandale (there were rumors that Apple was asking for the integrated gpu to be removed? or disabled) or stay at some further revision of Core2 as they are now (which I consider unlikely as the Envy isn't the only Clarksfield on the market now.)
(edit: fixed a typo that showed up in google results for Clarksfield)
Also at the same time the 'full' enthusiast "Core i7 Extreme" (Gulftown) will move to 6 cores plus HT for 12 threads total.
I believe that both of these are however meant to co-exist with current i5 & i7 parts on the market for at least some time, as the 'original' i7's have already been through 1 minor core revision (and the earlier models are being dropped from market) and Lynnfield/Clarksfield will likely also go through at least 1 revision (reduction in thermal envelopes &/or increases in speed as the die is further debugged and the production process for htem matured.)
Ie, again more tiers:
- Entry level dual core with 2 threads AND integrated gpu on the cpu package (but not on die) (upcoming 32nm Clarkdale & Arrandale "pentium" desktop & celeron mobile)
- "mainstream" dual core with 4 threads AND integrated gpu on the cpu package (but not on die) (upcoming 32nm Clarkdale & Arrandale)
- "mainstream" quad core with 4 threads (Lynnfield & Clarksfield i5)
- "mainstream" quad core with 8 threads (Lynnfield & Clarksfield i7)
- "enthusiast" and workstation/server quad core with 8 threads & QPI interconnect
(note that the Xeon cpu's are otherwise identical but are the ONLY chips to have ECC ram support enabled, which is what defines them as server/workstation now) - "enthusiast" and workstation/server with 6 cores and 12 threads plus QPI interconnect (32nm Gulftown)
How the upcoming Clarkdale & Arrandale parts perform for audio tasks with 2 cores @ 32nm versus the Lynnfield with 4 cores @ 45nm I cannot say, but Jimmy might have some insight into this since he's researching it. I would also personally be interested in this because there is some question in the mobile sector whether Apple will adopt the Clarksfield quadcore (like the HP envy has now), move to Arrandale (there were rumors that Apple was asking for the integrated gpu to be removed? or disabled) or stay at some further revision of Core2 as they are now (which I consider unlikely as the Envy isn't the only Clarksfield on the market now.)
(edit: fixed a typo that showed up in google results for Clarksfield)
Last edited by valis on Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
Re: Intel I7
All goes to say - Intel is insane. 
So, I guess it's all in the timing of which laptop to get based on 'horizontal' streaming/throughput of Scope vs. 'vertical' RAM-intensive big VST's - perhaps...
I figure the laptop/Xite investment is at minimum a 4 year investment.
So far I've only seen the Eurocom guys - eurocom.com (Canadian I believe) - building somewhat leading edge laptops (pricey), with the Dell/Alienware/Sagers, etc. stepping in soon thereafter.
The 'mainstream' brigade of HP, Dell, etc. seem to come in later as prices reduce, and new tech. gets brought in.
Greg
So, I guess it's all in the timing of which laptop to get based on 'horizontal' streaming/throughput of Scope vs. 'vertical' RAM-intensive big VST's - perhaps...
I figure the laptop/Xite investment is at minimum a 4 year investment.
So far I've only seen the Eurocom guys - eurocom.com (Canadian I believe) - building somewhat leading edge laptops (pricey), with the Dell/Alienware/Sagers, etc. stepping in soon thereafter.
The 'mainstream' brigade of HP, Dell, etc. seem to come in later as prices reduce, and new tech. gets brought in.
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
Re: Intel I7
Honestly I've been in the market for a laptop myself for about 6 months and still don't have a clue what to do. I am still relatively married to Logic so I keep thinking of getting a Macbook Pro, but Apple didn't update for Clarksfield (mobile Lynnfield) and so will they go for Arrandale or wait even longer? Compounded by the fact that only the 17" model even has an expresscard slot now, the early 2008 model still looks attractive and can be found new (unused) at cheaper prices than Apple's current models.
The HP Envy has some serious horsepower and would be great for Serato (dj'ing) and Ableton Live for live use. It is one of the few times I've actually considered an HP laptop, but that means I either move wholesale to Live (I dislike mixing/composing in it though I love it as a live use & loop tool) or also get one of the gimped iMacs (lacking anything but a single firewire bus & USB2 for expansion drives AND audio i/o).
And then of course there's individual makers specific to the audio market (ADK/Rain/etc) who carry more of a price premium (and don't run Logic eh) but might better serve my needs than HP/Dell/etc (where audio users are only a tiny fraction of their userbase, if that.)
My perspective is also very US-centric, I'm not aware of Eu & Asian makers & systems integrators (like Rain/ADK are) that aren't sold here nor am I always aware that some things are actually cheaper there (perhaps due to less demand/competing with older tech that is far more cost effective for most) like the Intel X-25M G2's seem to be (or were at some point.)
So if you would like to continue to discuss Laptop solutions as well, I'm all ears.
The HP Envy has some serious horsepower and would be great for Serato (dj'ing) and Ableton Live for live use. It is one of the few times I've actually considered an HP laptop, but that means I either move wholesale to Live (I dislike mixing/composing in it though I love it as a live use & loop tool) or also get one of the gimped iMacs (lacking anything but a single firewire bus & USB2 for expansion drives AND audio i/o).
And then of course there's individual makers specific to the audio market (ADK/Rain/etc) who carry more of a price premium (and don't run Logic eh) but might better serve my needs than HP/Dell/etc (where audio users are only a tiny fraction of their userbase, if that.)
My perspective is also very US-centric, I'm not aware of Eu & Asian makers & systems integrators (like Rain/ADK are) that aren't sold here nor am I always aware that some things are actually cheaper there (perhaps due to less demand/competing with older tech that is far more cost effective for most) like the Intel X-25M G2's seem to be (or were at some point.)
So if you would like to continue to discuss Laptop solutions as well, I'm all ears.
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
Re: Intel I7
Yeah, I've used Live (per producers' request) for a project back in the Spring, and found it very lacking when getting into a full-blown 100+ channel recording/mixing environment. Fine for loops and DJ type stuff, but gets buried under it's own weight when pushing it to grow into large projects.
Anyways - as stated, I think the choices are streaming for high track count ('horizontal' bus speeds to/from drives, etc.) and more 'vertical' RAM-intensive (for VST/ROMpler/Samplers).
With Scope taking the brunt of the horizontal overhead off the host computer, then that leaves other options open for consideration, including GPU's.
Don't know what to tell you about Macs, since Apple tends to sit back and wait for market trends to mature before jumping on board - so by then it may be too late.
I've checked ADK's, etc. and am leaning towards this type of special-built solution rather than off-the-shelf. Probably a more worthy investment.
Greg
Anyways - as stated, I think the choices are streaming for high track count ('horizontal' bus speeds to/from drives, etc.) and more 'vertical' RAM-intensive (for VST/ROMpler/Samplers).
With Scope taking the brunt of the horizontal overhead off the host computer, then that leaves other options open for consideration, including GPU's.
Don't know what to tell you about Macs, since Apple tends to sit back and wait for market trends to mature before jumping on board - so by then it may be too late.
I've checked ADK's, etc. and am leaning towards this type of special-built solution rather than off-the-shelf. Probably a more worthy investment.
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
Re: Intel I7
I'm probably not going to invest in Xite until I have considerably more income coming in from my music gear than I do right now, but I do understand your point. It's hard to have all things in a laptop unless you're willing to give up the very things that make laptops portable (lower heat/power/weight/size etc.)
It's too bad that the laptop market hasn't evolved further with the DIY approach, as this has always been my preferred method for non-mac. Aside from the cost savings of handling the integration yourself, it's much easier to create a solution to fit particular needs.
And when it comes to Mac, of course one is always subject to the royal decrees.
I do think that we're on the cusp of the market fully leaving Core2 though and there's no way that Apple can ignore that. It means leaving behind nvidia as the chipset, though it's hard to say who they will choose for the gpu (certainly not Intel's integrated gpu for the upper tiers of the portable line.) That actually brings up another point though...
Aside from the gpu itself, Nvidia is currently ousted from the laptop & desktop market as Core2 is phased out. So while Intel currently rules the mobile sector AMD might have some cause to put more R&D towards improving their own powersaving & microclocking in the future.
It's too bad that the laptop market hasn't evolved further with the DIY approach, as this has always been my preferred method for non-mac. Aside from the cost savings of handling the integration yourself, it's much easier to create a solution to fit particular needs.
And when it comes to Mac, of course one is always subject to the royal decrees.
I do think that we're on the cusp of the market fully leaving Core2 though and there's no way that Apple can ignore that. It means leaving behind nvidia as the chipset, though it's hard to say who they will choose for the gpu (certainly not Intel's integrated gpu for the upper tiers of the portable line.) That actually brings up another point though...Aside from the gpu itself, Nvidia is currently ousted from the laptop & desktop market as Core2 is phased out. So while Intel currently rules the mobile sector AMD might have some cause to put more R&D towards improving their own powersaving & microclocking in the future.
Re: Intel I7
All good info.
Though I would reiterate that while the P4 era "HyperThreading" was very immature and could only really handle very specific operations (only a limited set of registers etc), the current implementation basically doubles the cpu's "stateful" registers & operands so does actually seem to achieve much closer to the claimed performance increases in many cases. Still, I wouldn't opt for the better cpu just thinking HT was giving me that much more but rather look at clockspeed/TDP/ram support and so on as was mentioned above.
Though I would reiterate that while the P4 era "HyperThreading" was very immature and could only really handle very specific operations (only a limited set of registers etc), the current implementation basically doubles the cpu's "stateful" registers & operands so does actually seem to achieve much closer to the claimed performance increases in many cases. Still, I wouldn't opt for the better cpu just thinking HT was giving me that much more but rather look at clockspeed/TDP/ram support and so on as was mentioned above.
Re: Intel I7
Intel Launches 32nm Westmere-Based Clarkdale, Arrandale CPUs, Chipsets - (dailytech news)
The Clarkdale Review: Intel's Core i5 661, i3 540 & i3 530 - (anandtech, quite a few other sites too obviously and xbit posted theirs a day early as well)
So the Westmere chips definitely look skippable for now based on the reviews I've read there and elsewhere, both in desktop and I'm assuming mobile format as well, unless you're building an internet box for the corner or need a decent HTPC that can double up as a VST host.
When Bloomfield arrives later this year I can see a potential upgrade from older high end Core2 systems being more attractive than even the current x58 i7's have been, especially if the x58 chipset gets a revision as well. Something to look out for for sure, but beyond that I think that it took Intel quite some time to get Nehelem across all price points compared to anything I can remember since the Pentium2 era. So between now and Sandy Bridge it's just about keeping track of the steppings for each cpu now...
Finally, here's Intel's roadmap released a couple of months ago:
The Clarkdale Review: Intel's Core i5 661, i3 540 & i3 530 - (anandtech, quite a few other sites too obviously and xbit posted theirs a day early as well)
So the Westmere chips definitely look skippable for now based on the reviews I've read there and elsewhere, both in desktop and I'm assuming mobile format as well, unless you're building an internet box for the corner or need a decent HTPC that can double up as a VST host.
When Bloomfield arrives later this year I can see a potential upgrade from older high end Core2 systems being more attractive than even the current x58 i7's have been, especially if the x58 chipset gets a revision as well. Something to look out for for sure, but beyond that I think that it took Intel quite some time to get Nehelem across all price points compared to anything I can remember since the Pentium2 era. So between now and Sandy Bridge it's just about keeping track of the steppings for each cpu now...
Finally, here's Intel's roadmap released a couple of months ago:
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
Re: Intel I7
Yup, looks like more, smaller steps along the 32nm path.
Question for me NOW remains, what to go for on the mobile side for laptop/Xite host.
I don't want to wait until later in the year, and the current i7-based laptops still very pricey.
Greg
Question for me NOW remains, what to go for on the mobile side for laptop/Xite host.
I don't want to wait until later in the year, and the current i7-based laptops still very pricey.
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
Re: Intel I7
Well that's been my question too, and now I (mostly) have my answer: Clarksfield (mobile Lynnfield) or top of the line Core2 mobile. What I want to see now is if Apple updates their laptops to have Clarksfield in the MBP and Arrandale in the lower end (which is what I would do I think.)
I'm actually starting to debate having a mobile Logic production rig, seems to be easier to just stick with my desktop Macs for now and get a nice ADK Clarksfield based lappie for 1/2 the cost or less of an MBP and just stick to using Live on it (leave Logic for the studio.)
I'm actually starting to debate having a mobile Logic production rig, seems to be easier to just stick with my desktop Macs for now and get a nice ADK Clarksfield based lappie for 1/2 the cost or less of an MBP and just stick to using Live on it (leave Logic for the studio.)
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
Re: Intel I7
Looks like RAIN COMPUTERS will have their new Livebooks (Nehalem i7) laptops at NAMM.
I will check them out.
http://www.rainrecording.com/products/livebook-studio/
<I'd prefer a 17" screen though>
Greg
I will check them out.
http://www.rainrecording.com/products/livebook-studio/
<I'd prefer a 17" screen though>
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
-
Sounddesigner
- Posts: 1085
- Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:06 pm
Re: Intel I7
It looks like current i7 owners will be rewarded with a cheap Hexacore (relatively speaking) aswell. Rumour has it on many popular websites that there will be a i7 970 that is non-extreme version released in the 3rd quarter of this year. It will run at 3.2Ghz and will have many of the same features as the i7 980x extreme version wich runs at 3.33Ghz and that's to be released 1st quarter this year. Both processors are 6-core and 12 threads but the i7 970 price may be around $565 wich aint bad if someone already has the other components with their current rig (mobo,ram,etc). It might be tempting for me at some point to get the i7 970 and slowly build a back-up system with my current i7 920 with used parts off ebay. The i7 980x are supppose to be priced at $999. It's good intel are trying to make hexacores more affordable, some say it may have to do with AMD releasing several phenom 6-core processors soon.
Here is a couple links with specs, there's several websites with info on the 970 and they seem to be confident it's comming, just do a google if curious. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fu ... #Core_i7_2
http://www.overclock.net/hardware-news/ ... -2ghz.html
EDITED:
Here is a couple links with specs, there's several websites with info on the 970 and they seem to be confident it's comming, just do a google if curious. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fu ... #Core_i7_2
http://www.overclock.net/hardware-news/ ... -2ghz.html
EDITED:
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
Re: Intel I7
the fun never ends...
Greg
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3