Wednesday, July 9th 2008
Intel Bloomfield 2.66 GHz: First Comprehensive Evaluation
ChipHell carried out the first comprehensive evaluation of the Intel Bloomfield 2.66 GHz processor, a derivative of the eagerly anticipated Nehalem architecture, which already has fan-sites mushrooming all over the internet.
The most prominant benchmarks used by enthusiasts and overclockers, 3DMark Vantage (CPU Tests), Super Pi 1M, Cinebench and SANDRA were run on this processor.
In the 3DMark Vantage test, the processor secured a CPU score of 16294. It crunched Super Pi 1M in 15.475 seconds. With the Cinebench, it secured 3048 with a single thread, the multi-threaded bench belted out 12627 CB-CPU hinting at the processor's high multi-core efficiency. And finally, Bloomfield takes SANDRA out on a date. You have to look at the red dot compared to a QX9770 yourself.
I'm appetised and looking forward to a great processor architecture and so could you.
Source:
ChipHell
The most prominant benchmarks used by enthusiasts and overclockers, 3DMark Vantage (CPU Tests), Super Pi 1M, Cinebench and SANDRA were run on this processor.
In the 3DMark Vantage test, the processor secured a CPU score of 16294. It crunched Super Pi 1M in 15.475 seconds. With the Cinebench, it secured 3048 with a single thread, the multi-threaded bench belted out 12627 CB-CPU hinting at the processor's high multi-core efficiency. And finally, Bloomfield takes SANDRA out on a date. You have to look at the red dot compared to a QX9770 yourself.
I'm appetised and looking forward to a great processor architecture and so could you.
59 Comments on Intel Bloomfield 2.66 GHz: First Comprehensive Evaluation
Either way, this architecture is not a step back, and the new hyperthreading has shown (in initial benchmarks) to be more effective the P4 HT. The processor has very low voltage, will scale to 8 cores easily, and frankly Video Editing will take full advantage of it (which I love... plus gaming isn't going to be hurt).
Your processor is not particularly slow, and Bloomfield is not significantly faster. However, your SuperPi times -- which seem particularly slow -- may be exacerbating your perception of Bloomfield's performance advantage.
second... this is the mid range bloomefield chip. it has 4 cores and NOT the 8 core's that the high end chips will have. the 8 core 16 threaded bloomefield will not perform 2x as good on single threaded apps but in multi-threaded apps... LOOK OUT! especially if these overclock anything like the 45nm wolfdale and yorkfields. people are quick to dismiss anything new for some unknown reason. perhaps it's jealousy? IDK... i know i cant wait to get one. i'll save my monies for the big daddy 8 core chip and whatever x58 board asus comes out with that has the best features. i'll have my phase done by then too so this outta be interesting.
but i have to say look at the scores next to my AMD's with an oc i'm running higher than any released AMD phenom by 200mhz and i can't come close to it performance wise
Overall, those who have had a chance to play with Nehalem suggest a 20% IPC average advantage over Penryn, across a variety of applications (that's a 20% increase with slightly lower power requirements). And, I was excited enough to snag Wolfdale/Yorkfield for its average 6% IPC advantage over its 65nm cousins (not to mention the significantly reduced voltage requirements).Yep, expect a multithreading monster the world has never seen!
As for my own performance, I had nothing else running besides uTorrent. I could try with it off but I love The Office too much :rolleyes:
Once Sony Vegas (FINALLY) gets a 64-bit version that can scale up to 16 rendering threads, Watch out!
first 8 cores nehalem cpu wil be the server version Beckton
Bloomfield is the overclock EE version
Lynnfield is the budget posible not overclock posible like bloomfield does
PS. If the results are majorly handicapped for any reason, I'm sure that would have been stated up front. But lets say it was forgotten. TODAY, the results for bloomfield are luke warm if not tepid. Those are the facts.
The stats are objective. Wishful thinking about what might be achieved later down the road has no place in denying those results we've just seen.
But still, I'll hold my final judgment until I see how they OC. The on die mem controller makes me a little nervous.