Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Hardware

Asus Demos First Intel P55 48

Posted by Soulskill from the zoom-zoom dept.
adeelarshad82 writes "Intel's X58 chipset is the platform of choice for enthusiasts, but Intel serves a heck of a big audience. To please that larger crowd and bring down prices, the company is planning a mainstream iteration of its Nehalem architecture: the P55 chipset. It's designed to work with the forthcoming Lynnfield CPUs, and offers performance close to LGA1366 chips at a much cheaper price. Recently Asus demoed its first intel P55 chip and released exclusive photos. Asus claims to have run its new boards with engineering samples of the Core i5-750 at a 77 percent overclock, boosting speeds from 2.66 GHz to 4.7 GHz. Asus admits this wasn't necessarily stable, but still — that's fast. And on liquid cooling, the boards reportedly hit speeds of 5.1 GHz."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Asus Demos First Intel P55 More

Asus Demos First Intel P55

Comments Filter:
  • Clockspeed can be so misleading, benchmarks are what we need to see. TFA is woefully short on substantial info.

  • lets see them bring down costs and hold stability

  • And it's got Turbo Boost (Score:4, Informative)

    by BadAnalogyGuy ( 945258 ) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @12:10PM (#28867905)

    Working article link (from Google)
    http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=752 [pcper.com]

    Now all I need is a molecular bonded shell and a Super Pursuit mode, and I'd be ready to go.

    • The use of a turbo button actually makes sense - "most" users are only likely to need OC'd settings for games and other high-performance applications. By being able to change between OC and non-OC at the flick of a button, it limits the amount of damage to components caused by overclocking a system over an extended period of time.

      • Re:And it's got Turbo Boost (Score:4, Insightful)

        by TheBig1 ( 966884 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @01:01PM (#28868963) Homepage
        While I agree that changing speed makes sense, why have it in the form of a Turbo button? Software CPU scaling (present in my 2 year old laptop, probably was around for some time before that) allows the machine to run at a low frequency (e.g. I have mine defaulting to 800Mhz) until the CPU usage exceeds a threshold; it then steps up progressively to the max speed. If you set your max speed to be OC'd, and include some thermal limiting to step down if sustained max speed is too fast, then you really have the best of all worlds.

        Cheers
      • So, it's not like the old turbo buttons? That thing NEVER got turned off :-)

        50Mhz was soo slow.... (Ah, good old 486-DX2 processors)

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by bdcrazy ( 817679 )

        Back when I had a 286, the turbo button was turned OFF so the games would play. A lot of time based games from those days and other interactive games were based off the system clock. Turning the turbo on boosted clockspeed high enough to make those games unplayable.

    • Quote from the Slashdot summary: "Asus claims to have run its new boards with engineering samples of the Core i5-750 at a 77 percent overclock, boosting speeds from 2.66 GHz to 4.7 GHz."

      Translation: "Intel's fastest processors are not fast enough. Intel's processors are so slow that even a 77% increase in speed is worth sacrificing stability and risking hardware failure."

      Oh well, things will be better when we get the 22 nanometer parts [tomshardware.com].

      Question: Is Intel deliberately creating confusion when the com
      • Note that everyone is expected to know about the "P55" already. It is assumed that no explanation is needed.

        Here is a fairly typical article: Intel P55 Ibex Peak Chipset Features [vr-zone.com].

        Intel marketing words:
        Ibex Peak
        P55 Express
        Lynnfield
        Havendale
        Penryn
        Montevina
        Cantiga
        Core 2 Duo
        Centrino 2

        You can mix and match them. For example, this random article [cnet.com] I found with a Google search says: 'The processor specifications for the Pioneer DreamBook Style 9008 speak for themselves: "Intel Core 2 Duo Centrino 2
  • 4~5Ghz speeds? Guess they manage to figure out the P4 diagrams.

  • I don't overclock (Score:4, Interesting)

    by anss123 ( 985305 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @12:30PM (#28868299)

    My computer @ 2.4Gig spews out about 120Watt.

    To cool it I use five big fans, making the noise out of this setup is a bit loud but acceptable (a little less than the noise out of a Nintendo Wii perhaps, though a Wii's noise is thinner and more annoying).

    The only thing that interests me about this new CPU is if I can bring down the power usage to about 100 watt (like my former computer) while keeping the perf, but pretty much all that is reported these day is how much so-and so chip overclocks.

    Annoying, but that's where the money is I guess.

    • My computer @ 2.4Gig spews out about 120Watt.

      To cool it I use five big fans, making the noise out of this setup is a bit loud but acceptable (a little less than the noise out of a Nintendo Wii perhaps, though a Wii's noise is thinner and more annoying).

      Your rig needs five fans, but makes a little less noise than the Wii? I can't even hear my Wii's fan from across the room, especially not over my computer's fans even when idling and the CPU and graphics card fans are at their lowest speeds.

      The only thing th

      • "Your rig needs five fans, but makes a little less noise than the Wii? I can't even hear my Wii's fan from across the room"

        Maybe not the fan, but some Wii drives are LOUD I know one of the first Wii's I owned had a really loud drive.

        • I'll back this. The seek noises on the Wii are loud-as-hell compared to the Gamecube's optical drive. This noise is present even when using old Gamecube discs.

          In terms of purse fan noise, the Wii and Gamecube are similar, but the Wii seeks can be heard clear across the room! Sure, it's quiet compared to other consoles, but it's a step back for Nintendo.

      • Your rig needs five fans, but makes a little less noise than the Wii? I can't even hear my Wii's fan from across the room, especially not over my computer's fans even when idling and the CPU and graphics card fans are at their lowest speeds.

        My PC is *almost* silent. It can be heard if you listen carefully, but it's quieter than ambient background noise. Assuming you have decent silent fans, a silent power supply, and an aftermarket CPU cooler, the addition of:

        a fan controller [zalman.co.kr] (any will do)
        acoustipack-ultimate [acoustiproducts.com]

        will pretty much silence any PC. The only remaining noise i have a few frequencies from the hard drives, but it's now so quiet that it no longer bothers me. If i had money to replace my hard drives with SSD's, my PC would actually be

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by anss123 ( 985305 )

        I can't even hear my Wii's fan from across the room

        Doubt I'd hear a Wii across the room either but the fan noise is still about the same as my comp (Measured by my trusty ear :-)

        CPU and graphics card fans are at their lowest speeds

        I don't buy GPU's with fans. Even the "quiet" ones are dreadfully noisy. My CPU fan is noisy though, noisiest fan in my comp by a good margin... Costliest too. Grr.

        Yeah, I specifically buy chips made for lower power grades than the top end (e.g. I have a 60W Athlon X2 instead of the 95W version). Unless I'm playing a game, my CPU fan barely needs to move. Which is why I'm surprised you say your Wii is louder than your PC...

        For a long while the HDD was actually the noisiest part in my comp. I bought quieter fans and... well. The noise was deceptive, didn't sound like it came from the HDD. Anyway, it has taken me a few tries and failures to

        • I usually put a big aftermarket cooler on the CPU and disconnect its fan. It still barely gets warm and is 100% silent.

      • He said five big fans. Big fans spin more slowly to move the same amount of air and the noise output is related to fan RPM. I don't use desktops anymore, but my last one became a lot quieter when I replaced the small CPU fan with a big heatsink and a large case fan.

        • He said five big fans. Big fans spin more slowly to move the same amount of air and the noise output is related to fan RPM. I don't use desktops anymore, but my last one became a lot quieter when I replaced the small CPU fan with a big heatsink and a large case fan.

          Yeah and I use big fans too and yet still...

          • Try running big 12V fans at 5V. They blow more than half as much air for less than half as much power. It might serve your cooling needs. Keep internal fans at 12V, but anything on the case at 5V. Probably a bad idea to do to your power supply, I did it to a 250W that was running a 10W AMD Geode, but that's it.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by anss123 ( 985305 )

            Yeah and I use big fans too and yet still...

            There's a huge difference between fans. My first "big" fans were from Antec tri-cool and a single of those fans running at its lowest RPM made so much noise I had to turn off the computer and use the laptop. Not I got one CPU fan, one PSU fan, one 600 RPM HDD fan, one 800 RPM case fan and one 800-1000 RPM back fan, all inside a "silent" case. Most laptops make more noise than my box now, though I'm not quite happy yet.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Knara ( 9377 )
              Yeah it's pretty amazing what careful selection of fans can do for acoustics in a PC.

    • 120W? Is that on idle, or full load? BTW, dropping the power consumption down by 20W through buying a new CPU would pay itself off in about a decade.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by anss123 ( 985305 )

        120W? Is that on idle, or full load?

        I'm 120Watt at idle, 130 almost idle, 200+ on load, and even more when running that Furmark thingy + StessCPU.exe. It's the GPU that's the biggest sinner, but I don't want to replace it just yet.

        BTW, dropping the power consumption down by 20W through buying a new CPU would pay itself off in about a decade.

        Hmmm... who knows with the ever rising energy costs :-)

        • Man, 120W at idle is horrible :(

          Drop by at SPCR [silentpcreview.com] forums - I've been lurking there for a while and I've learned an incredible lot. They have people building sub-30W HTPC machines, and idling at over 100W is practically considered a sin. Using as many fans as you do will probably get you burned at the stake, though ;)

    • The snippets that I've read about the core i5 750 in TFA mention a possible TDP between 82-95W. Under load, you'd easily be over 100W.

      If your main focus is green computing, you're looking in the wrong direction. There are several, very capable cpu's from AMD and Intel right now that are rated at 65W TDP (even fast Core 2 Duo and Phenom II X3 parts). With speedstepping, an energy-efficient power supply and green HD, you should be about to hit your 100W mark or atleast get very close to it.

      • This kind of number really makes me wonder if anyone at Intel has a clue when they shout about performance per Watt. A typical ARM Cortex A8 SoC uses around 250mW for the entire chip (including RAM, flash, GPU and DSP, as well as the CPU core). Is the i5 really 328-380 times faster? Given that the i.MX515 can encode H.264 in realtime in under 1W, what on earth can the i5 do with 82 times as much power?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by anss123 ( 985305 )
          ARM seems to be good at hype and engineering, but they need a user-friendly OS to go with it. Linux is still a disappointment in the user friendly department, for no good reason really as it's not like Windows sets the ball so impossibly high, but Google Android and that Intel job (ironically) may change things... exciting times ahead.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by TheLink ( 130905 )
          > what on earth can the i5 do with 82 times as much power?

          Run Crysis? Boot Vista?

        • Is the i5 really 328-380 times faster?

          Yes... Yes it is.

          Given that the i.MX515 can encode H.264 in realtime in under 1W, what on earth can the i5 do with 82 times as much power?

          Multimedia operations are performed by integrated DSPs on the chips, so the fact that it can decode H.264 tells you NOTHING about the speed of the processor, any more than the speed of your GPU tells you how fast the CPU is.

          And before anyone starts yelling that desktop CPUs should have DSPs in them, as ALWAYS happens on /., go look i

  • That's the version that will ship with MMX, which I am very excited about!

    Seriously, I love when big companies start recycle product names / numbers fifteen years later.

    • Seriously, I love when big companies start recycle product names / numbers fifteen years later.

      My phone is a Nokia 6110, which must be a rather ancient model, since their new 6110 Communicator has been out for a couple of years. Another stupidity is with Nokia 3110, from around the same time as my 6110, as they have a relatively new model called 3110 Classic. So the new version is the classic one.

  • Asus admits this wasn't necessarily stable, but still - that's fast.

    Car analogy: Isn't this like having a really fast car with really shitty steering? Great, you go fast - up until you don't.

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close