Nevertheless, the machine apparently managed to hit a CPU score of 16,334 in 3DMark Vantage. VR-Zone comments that the score is "about 45% faster than a similarly clocked [45nm Core 2 Quad

WHAT?
am I reading that right? that's a massive ipc increase, I thought P4 -> C2D was massive enough as it was, are we sure about these numbers?
Even 20% would be brilliant but 45%? cmon!?

That is well and truely the end of AMD at that point, if intels next CPU is that much quicker than their old CPU's - which are that much quicker than AMD's!

good.lord!

someone from amdzone has a few choice words. take from it what you will.
http://scientiasblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/nehalem-appears-but-anand...

In honour of the fallen, AMD is TOAST. LOL!!!!

"Seal AMD's Fate" as a friend that works at intel puts it.

anand has pretty much confirmed these benches, and with a hobbled memory subsystem nonetheless!

Seeing how we keep getting hammered by the "GPU is King" litany,it might be a good thing to stop complaining that a new and faster CPU makes little difference.
I like to game as much as anyone but having a fast CPU(C2D @3.3GHz) has made encoding,large file transfers,file compression and general multitasking activities a whole lot better than the previous generation of CPU I had.(X2 3800)
Nehalem will make all of those tasks quicker as well as providing a bit of a lift to game frame rates (if we are lucky).....that's a good enough reason to get one.

This news is a kind of a downer for those folks who just recently bought CPUs especially from the current architecture; Yorksfield. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing though, it's the best deal right now in terms of everything; price, performance, power consumption etc....My take on this is "WOW!", imagine the performance in CPU intensive tasks. Hmmm I can only hope AMD can keep up....

(heh, intel released their first 2.66 clocked CPU in 2003. I don't think anyone here would have predicted 5 years later there's be a front page article on TR about intel's shiny new 2.66 clocked CPU :-P )

even though it's reporting 45nm, I'm pretty sure other websites said that the test versions Intel was showing off where 65nm or something.

Can anyone else verify this?

AMD better have something up their sleeve, or else, as Bender would say, "they're boned".

One word -> DROOL!!!

it way to fast to be real :))

But Penryn was suppose to be 40% faster then Conroe and just look at the performance in tests, are not really true not by a long shot. so not real
that Nehalem will cost twice as penryn and twice as big, hot,only DD3 and a huge power envelop ~200W.

Nvidia and Intel are selling more power supplies then any advertisement with there big , huge (shrinks ) components.

Only one company is green AMD :)))

This is Penismarks at work. I would take the results with a grain of salt.

Secondly, the vast majority of modern games are GPU-bounded.

I'm betting a lot of the performance is from HT. 4->8 threads, plus architectural improvements for 45% performance sounds good.

Is this going to get me more FPS in 3d games or is the 3dmark score meaningless?

Can I be the first to say 'Oh dear'?

I'm really impressed by the stock core voltage at that frequency...

I knew Nehalem would be an awesome performer.

My guess is Intel pulled back on the Dunnington to include a QPI version of it also.
I tested Dunnington months back and it will be a bad arsed processor with QPI links.
6, then 12, then 24! LOL, things are about to get HOT!

I just hope that AMD can hang in there and give Intel incentive to keep cranking out the silicon.

I would like to know the GPU being used. If that's the case with a 9800GTX2 or something. AMD/ATI is going to be in big trouble if they only got 5K with a 4850 GPU and a Phenom 9850 clocked at 2.5Ghz

Having upgraded my very trusty but venerable X2 4400+ Toledo system with a 8800GT and not at all interested in insane graphics resolutions for games ( I use 1280x960, usually), I am very happy to wait for Nehalem as my next full system upgrade :-) :-). Pity that AMD is about to fall backwards off the financial-deficit plank they created with their idiotic acquisition of ATi and which has totally crippled their CPU development. With the Q4 projected ship date, seems as if Nehalem is being lined up to instantly crush AMD's 45nm offerings.

Any sign of a CPU-Z and 3DMark score on AMD's 45nm offerings ?

I'll wait to see official numbers and to see what AMD is cooking up (Bulldozer).

As long as my Q9300 that was JUST purchased lasts 6+ months I guess I would be ok with this news, otherwise I ask Intel to stop making any future processors until I am ready to buy again. kthx

I'm calling shenanigans on this one. I thought the FSB was not going to be in Nehalem architecture anymore, replaced by QuickPath?

45% faster at only 2.6 GHz !? Yikes. That's just an insane per-clock improvement in that test. Sounds like loads of extra SSE grunt, perhaps.

Could we please have some more versions of SSE :-)

The CPU-Z readings aren't up to date obviously, since it doesn't officially support Nehalem yet, which is why it's going to read the FSB and funny L2 cache. The voltage may or may not be correct too.

Nehalem is looking awesome though.

Hoooly crap. Why did I even bother building my current machine a month or two ago. Should've just waited for X58 and Nehalem to be released!

heh, intel released their first 2.66 clocked CPU in 2003. I don't think anyone here would have predicted 5 years later there's be a front page article on TR about intel's shiny new 2.66 clocked CPU :-P

That's my next build, right there!

so ... 0.8v?