Core i7 - Is High VDimm really a Problem?

by Gary Key on 10/8/2008 12:00 PM EST
POST A COMMENT

40 Comments

Back to Article

  • snakeoil - Saturday, October 11, 2008 - link

    nehalem is too expensive processor, too complicated and expensive 8 layers motherboard because triple channel ddr3,3 sticks of too expensive memory,too much problems with memory voltage,too much problem to overclock because automatic overclocking,too high tdp (130 watts even for the 2.6ghz processor,too lousy in gaming.too much problems with quickpath(when are we going to see 4p and 8p nehalems?),too big yields(have you noticed the size of nehalems, this reminds me of gt280 too power hungry), etc,etc,(and you know something, little anand is paid up by intel,you know it ,everyone knows it. etc etc Reply
  • v12v12 - Wednesday, October 15, 2008 - link

    Wow... although it's not at all like the P4, the release-speculation, combined with some of the commentary in here and the general hardware and price increase Vs Penryn... it sure is looking like a leap from PIII to early initial P4s on paper. In reality it's just new tech, which always requires an initial and usually expensive surge into.

    While those of you that have Penryns now... getting a nehalem anytime soon would be foolish and a waste of money, unless you're loaded (lying to yourself) and or running a very competitive, media related business—where gains in CPU productivity are crucial... Playing around (aka OC'ing, which I LOVE) sounds like a futile leap. Just wait for Xbit-labs and the extreme forum top earners to take the plunge for you. They ALWAYS have like 5 guys with more money than Gates—tearing stuff apart, pushing the limits, burning up expensive hardware just to be "that guy." The forum heros WILL take the lead as they always do. Just be patient and wait. There's nothing to fear, unless you've already planned on taking the leap and started parting out old boxes. lol... ciao!
    Reply
  • v12v12 - Wednesday, October 15, 2008 - link

    Wow... although it's not at all like the P4, the release-speculation, combined with some of the commentary in here and the general hardware and price increase Vs Penryn... it sure is looking like a leap from PIII to early initial P4s on paper. In reality it's just new tech, which always requires an initial and usually expensive surge into.

    While those of you that have Penryns now... getting a nehalem anytime soon would be foolish and a waste of money, unless you're loaded (lying to yourself) and or running a very competitive, media related business—where gains in CPU productivity are crucial... Playing around (aka OC'ing, which I LOVE) sounds like a futile leap. Just wait for Xbit-labs and the extreme forum top earners to take the plunge for you. They ALWAYS have like 5 guys with more money than Gates—tearing stuff apart, pushing the limits, burning up expensive hardware just to be "that guy." The forum heros WILL take the lead as they always do. Just be patient and wait. There's nothing to fear, unless you've already planned on taking the leap and started parting out old boxes. lol... ciao!
    Reply
  • Zebo - Friday, October 10, 2008 - link

    More "look what we got" articles and nothing of substance. I know you're privileged site here at AT and enjoy taunting other sites with your access but briefs just wastes your audiences time. Reply
  • tgarland - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    see Nehalem News architecture diagram of the new nehalem platform and notice the IMC

    http://www.augustinefou.com/2008/10/core-i7-vdimm-...">http://www.augustinefou.com/2008/10/core-i7-vdimm-...


    Reply
  • deadrats - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    am i the only one that thinks that the upcoming nehalem is a little too much like the P4? i mean think about it:

    when the P4 was first announced intel promised much higher clock speeds, one of the key promises of nehalem is much higher clock speeds.

    when the P4 was first announced intel went on and on about what a great cpu it was for multimedia, audio and video, content creators, one of the key promises of nehalem is what a great cpu for multimedia it will be.

    when the P4 was announced and released it could only be coupled with expensive and exotic rdram, memory that needed to be run in matching pair of modules, with the promise of unheard of bandwidth (though sdram was an option for a while and they did move to ddr eventually), the nehalem can only be run with expensive and exotic ddr3 that needs to be run in groups of 3 modules.

    sounds a little too much like the P4 to me...
    Reply
  • 7Enigma - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    Fanboy go home. While you are there, learn the difference between want and need.

    Trying to draw a parallel between a yet unreleased processor that looks promising to a P4 that was a stopgap solution to combat AMD's superior architecture at the time is pretty sad.
    Reply
  • deadrats - Saturday, November 01, 2008 - link

    looks like i was right, dumbass:

    http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=2700">http://www.hwbox.gr/showthread.php?t=2700
    Reply
  • deadrats - Friday, October 10, 2008 - link

    fanboy? LOL, you have no idea what you are talking about. if you are implying that i hate everything intel and loyal to amd, nothing could be further from the truth. while it's true that i currently use a phenom 9500, the reason is that it was the cheapest quad core available at the time i bought it.

    as far as x86 based processors are concerned, i personally think we the general architecture should have been abandoned years ago, and in fact intel originally wanted to move us to the itanium and the ia-64 architecture (microsoft even made a 64 bit windows 2000 for the itanium):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium

    quote: "During development, Intel, HP, and industry analysts predicted that IA-64 would dominate in servers, workstations, and high-end desktops, and eventually supplant RISC and complex instruction set computer (CISC) architectures for all general-purpose applications. Compaq and Silicon Graphics decided to abandon further development of the Alpha and MIPS architectures respectively in favor of migrating to IA-64."

    if i am a "fanboy" of any cpu it's the cell processor, which is vastly superior to x86 cpu's.

    as for how "promising" the nehalem looks, all i can point to is the numerous preview articles were prototype nehalem have been tested but intel demanded that benchmark results not be released to the general public because they didn't want to scare anyone away from nehalem (intel has claimed that the low benchmark numbers are due to immature drivers and early chipset and processor silicon).

    ask yourself this: if the nehalem will be that much faster than current generation penryn based cpu's then why is it that intel is selling a 6 core penryn based cpu with up to 16mb of L3 for use in high end servers?

    remember my prediction: nehalem will be at most 20 percent faster than current generation penryn based cpu's and most of that performance will be thanks to the higher clock speeds.
    Reply
  • IntelUser2000 - Saturday, October 11, 2008 - link

    deadrats: ask yourself this: if the nehalem will be that much faster than current generation penryn based cpu's then why is it that intel is selling a 6 core penryn based cpu with up to 16mb of L3 for use in high end servers?

    Stupid argument. That's because its a server MP CPU and it takes longer time to validate. You might want to know that the Dunnington replaced Tulsa, which is a Netburst MP on the 65nm Presler core and it was VERY recently replaced.
    Reply
  • steveyballme - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    If it's faster it's faster! Don't complain about how long it last, if it's faster it should not last as long! Just buy another.

    http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com">http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
    Reply
  • araczynski - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    the sky is falling!! maybe...trust us... Reply
  • D3SI - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link


    Upgrading is pricey. Going to run the e8400 till it dies hehe :)
    Reply
  • Calin - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    e8400? That's very recent upgrade, you could probably use it for a couple more years. Reply
  • Darkness Flame - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Think about it; even if you had a QX9750 processor with it's 1600 MHz FSB, you wouldn't notice any significant bandwidth increase over DDR2/3 1066. Even when pushed up to 2000 MHz FSB, DDR2 1200 Mz - DDR3 1333 MHz dual channel sufficed. Going up to DDR3 1600 could get you tighter latencies, and a few more decimals, but not much. The number of people who went higher than that was very low in percentage to the rest.

    Now, Core i7 uses triple channel RAM, and unless I'm mistaken, Anandtech themselves hinted that there wasn't as much a difference between dual and triple channel DDR3 1066 MHz RAM on this board. In my opinion, that would mean that the difference between dual and triple channel DDR3 1333 MHz RAM would be less. However, that's on the 2.66 GHz model. The 3.2 GHz model's QPI is at 6.4 GT/s, over the 4.8 GT/s on the two lower ones. Calculating it all out, triple channel DDR3 1333 MHz would be the base, with DDR3 1600 MHz being the sweet spot, with probably not much difference about it. With QPI looking to not having many options for overclocking, there wouldn't be a need for anything faster right now. Well, except for the extremist who have bottomless wallets.
    Reply
  • Calin - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    I think it will be Barcelona all over again - twice the theoretical bandwidth with one and a half the measured bandwidth, for very little gain in performance.
    Do triple channel RAM makes sense now? Probably not. Did DDR3 made any sense at its introduction? Did DDR2 made sense at its introduction? Not much, and yet we're at triple channel DDR3 when sometime we had single channel PC-100 SD-RAM.
    This is proofing for the future, preparing a platform (hopefully) for the long run.
    Reply
  • Darkness Flame - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    corrections in order ...
    Mz -> MHz
    (before "With QPI") about -> above

    I should proofread before posting ...
    Reply
  • npp - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    At least in benchmarks, the gains from the IMC are noticeable, I saw something like 19GB/s bandwith measured on xtemesystems, which is very high indeed, much higher than what you'd get with 450Mhz FSB... The open question is, however - which is the app hte really needs that much... Reply
  • SuckRaven - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    I thought it was JEDEC, not JDEC...

    'Joint Electron Device Engineering Council'

    anyways....

    Probably going to wait for the die shrink of i7 (Nehalem), or at the very least, a couple of revisions before I jump on the bandwagon. I am loooooooong due for upgrading my hardware.

    Ooooh goody! A new build is always fun.
    Reply
  • Butterbean - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Lately - the main impression I am getting about Nehalem is to just leave it alone a good while. Reply
  • BansheeX - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    This whole 3dmark crowd of SLI, overlock kiddies with 10000w psus who want to pump more volts into their ram to solve their pi benchmarks a millisecond faster has to end. The amount of time and money these people spend on overclocking is way higher than they would have spent purchasing a faster computer to begin with. They've completely taken over forums with their self-inflicted problems, and it's a tech support nightmare. People wonder why interest in PC gaming has lost immeasurable ground to consoles, this is one. Stop dicking with your ram and play your games. Reply
  • strikeback03 - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    Why does it have to go away? To me, the "extreme overclocking" crowd seems to be another expression of the mindset that produces heavily modified compact cars. Sure, some of these people could have afforded something faster out of the box (I once overheard a guy in Autozone say he had spent $25000 on the motor in his Cavalier *smacks forehead*) but the fun is in doing it yourself. Reply
  • OddJensen - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    Well yeah, I guess it's kinda frustrating sometimes. "Oh man, my friend can OC his quad core to 4.1 GHz, but mine can only go to 3.8 GHz, what's wrong, i even set the vcore to maximum allowed, i get BSODs and i don't understand why and blablabla". And you have to try explaining to them that their CPU isn't necessarily going to go as far as another one, and that setting the voltages to the extremes will probably wear the equipment down pretty much right away. :P

    And then you have the ones who go like "Well, i just blew up my 4th QX9650, but that's OK, I'll just RMA again.".
    Reply
  • ciukacz - Saturday, October 18, 2008 - link

    i even saw how people give instructions on how to kill a cpu just to return it for RMA to get another one which could have better OC potential. Reply
  • D3SI - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link


    +1

    They also need to get out a bit hehe
    Reply
  • npp - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    I really loved that one :) But people need to talk about something, anyway, and here you have it - a nice opportunity for all those paranoid guys around the forums to express their worries. We all own CPUs with immense computing power, largely unused, and still feel unsatisfied with what we've got. Answering the question what the hell do I need all this for is much important than asking why the hell won't it run my uber-mega-overclocking DIMMs at 2,2V, I think. Reply
  • stmok - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Its their money and time. Let them spend it the way they want to.

    Just be thankful it isn't yours! :)

    Reply
  • Rob94hawk - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    I hate commentaries like this. All that is reiterated is something that we already know so this article is pointless and over month late.

    By the time the NDA has lifted the boyz over at xtremesytems.org will already have it figured out.
    Reply
  • csjsi - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    I don’t know what some of you are going on about, I could buy this product in a New Zealand retail shop yesterday......so I glad for the heads up.

    Thanks
    Reply
  • Nfarce - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    If you could buy "this product" in an NZ retail shop yesterday, I'd love to see the link selling it, because Nehalem hasn't even hit the retail market yet, let alone an X58 mobo to run it. If anything, someone was selling a pre-preduction test release. Do you have that Cartman time machine that fast forwards to the Wii release? Reply
  • Lonyo - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Usually high clock speeds mean more bandwidth, but with trichannel, is it really going to be necessary to overclock the RAM that much anyway?

    Might it not just be enough to go with standard 1333MHz speeds and tightest timings possible, and then set a ratio (assuming Nehalem has good ones) to allow increasing the CPU bus speed anyway for an overclock while leaving the RAM effectively alone, or does Nehalem need even more than trichannel bandwidth?
    Reply
  • Jorgisven - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Overclockers who after plunking down a pretty penny on an i7/X58 set fry their chipsets within days thinking running 2.0-2.2 volts is okay, because they can do it with their current Penryn. It's a good warning, but also a little early. It's like telling a 12 year old it's okay to turn right on red, SOMETIMES. While good information, it's not very practical information YET.

    I agree it's a little early to announce this issue, as these things are hardly available to the general public. Those with access to the chip have most likely been briefed by Intel.
    Reply
  • QChronoD - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    I very much enjoy the rapidly changing system designs that are gifted to us by the computer industry. It was mean for us users to be able to upgrade one piece of a system once or twice a year for several years, and not have to replace everything else besides the HD and CD-ROM. My wallet thanks all the specification committees that allow it to shed weight when it have to replace my cpu, memory, and motherboard if I want to get anything faster.
    I remember having a board that would scale from 300MHz to 1GHz. Unless you bought the slowest speed of a processor when it first launched, you won't be able to upgrade more than 25%, and only if you upgrade within 2 years or so. It used to be the same with memory, everything used the same format, but higher rating gave you better speed. Now it seems like you can't even carry your old memory over to a new system.
    Reply
  • Nfarce - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Articles like this are not very helpful when we can't even get our own hands on an i7, let alone any review sites yet. Rumors abound (yes, only rumors) about how it will be at *least* one more quarter before we see the i7/x58 chipset in mass, let alone any bugs to iron out. I'm about ready to plunk down on a trusty P45/E8500/DDR2 rig to replace my aging E6600 box. I can't wait that long to upgrade, but I will wait for AT's first reviews before making a final decision. Reply
  • iDelta - Thursday, October 09, 2008 - link

    Indeed, i'm also about to *downgrade* back to DDR2 and the P45 chipset as it is simply faster....

    So the DDR31800 modules i have will not work on i7. Shame, i won't upgrade if that is the case, i'll look at what AMD is doing a little more closely.
    Reply
  • wolfman3k5 - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    uhm, who cares? Reply
  • rree - Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - link

    http://ecartshopping.biz">http://ecartshopping.biz

    Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

    Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
    Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35
    Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

    Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
    Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $16
    New era cap $15

    Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25

    FREE sHIPPING
    http://ecartshopping.biz">http://ecartshopping.biz
    Reply
  • wwrr - Friday, December 11, 2009 - link

    http://elurl.com/42v">http://elurl.com/42v

    Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

    UGG BOOT $50

    Jewerly $20

    Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
    Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35
    Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

    Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
    Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $16
    New era cap $15

    Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25

    FREE sHIPPING
    http://www.elivebuy.com">http://www.elivebuy.com
    Reply
  • bigboxes - Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - link

    Could you be more specific as to what you don't care about? Reply
  • sjbderen - Thursday, July 14, 2011 - link

    Come go and see, will not regret it Oh look

    http://www.ifancyshop.com
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now