Penryns HP Workstation Review, (yeah! mac pro!)

[jrlcopy]

http://gizmodo.com/338507/dream-pc-8+core-workstation-rocks-the-penryns-verdict-wow

Yes this is a review of PC, yes PC's are yucky, however, it uses the 'possible same' cores as the new mac pro, and they were all happy about it. Figured I would post that review.

Appears to be quite a nice speed increase.

 

[Techguy172]

Yeah, You also kind of screwed up the title too I think you mean't HP Workstation (penryn) Review.

 

[netdog]

Price of the HP makes me think that the 2499 model isn't going to be a 2.83 Octo.

 

[Umbongo]

Price of the HP makes me think that the 2499 model isn't going to be a 2.83 Octo.

HP's prices have always been alot more than Apple. An xw8400 with the current base mac pro specs costs $3,500.

 

[timestamp]

Price of the HP makes me think that the 2499 model isn't going to be a 2.83 Octo.

Apple seemed to get the 2.66 Woodcrest model for nearly a $1000 cheaper than a similar Dell back in 2006. I don't think they will have any problem repeating that.

 

[macz1]

The speedup in Cinebench is only 5,7x! Why doesen't cinebench get more out of eight cores? Is raytracing not as scalable as I thought?

 

[Pressure]

The speedup in Cinebench is only 5,7x! Why doesen't cinebench get more out of eight cores? Is raytracing not as scalable as I thought?

Most likely the processors starving for bandwidth. Remember they are still each connected with a 1.333Mhz Front Side Bus that 4 cores share.

Nehalem will do away with that later this year.

 

[Topper]

Most likely the processors starving for bandwidth. Remember they are still each connected with a 1.333Mhz Front Side Bus that 4 cores share.

Nehalem will do away with that later this year.

Are you going to get a Nehalem Mac Pro?

 

[steelski]

Most likely the processors starving for bandwidth. Remember they are still each connected with a 1.333Mhz Front Side Bus that 4 cores share.

Nehalem will do away with that later this year.

This is where the AMD architecture starts to look not so silly in the opterons. The new ones show almost perfect scalability. Stil a tad slower but by mid next year I dont think there will be much of a differance.

 

[Pressure]

Are you going to get a Nehalem Mac Pro?

At this rate it may first come in a year, so I think I will gladly accept the Penryn Mac Pro as a stop gap

 

[Pressure]

This is where the AMD architecture starts to look not so silly in the opterons. The new ones show almost perfect scalability. Stil a tad slower but by mid next year I dont think there will be much of a differance.

By mid next year Intel will be way ahead of AMD. They (AMD) have publically stated that there will be no new investments (R&D) in the whole year of 2008 to cut losses.

It's Phenom and only slow Phenoms to boot. Just to add salt to injury. Some will be quad-cores and others will be tri-core but the majority will be dual-core.

Nehalem will be "8-core" in some aspect because it includes HyperThreading again. Penryn is already faster clock for clock compared to Phenom (K10) and by the time Intel have implemented the memory controller onboard it will be much faster.

 

[peejack]

At this rate it may first come in a year, so I think I will gladly accept the Penryn Mac Pro as a stop gap

Haha amen to that bro

 

[jwt]

By mid next year Intel will be way ahead of AMD. They (AMD) have publically stated that there will be no new investments (R&D) in the whole year of 2008 to cut losses.

It's Phenom and only slow Phenoms to boot. Just to add salt to injury. Some will be quad-cores and others will be tri-core but the majority will be dual-core.

Nehalem will be "8-core" in some aspect because it includes HyperThreading again. Penryn is already faster clock for clock compared to Phenom (K10) and by the time Intel have implemented the memory controller onboard it will be much faster.

Interesting. I have to say, when Apple chose to partner with Intel over AMD, I thought they were fools, given the lead AMD had over Intel at the time of the announcement. By the time the Mac Pros were out, it was clear that Intel was kicking AMD's butt. Now there's no contest and AMD's future isn't even clear at this point. Glad Apple went with Intel.

 

[Pressure]

Interesting. I have to say, when Apple chose to partner with Intel over AMD, I thought they were fools, given the lead AMD had over Intel at the time of the announcement. By the time the Mac Pros were out, it was clear that Intel was kicking AMD's butt. Now there's no contest and AMD's future isn't even clear at this point. Glad Apple went with Intel.

You don't have to be some kind of wizard or being able to read signs. Intel has a clear road map of what products to expect when. AMD failed doing the same and does not have the same amount of money to burn on R & D. The choice was obvious, especially at the time of the transition.