First i5 Lynnfield benchmarks leaked!

[Toss3]

http://www.guru3d.com/news/core-i5-test-leakedlynnfield-perforamnce-revealed/

As you guys know Intel will be releasing Core i5 processors somewhere in the future, based on the 45nm Lynnfield architecture. These processors will have four cores.

Initially there will be three models released at launch, all are quad-core processors and based on the Lynnfield core, using 45nm fabrication process.

Some key features:

Four x86 processing cores with support for HyperThreading technology
Dual-channel DDR3 memory controller specified to run DDR3-1066 and DDR3-1333 modules
8 MB of L3 cache, and support for TurboBoost technology.
The three processors will have clock frequencies of 2.66 GHz, 2.80 GHz, and 2.93 GHz and priced respectively $196, $284, and $562 USD, which does seem rather expensive judging from the performance you can see below.

Benchmarks through an Asian site (xfastest) have leaked now showing the 2.66GHz model clocked processor.Not only pictures of a Core i5 processor and one of Intel's reference motherboard has been posted, but also some quickly managed benchmarks.

The processor operates at 2.66GHz and among the benchmarks we find some pure processor tests in the form of Cinebench 10 and Everest, where we can do a quick comparison with some of our own tests with AMD's and Intel's latest processors.
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=37031&stc=1&d=1243262018
What is surprising is that Core i5 doesn't seem to be able to keep up with Intel's Core i7 920 processor operating at the same clock frequency. The processor however it is pretty much on par with AMD's flagship Phenom II X4 955. Yet the Core i5 2.66 Ghz model would cost 284 USD at start while you can purchase Phenom II X4 for $245.00 (see here) already.

This is going to be an interesting launch alright.

Hmm doesn't seem to perform all that well, but I'll reserve my judgement 'til we see some benchmarks from reputable sites.

[Galvin]

Isn't the i5 suppose to be a slower version of the i7 ?

[hell_of_doom227]

I still don't know why Intel is making such a mess by releasing i5 socket.

[mojoman0]

is this socket even meant for the mainstream consumer user base?

[Sazar]

i5 is the non-server based proc. Should be cheaper to manufacture so therefore it should be mainstream.

[a12ctic]

i5 is the non-server based proc. Should be cheaper to manufacture so therefore it should be mainstream.

This.

Also, these chips aren't supposed to dethrone the i7 so it makes perfect sense that they don't perform as well. They're releasing these just to bring the new architecture to the mainstream. They're probably faster than the 9x00 series anyway, so I don't see any hurt in it. Seems sort of like when the AMD FX chips ran a different socket than the s754.

[CaptNKILL]

Seems a bit expensive considering the 920 can be purchased for well under $300.

If it was around $200 and the boards were around $100 it'd be much more attractive.

[hemmy]

Ya, not sure who would pay >$500 for a Core i5 chip shen you could get i7 much cheaper.

[ninelven]

You are looking at it from the wrong perspective... For $280, you can get a slightly faster CPU than the i7 920 that only requires 4GB of ram and has motherboards available for ~$120. In the end, you get something (very likely) slightly faster than an i7 920 for 150-200 dollars less.

[hemmy]

Less than 200mhz difference, no triple channel memory. Probably would not amount to any difference

[Bman212121]

You are looking at it from the wrong perspective... For $280, you can get a slightly faster CPU than the i7 920 that only requires 4GB of ram and has motherboards available for ~$120. In the end, you get something (very likely) slightly faster than an i7 920 for 150-200 dollars less.

I wouldn't necessarily say that either. The 2.8ghz version might still be slower than the i7 920 given the gap between the two. The price of the processors are about the same right now, and it's likely that the 920 could dip below that in the future.

You can run 4GB of ram in a computer with an i7 using dual channel if you want, but if you want to have more ram and faster speeds you can opt for triple channel. The only price where the i7 sticks you right now is the board. Board makers could easily release cheaper board with only support for dual channel (Like the Intel reference board for the I7) and probably have $120 board with the current cpu.

If the prices and benchmarks given are fairly close it really doesn't seem like there will be a market for these chips. I'd have to venture that Intel can make them cheaper and OEMs will be able to get much better prices on i5 than i7.

EDIT: Actually I'm betting the real selling point is going to be TDP. I don't see any figured listed but I would have to imagine they will run cooler and use less electricity. That would make them a better fit for OEM pcs than the i7.

[ninelven]

Board makers could easily release cheaper board with only support for dual channel (Like the Intel reference board for the I7) and probably have $120 board with the current cpu.
No. Since you didn't bother to understand why before you posted, I doubt you are interested now. We are done here. If you have anything else "enlightening" to say I suggest you save it for a few months.

[rage10]

No. Since you didn't bother to understand why before you posted, I doubt you are interested now. We are done here. If you have anything else "enlightening" to say I suggest you save it for a few months.
wtf?
you get lower board costs because of dual channal memory, lack of northbridge, lower pin count and thiner boards (6 layers for I5 as apposed to 8 for I7). prices will be probobly ~150$ at launch but will probobly drop to ~100$ soon after.

[rage10]

EDIT: Actually I'm betting the real selling point is going to be TDP. I don't see any figured listed but I would have to imagine they will run cooler and use less electricity. That would make them a better fit for OEM pcs than the i7.

they could also be I7 chips where part of the memory controller failed.
EDIT: never mind they are a diffrent socket so they cant be I7s

[CaptNKILL]

No. Since you didn't bother to understand why before you posted, I doubt you are interested now. We are done here. If you have anything else "enlightening" to say I suggest you save it for a few months.

:lol:

Wow, someone needs to relax.

Anyways, 140Mhz on the 2.8Ghz i5 is not going to make it faster than a 2.66Ghz i7. It isn't anywhere near close enough in the benchmarks.

IMO, the X58 is almost as large a selling point as the i7 itself. Triple channel DDR3 and 2x or 3x SLI support on a very solid Intel chipset. And now you can get one for under $200.

The i5 just seems kind of pointless since it isn't going to allow you to upgrade to either a better motherboard OR a better CPU. You can get an X58 board with 6Gb DDR3 and an i7 920 for around $500. An i5 will basically get you less performance and far less flexibility and features for slightly less money.

[Maverick123w]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570

anandtech review... actually looks pretty good to me. Can't wait to see the final product.

[ninelven]

I'd say that sums it up pretty well.

[john19055]

The Lynnfield chips don't look to bad ,but if they come out and overclock just as good as a i7 920 ,then they look even better if they are going to be $100 cheaper and it looks to be faster then the i7 in a lot of things when clocked the same.

[noko]

I thought the I7 920 and 940 are going to be discontinued or already has been. So in the near future they won't be available.