Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.intel > #124
| From | "Orson Cart" <ex-privat@parts.org> |
|---|---|
| Reply-To | "Orson Cart" <ex-privat@parts.org> |
| Subject | QX9770+X48 versus Nehalem? |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.intel |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | $$9kwcj_imgnxt.feeder.x-privat.org |
| Message-ID | <4e8070ff$1@x-privat.org> (permalink) |
| Date | 26 Sep 2011 14:33:03 +0100 |
| Organization | X-Privat NNTP Server - http://www.x-privat.org |
| Lines | 8 |
| X-Authenticated-User | $$xs-7_q6xz085nc1qk |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@x-privat.org |
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!newsfeed.x-privat.org!x-privat.org!not-for-mail |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.sys.intel:124 |
Show key headers only | View raw
I came across a PC mag article about the Nehamlem CPUs when they first came out. It said the the new direct memory controller was equivlent to 1600 MHz FSB on the old Pentium4/Core2 generations, so it would be faster than the Penryns, which went up to 1333 MHz. Now the Core 2 extreme was capable of 1600 FSB with an X48 chipset. Has anybody done a comparison of that with the Nehalems?
Back to comp.sys.intel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar
QX9770+X48 versus Nehalem? "Orson Cart" <ex-privat@parts.org> - 2011-09-26 14:33 +0100 Re: QX9770+X48 versus Nehalem? "Jim" <jim@wtf.invalid> - 2011-09-28 09:40 -0400
csiph-web