难道4G的CORE 2仅仅相当于 5G的P3 ???

花泥

国际象棋测试我3.9G的Q6600才跑了19.X,算4G 大概20出头,除以4,难道4G的CORE 2仅仅相当于 5G的P3 ???

wqz333

原帖由 cm4ever 于 2007-12-31 03:03 发表
别人给出了很多证据，potomac却一再狡辩和选择性无视。失去讨论的价值。

没办法,谁叫它是文盲?

Ephyer

原帖由 沙门 于 2007-12-30 23:30 发表


KJ的图本来我不想发的，无奈小白太多，，

谁用PIII超到死对比一下性能？

819415

1分29秒不行的。p3的世界记录是50多秒的，超频到2G多。很奇怪居然是一个超频能力应该比较糟糕的TA1步进的p3s 1.26在bx主办上创造的。

你这个成绩不用p3出马，我的c3就行了，bx上跑pi不是815上能比的。当然p3根本没法和core2比性能。天壤之别。



[ 本帖最后由 Ephyer 于 2007-12-31 01:28 编辑 ]

沙门

原帖由 花泥 于 2007-12-26 00:53 发表
你送个能降频到1G的主板给我吧,反正我的主板降不下去,你以为我不想试一下阿....

只用一个核心,成绩出来确实只有1/4略强一点点....我3.6G算出来是4.67,

KJ的图本来我不想发的，无奈小白太多，，

谁用PIII超到死对比一下性能？

疯一样的男子

原帖由 itany 于 2007-12-27 11:30 发表
At Intel, everything went wrong. On every modern x86 processor, the CPUID instruction returns, among other things, the family code of the CPU. The i486 (1989) is family 4, Pentium (1993) and Pentium M ...

很详细，事实也很清楚了。

itany

At Intel, everything went wrong. On every modern x86 processor, the CPUID instruction returns, among other things, the family code of the CPU. The i486 (1989) is family 4, Pentium (1993) and Pentium MMX (1997) are family 5, Pentium Pro (1995), Pentium 2 (1997), Pentium 3 (2000) and Pentium M (2003) are family 6 (”P6 microarchitecture”).

Since 1997 or so, it seems to have been clear to Intel that the x86 line of CPUs (retroactively named “IA-32″) was to be eventually replaced by IA-64. Itanium, the first IA-64 CPU, was supposed to be released around 1998. IA-64 also supported the CPUID instruction, and the Itanium was specified to return family 7.

But Itanium was 3 years late, and Intel introduced a successor to the P6 line of CPUs, which was a complete redesign, to compete against the very strong AMD Athlon in the x86 market. The Pentium 4 (”NetBurst architecture”) needed a family code. It had no relation to family 6 (P6) and none to family 7 (Itanium). So they chose family 15, which was the highest number that could be represented in the 4 bit family field of CPUID, and defined it to mean: “check the (previously undefined) bits 20 to 27 for the information you are looking for”. All NetBurst CPUs had “0″ as the extended family ID, so the effective family was “15/0″. Then came the Itanium 2 (2002): For some reason, Intel didn’t use family 8 for it, but family 15 and extended family 1 (”15/1″, later Itanium 2 CPUs had “15/2″).

Today we know that IA-64 will not replace IA-32, in particular because Microsoft ruled out the possibility of supporting IA-64 on desktop Windows. In 2006, Intel introduced the Core and Core 2 CPU lines, which replace the Pentium 4 - and they are IA-32.

So what is the family ID of the Core CPUs? “15/3″, because it is the next free ID? “8″, because numbers 8 to 14 are not taken yet? No, Core and Core 2 are family 6: These CPUs are direct successors of the Pentium 3, and thus based on the P6 microarchitecture. The model ID encoded in CPUID is “13″ for the last Pentium M (”Dothan”), “14″ for the Core, and “15″ for the Core 2 and the Core 2 based Xeon. Now the problem is that the model ID bit field is only 4 bits wide, so “15″ is the highest model ID that can be represented. I think we are all curious how Intel is going to encode Core 3…

* 486 (1989): family 4
* Pentium (1993): family 5
* Pentium Pro (1995): family 6, models 0 and 1
* Pentium 2 (1997): family 6, models 3, 5 and 6
* Pentium 3 (2000): family 6, models 7, 8, 10, 11
* Itanium (2001): family 7
* Pentium 4 (2000): family 15/0
* Itanium 2 (2002): family 15/1 and 15/2
* Pentium M (2003): family 6, models 9 and 13
* Core (2006): family 6, model 14
* Core 2 (2006): family 6, model 15

itany

原帖由 Elensar 于 2007-12-27 09:42 发表
这推理的前半部分很不错
ConroeKensfieldMerom的CPU ID都是6F
问题是，WolfdaleYorkfieldPenryn的CPU ID是67……
中间还有Conroe-L和Merom-L是66

可能是到6F之后编号用光了，之后就往回去，结果就乱了吧……
但愿Nehalem或者Gesher能开创一个新家族……

icecola

原帖由 Cameraman 于 2007-12-27 05:01 发表
又来神化老古董了，真是呕:funk:

现在最讨厌的就是见到有人吹P3 C3 PM

完全不明白Pentium Pro架构地位的人请退避

Cameraman

又来神化老古董了，真是呕:funk:

现在最讨厌的就是见到有人吹P3 C3 PM

itany

看看Family 6，已经很清楚了 （没有包含Xeon和Celeron，加进去就很连续了）
P Pro： Model 1
P2    ： Mode 3、5
P3    ： Mode 7、8、B
PM    ： Mode 9、D
Core  ： Mode E
Core2： Mode F

如果把Banias从9改成C，正好就连续了，从Tulatin的B，一直到Core2 的F

[ 本帖最后由 itany 于 2007-12-27 00:33 编辑 ]

itany

Albatron

原帖由 jhj9 于 2007-12-26 11:59 发表
P3->P-M->Dothan->Yonah(Core Duo)->Conroe(Core 2 Duo)
应该是这样的顺序吧

P-M和Dothan可以合并成P-M
Banias跟Dothan是一个架构

itany

原帖由 potomac 于 2007-12-26 20:45 发表

这个F，搞不清了。有空，偶再查查。:loveliness:

[ 本帖最后由 itany 于 2007-12-27 00:06 编辑 ]

花泥

原帖由 finekey 于 2007-12-26 17:53 发表

您的意思是e2160靠的是芯片组和ddr内存赢的？
BX芯片组和pc133大幅度制约了p3 1.2G的成绩？
这里好像有不少图拉丁c3 1.3G的成绩，您认为bx芯片组和pc133都严重对不起图拉丁？
http://post.baidu.com/f?kz=23837 ...

麻烦你测试一下2G 和3G 2160的成绩,由于FSB大幅增加,本来未必能达到的线性增长应该可以达标,还大大超过吧:p

花泥

原帖由 finekey 于 2007-12-26 17:53 发表

您的意思是e2160靠的是芯片组和ddr内存赢的？
BX芯片组和pc133大幅度制约了p3 1.2G的成绩？
这里好像有不少图拉丁c3 1.3G的成绩，您认为bx芯片组和pc133都严重对不起图拉丁？
http://post.baidu.com/f?kz=23837 ...

老兄,我也没说仅仅是芯片组和内存造成的阿,只是芯片组和内存差距太大了,已经不好直接比较性能了,唯独在国际象棋这个测试里CORE 2效率没有大胜P3提出来怀疑一下这个测试究竟有什么问题而已

itany

原帖由 potomac 于 2007-12-26 19:18 发表

哪里能是7啊，
别说C2D了，即便是NetBurst也是P6系列的，代号P68。:funk:
进7系列的，需要EPIC血统。:loveliness:

Netburst明明是Family F的……