Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Nehalem Turbo?

topgun072003

topgun072003

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 11, 2006
309
0
Los Angeles, CA
I understand that the 2.26 Nehalem processor is about equal with the 2.8 '08 model in single threaded apps and the 2.26 outperforms the 2.8 '08 in multi-threaded apps. (from the benchmarks that I've seen)

But while going through the forums, some people have said, "wait until the turbo is utilized!" Or, "Wait until the Nehalem turbo boost is used."

1. What is this "turbo boost" and why isn't it being used now and represented in the current benchmarks? What sort of gains would be seen/experienced with the boost?

2. How easy is it to upgrade th Nehalem chips yourself? Especially with the new hardware architecture. Could I grab some 2.66 X 2 and slap them in there for a cheaper upgrade than the Apple upgrade? Pro's and Con's? (I've read about the 5500 i7 being the one they use because it allows for 2 processors I believe.)

Thanks in advance for all of your help.
 
The turbo boost upclocks the processor when cores are idling. so the quad 2.26 will clock up to a single 2.39 (one step) (at least mine will) and shut down the other cores
theoretically you can upgrade the processors easily, it is a matter of $$$
 
topgun072003 said:
I understand that the 2.26 Nehalem processor is about equal with the 2.8 '08 model in single threaded apps and the 2.26 outperforms the 2.8 '08 in multi-threaded apps. (from the benchmarks that I've seen)

But while going through the forums, some people have said, "wait until the turbo is utilized!" Or, "Wait until the Nehalem turbo boost is used."

1. What is this "turbo boost" and why isn't it being used now and represented in the current benchmarks? What sort of gains would be seen/experienced with the boost?

2. How easy is it to upgrade th Nehalem chips yourself? Especially with the new hardware architecture. Could I grab some 2.66 X 2 and slap them in there for a cheaper upgrade than the Apple upgrade? Pro's and Con's? (I've read about the 5500 i7 being the one they use because it allows for 2 processors I believe.)

Thanks in advance for all of your help.
Click to expand...

"Turbo" is pretty much clever semantics. For many years, chips have operated in power-save modes where they reduce clock speed when the loading is light. (Speedstep, etc.)

This is sort of the reverse. The processor normally runs at a given clock speed, but under certain conditions (other processors not doing anything), the clock speed can be raised.

They don't just run at the higher clock speed all the time because doing so would require higher power (and possibly would heat the chip up too much, too).
 
Hehehe, this kinda makes me wonder how much of this is only semantics? Right? I mean if we call the reduced speed of the previous chips "normal" and the operating speed "turbo" then it's almost like the same thing renamed. :D

:D
 
According to the aforementioned AnandTech review, these are the max turbo boost speeds... has anyone confirmed whether this feature is actually enabled and working on their Mac Pro?

According to Intel's white paper it may be somewhat tricky... someone may need to develop a utility to measure it... Any software developers in the house?

Processor Speed and Cache Comparison

Xeon model Speed (GHz) - Max. Turbo - Max. Turbo 4 cores busy

X5570 2.93 - 3.33GHz - 3.2GHz

X5550 2.66 - 3.066GHz - 2.93GHz

E5520 2.26 - 2.4GHz - 2.33GHz
 
Well my W3520 2.66 under single core load only goes up to 2.79Ghz :confused:

That sucks hardcore, why can the desktop i7s go higher!? :mad:
 
Concorde Rules said:
Well my W3520 2.66 under single core load only goes up to 2.79Ghz :confused:

That sucks hardcore, why can the desktop i7s go higher!? :mad:
Click to expand...

I wondered how the 3500 series at the same clock speeds might compare to the 5500 series.

With the 2.66GHz X5550 anandtech are quoting 3.066GHZ (1 core busy) or 2.93GHZ (4 cores busy).

The 2.93GHz X5570 we all know Apple quote 3.33GHz and anandtech say 3.2GHz with 4 cores busy.

Anyone find any data for the W3540 2.93GHz Quad?
 
CPU-Z in Windows.

I downloaded prime 95, set it to one thread, locked it to core 0 and only went up one multiplier :(
 
I still remember those 1995 beige boxes with the infamous turbo button on the front of the tower... :D

2446374749f5044a2333.jpg


Ah yes, the all important turbo button, savior to games that needed to run slower.
 
Ok more testing:

Under 100% 8 thread load it goes to 2.79Ghz.

I can't for the life of me get it any higher in single core load :confused:
 
Pika said:
I still remember those 1995 beige boxes with the infamous turbo button on the front of the tower... :D

Ah yes, the all important turbo button, savior to games that needed to run slower.
Click to expand...

haha :) that were awsome.
 
Pika said:
I still remember those 1995 beige boxes with the infamous turbo button on the front of the tower... :D

Ah yes, the all important turbo button, savior to games that needed to run slower.
Click to expand...

heh, heh. I had one of those. An AST box.
 
cmaier said:
"Turbo" is pretty much clever semantics. For many years, chips have operated in power-save modes where they reduce clock speed when the loading is light. (Speedstep, etc.)

This is sort of the reverse. The processor normally runs at a given clock speed, but under certain conditions (other processors not doing anything), the clock speed can be raised.

They don't just run at the higher clock speed all the time because doing so would require higher power (and possibly would heat the chip up too much, too).
Click to expand...

Simplistic analysis, but more or less correct.
 
Pika said:
I still remember those 1995 beige boxes with the infamous turbo button on the front of the tower... :D

2446374749f5044a2333.jpg


Ah yes, the all important turbo button, savior to games that needed to run slower.
Click to expand...

Lol yeah... but don't you mean more like 1990? Pretty sure they were 486-based.
 
cmaier said:
I'd be happy to go into the complicated analysis, but I think I'd lose most readers a few chapters after P=Vf^2.
Click to expand...

Right before highschool I needed one and my Great Aunt, who should be a Saint, got it for me and a new car. Iroc Z by chevy I believe. 586 or something. Dot matrix color printer. Turbo. 512 ram?
50mB harddrive. $3000. Top of the line. Geesh.
 
Macingmusic said:
Right before highschool I needed one and my Great Aunt, who should be a Saint, got it for me and a new car. Iroc Z by chevy I believe. 586 or something. Dot matrix color printer. Turbo. 512 ram?
50mB harddrive. $3000. Top of the line. Geesh.
Click to expand...

Was that before or after this thread was closed? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back