Intel Yonah Performance Preview

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
look at this performance preview at anandtech: those yonahs are "amazing"!



Intel Yonah Performance Preview - Part I: The Exclusive First Look at Yonah



http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2627
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ice_climber

    look at this performance preview at anandtech: those yonahs are "amazing"!



    Intel Yonah Performance Preview - Part I: The Exclusive First Look at Yonah



    http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2627




    I was pretty disappointed actually. The 2 bottom model Athlon 64 X2s beat it in almost every test. I was considering getting a Yonah based Powerbook (if one comes out), but now I think I'll wait for Merom.
  • Reply 2 of 54
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    You're forgetting that this is a notebook chip versus desktop chips, and the notebook chip is a good GHz below the desktop chips.
  • Reply 3 of 54
    Same speeds actually. The X2 3800+ runs at 2GHz. Anyway, clock speed is irrelevant these days with so many architectures.



    Since it's a notebook chip I also expected better power consumption. For a 65nm notebook chip, it really should have been better than a 17W difference at idle and a 36W difference at full load. Remember the X2s are 90nm still.
  • Reply 4 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dojobi

    Same speeds actually. The X2 3800+ runs at 2GHz. Anyway, clock speed is irrelevant these days with so many architectures.



    Since it's a notebook chip I also expected better power consumption. For a 65nm notebook chip, it really should have been better than a 17W difference at idle and a 36W difference at full load. Remember the X2s are 90nm still.




    They were testing total system power in a desktop motherboard...



    They tested the T version (which as a max. TDP of 31 W), not the E version. Persumably, the E version of Yonah will clock close to 2.5 GHz with a power consumption of about 50-60 W.
  • Reply 5 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dojobi

    I was pretty disappointed actually. The 2 bottom model Athlon 64 X2s beat it in almost every test. I was considering getting a Yonah based Powerbook (if one comes out), but now I think I'll wait for Merom.



    It's running neck and neck with the leading desktop processor of the same speed. Just look how much faster it was than the netburst based Pentium-D.
  • Reply 6 of 54
    drboardrboar Posts: 477member
    Even the slowest one will kill the G4 still in use in the mini and portable. Even the G5 will get some competition
  • Reply 7 of 54
    I have a hard time complaining. If someone told me I could buy a Powerbook that was almost as fast as a AMD dual core system I'd jump at it.



    Well it looks like we'll have this. And if Merom is on time with additional "go fast goodies" then Intel is right where it needs to be.



    My guess is that Merom will have additional features to lessen the L2 cache latency as well as adding another execution unit and other stuff.



    Looks good for the Powermacintel's due out late 2006-early 2007.
  • Reply 8 of 54
    Imagine what Conroe is going to be like if Yonah is this fast? I also find it interesting that intel is making specific desktop chipsets for Yonah.
  • Reply 9 of 54
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    The level of performance is rather impressive, but the watt consumption is huge for a laptop chip.

    Now this one is a dual, and the G5 mobile isn't a dual.



    Personally I will only consider a Merom in a laptop. The merom will have a better watt consumption in a laptop, providing a better battery life.



    PS : I forgot to say what was obvious : the Yonah is way more performant than the G4. Not a surprise here, if we consider how old is this chip.

    Kill the G4 !
  • Reply 10 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    The level of performance is rather impressive, but the watt consumption is huge for a laptop chip.

    Now this one is a dual, and the G5 mobile isn't a dual.





    Well, they give no data on the watt consumption of the chip. They put the chip into a desktop motherboard and give the consumption of the entire system.



    I'll take this statement as face value since none of us have actually touched a Yonah:



    Quote:

    Although we didn't consider it as such here today , Yonah will be quite impressive on notebooks. The thought of having such a cool running dual core processor in a notebook is honestly amazing, and the performance difference (especially for multitaskers) over what we have today will be significant.



  • Reply 11 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Existence

    They were testing total system power in a desktop motherboard...



    They tested the T version (which as a max. TDP of 31 W), not the E version. Persumably, the E version of Yonah will clock close to 2.5 GHz with a power consumption of about 50-60 W.




    Yeah, I realise this. I wasn't trying to say that the chips were using 100W+ I don't really mind seeing total system consumption anyway. It gives a better comparison with the AMD chips that way since they have their memory controller on the chip, and the intel's don't. This way you get the power consumption figures when everything is in use.



    It would be nice to see one at 2.5GHz btw
  • Reply 12 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BenRoethig

    It's running neck and neck with the leading desktop processor of the same speed. Just look how much faster it was than the netburst based Pentium-D.



    Well the X2 3800+ and 4200+ are only running at 2GHz and 2.2GHz. The top X2 runs at 2.4GHz and has twice the cache.



    The Netburst chips have been the slowest for quite some time now, so it's really only fair to compare it to the AMD chips.



    Maybe I am being a bit hard on it, but it's just that I expected much bigger gains. As everyone has said, it's a hell of a lot better than the G4, so I shouldn't complain
  • Reply 13 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    The level of performance is rather impressive, but the watt consumption is huge for a laptop chip.



    How does the Yonah compare to the current G4's, watt wise?
  • Reply 14 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Existence

    They were testing total system power in a desktop motherboard...



    They tested the T version (which as a max. TDP of 31 W), not the E version. Persumably, the E version of Yonah will clock close to 2.5 GHz with a power consumption of about 50-60 W.




    Uh, and they want to put this in a laptop? That's shockingly bad power consumption for a laptop CPU. The MPC7448 (G4) comes in at around 10W at 1.4GHz and the 7447A was between 21W and 30W max at 1.4GHz. The Athlon 64 X2 which is not even a laptop chip will probably come close to Yonah's when fabbed at 65nm. Clearly the extra power consumption here is the second core but I'm sure IBM could have got a G5 to perform at least as poorly as this. I'm not even remotely impressed at this processor based on what we're seeing here.
  • Reply 15 of 54
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    Matt the numbers given were for total system power. Thus it includedes the chipset and likely hard drives and any other heat causing equipment.



    Yonah is looking damn good for power consumption with the system heat barely rising under full load.
  • Reply 16 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Matt the numbers given were for total system power. Thus it includedes the chipset and likely hard drives and any other heat causing equipment.



    Yonah is looking damn good for power consumption with the system heat barely rising under full load.




    The numbers Anandtech gave for total system power consumption of the Yonah desktop system were 92W at idle and 108W under load. Due to this, I assume the much lower wattage numbers Existence listed are for the CPU by itself under load. 30-60 Watts is not low power consumption for a laptop CPU or even for a complete laptop system for that matter. My iBook power adaptor is only rated at 65W, from memory, and it still manages to charge the battery while I'm using it.
  • Reply 17 of 54
    It is so sad what a good portion of Mac community has become - mindless Intel fanboys. Just with one simple keynote speech by Jobs.



    This chip is getting laughed at across the x86 world...
  • Reply 18 of 54
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Roadmap

    It is so sad what a good portion of Mac community has become - mindless Intel fanboys. Just with one simple keynote speech by Jobs.



    This chip is getting laughed at across the x86 world...




    And then you woke up?
  • Reply 19 of 54
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Roadmap

    It is so sad what a good portion of Mac community has become - mindless Intel fanboys. Just with one simple keynote speech by Jobs.



    This chip is getting laughed at across the x86 world...






    LOL a whopping 5 posts. Yeah.......you're credible.
  • Reply 20 of 54
    thttht Posts: 3,929member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MattB

    The numbers Anandtech gave for total system power consumption of the Yonah desktop system were 92W at idle and 108W under load. Due to this, I assume the much lower wattage numbers Existence listed are for the CPU by itself under load.



    From the Yonah hot and hungry thread:



    "There are various levels of power consumption for Yonah and various levels of Yonah parts.



    It will have an "E" part for presumably "Extreme" TDP versions of Yonah which will have >= 40 Watt TDP and >2.2 GHz. These are likely Sossamans (will have dual-CPU support (quad-core) in companion northbridge) and Yonah CPUs for 2" thick gaming laptops. A 2.4 GHz Yonah will generally be equivalent to a 2.4 GHz Athlon X2 or 2.4 GHz 970mp in performance. It will be faster in some things, but slower in others.



    The "T" part is the normal voltage, highest volume Yonah part with 29 to 49 Watts TDP and up to 2.16 GHz. Apple can skim the 2 GHz 31 Watt TDP "T" parts if they are good at negotiating.



    The "L" part is the official low voltage, somewhat lower volume Yonah part with 15 to 24 Watts TDP and up to 1.66 GHz.



    The "U" part is the official ultra low voltage, lowest volume Yonah part with <14 Watts TDP and up to 1.3 GHz, but probably somewhere around 1.1 GHz.



    There will likely be single core variants of all of these parts.




    Quote:

    30-60 Watts is not low power consumption for a laptop CPU or even for a complete laptop system for that matter. My iBook power adaptor is only rated at 65W, from memory, and it still manages to charge the battery while I'm using it.



    The 30 to 60 Watt Yonahs will be Sossamans blade, 1U servers and for gaming, desktop replacement laptops. They'll likely be in the 2.2 to 2.4 GHz range.



    The Athlon X2 or Turion can have similar power consumption as Yonah when fabbed on like processes. Yes very true. But Intel is 6 to 8 months ahead of AMD in getting to 65 nm, no?
Sign In or Register to comment.