1
Quote
We saw some Intel quad-core chippery purring away at at 3GHz, although the fastest we know of for sale works at 2.66 GHz. For roughly $1000 you will get a single quad-core Xeon and if you double the money you will get twice as much. We saw the machine based on two 5300 series quad-core Xeons and Intel’s motherboard and 8500 chipset. We saw it up and running and we even had a chance to play with a machine for a while.
It handles nicely and has the best Cinebench 9.5 score we even seen, it does the job with eight cores in just 11 seconds. It is significantly faster than a single Kentsfield quad-core or AMDs 4x4.
3Dmark06 CPU score is at 6089, again the fastest we've seen. It was all running with 2GB of memory on a Windows XP. We also saw Half life 2 particle benchmark and this thing was also super-fast compared to anything we’ve seen so far.
Back to availability if you use 2.66 GHz quad-core Xeons you can buy and put it all together today. We have some cool pictures to prove the claims. Intel insists that the FSB is never a bottleneck and from the test we've seen it sounds about right.
It handles nicely and has the best Cinebench 9.5 score we even seen, it does the job with eight cores in just 11 seconds. It is significantly faster than a single Kentsfield quad-core or AMDs 4x4.
3Dmark06 CPU score is at 6089, again the fastest we've seen. It was all running with 2GB of memory on a Windows XP. We also saw Half life 2 particle benchmark and this thing was also super-fast compared to anything we’ve seen so far.
Back to availability if you use 2.66 GHz quad-core Xeons you can buy and put it all together today. We have some cool pictures to prove the claims. Intel insists that the FSB is never a bottleneck and from the test we've seen it sounds about right.
http://www.theinquir...x?article=36902
If i had money ....
