Posted on Thursday, April 30 2009 @ 1:02 CEST by Thomas De Maesschalck
FUD Zilla
claims bad performance was one of the reasons why Intel decided to ditch its Havendale processor in favor of the Clarkdale. The site heard there were some serious problems with the memory controller of Havendale which resulted in poor performance:
As we told you on Friday last week, Havendale and Clarkdale feature an upgraded G45-chipset type memory controller, unlike Lynnfield which has a cut-down Nehalem memory controller. However, it seems like Intel bodged something on Havendale, as the memory controller is having some serious performance issues. The Everest memory read tests on the G45 chipset is about 8,000 while the Havendale sample our source has been testing manages an underwhelming 2,600.
If this wasn't bad enough, the CPU itself doesn't seem to perform as well, as our source also has access to a Lynnfield CPU which had two cores disabled and its clock speed reduced to match that of the Havendale CPU for some comparative testing. The Lynnfield CPU managed to run SuperPI 32M in about 16 minutes, while the Havendale CPU took 5 minutes longer at about 21 minutes.
