At CES, we stopped by the Nvidia booth, and got a chance at an exclusive meeting and hands on look at some of the new dual-core phones, the Motorola Atrix and the LG Optimus 2X. We wanted to find a way to show you all how amazingly the Motorola Atrix runs with it’s Tegra 2 CPU, and we thought, “how about a game?” So, we shot a quick demo video of Need for Speed Shift running in real-time. No flaming on my playing, folks… its just to show off gameplay.

NFS: Shift was amazing on the Atrix. Not only was it super responsive to the accelerometer, but the video rendering was incredible. It was quite an experience to check this out, so be sure to hit the break and check it out, and let us know your thoughts in the comments below. Also, be sure to check out our full hands on of the Atrix here.

Read More…

Demo: Need For Speed Shift on the Motorola Atrix with Nvidia Tegra 2 dual core CPU

View full post on Android News, Rumours, and Updates

Note: This Intel Core i5-2500K review also reviews the Sandy Bridge architecture as a whole, as well as the high-end Intel Core i7-2600K processor.

Ready or not, here they come. Intel is rolling out a thoroughly overhauled range of PC processors based on its new Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. Our first taste of the new chips comes in the form of the Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K desktop CPUs.

Thanks to the baffling array of chips, sockets and brands, we’ve barely got to grips with Intel’s existing CPU range. Certainly Intel’s main rival, AMD, has no answer in outright performance terms to the chips Intel already offers, but the relentless march of technology must go on.

So, ignore the familiar Core i5 and Core i7 branding. These are all new processors and they’re ready to roll.

As it happens, Intel could actually do with more powerful and, crucially, more power efficient processors for laptop PCs. Deep down, that’s what Sandy Bridge is really about. However, as we’ll learn, Sandy Bridge has a lot to offer for the desktop, too, including exciting new features such as a hardware video transcoding engine and much-improved integrated graphics.

At launch, it’s not quite a full range of processors. In total, Intel is rolling out 14 new desktop CPUs based on Sandy Bridge under the Core i3, Core i5 and Core i7 brands. Pricing extends from around £75 to £250.

The very top and bottom of Intel’s desktop range will remain unchanged. The six-core Gulftown derivative of the Core i7 and the entry-level Pentium chips live on for now. Everything else is effectively for the chop.

With new chips inevitably come new chipsets, but what you might not expect is the new processor socket. Known as LGA1155, it’s almost identical to the existing LGA1156. It loses just one pin. Problem is, the two sockets are entirely incompatible.

You cannot drop Sandy Bridge processors into any existing motherboard. Nor can you use any previous Intel processors with Sandy Bridge-supporting motherboards.

Although Intel will absolutely deny it, we believe this change in sockets is unlikely to have been a technical necessity.

Instead, at best, we suspect it represents a disregard for existing customers, and at worst a tactic designed to force whole a platform upgrade rather than drop-in CPU changes.

Unfortunately, the new socket isn’t the only dubious new feature that debuts with Sandy Bridge. Intel has also made a fundamental change to the chip’s architecture that has killed traditional processor overclocking using the CPU bus stone dead. We’ll come to the details later, but the bottom line is that Intel has brought overclocking under strict control.

It’s not completely gone, but it’s only available where and when Intel allows it.

However, don’t let those negatives convince you the new Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K chips are stinkers. Compared to their closest equivalents from Intel’s existing range – the Intel Core i5-760 and Intel Core i7-870 – the new chips are arguably in a different league.

In fact, even the mighty six-core Core i7 980X isn’t safe from Intel’s remarkable new Sandy Bridge architecture. It’s that good.

In terms of basic layout, the Sandy Bridge architecture that underpins the new Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K desktop processors is not a revolutionary redesign. For launch, Intel has cooked up dual- and quad-core derivatives.

All Sandy Bridge processors are based on Intel’s latest 32nm production process. Thus, in Intel’s “Tick-Tock” jargon, we’re talking Tock. In other words, Sandy Bridge is a new architecture on an existing silicon node.

Familiar features such as HyperThreading and Turbo Boost reappear with a bit of spit and polish. Likewise, most of the so-called uncore features look like a carry over. The memory controller remains dual channel with support for DDR3 DIMMs up to 1,333MHz.

As before, the on-die PCI Express discrete graphics interface delivers a total of 16 lanes. Multi-GPU platforms from AMD and Nvidia are supported, but again only in dual-card configuration with eight lanes per card.

Dig deeper, however, and you’ll dredge up some seriously significant changes. For our money, one of the most important is the newly integrated clock generator. In operating frequency terms, this change effectively binds the entire platform to the baseclock.

Bump up the baseclock and all core and uncore elements of the chip, including everything from the PCI Express bus to the memory controller and the cores themselves, gain frequency in proportion.

The upshot is that overclocking via the baseclock is no longer a goer. At best you’ll manage an overclock in the low single digits above the standard 100MHz frequency. Instead, significant frequency adjustments with Sandy Bridge is done through the CPU multiplier.

If you recall, Intel recently introduced a number of K series chips with unlocked multipliers. Until now, the special Ks didn’t make much sense, such was the ease and effectiveness of baseclock tweaks.

However, it now seems clear Intel was preparing the ground for the baseclock-locked Sandy Bridge architecture.

For Sandy Bridge, the overclocking drill goes like this. K series chips are fully unlocked up to a theoretical 5.7GHz while all other Sandy Bridgers are unlocked to the tune of four speed bins. Given the baseclock of 100MHz, that means a maximum overclock of 400MHz for all non-K models.

That’s a major reduction compared to the typical 1GHz overclock possible via the bus or baseclock with most existing Intel processors.

Overclocking aside, the other big change with Sandy Bridge involves video processing. For starters, Intel has given its HD Graphics a major kick up the backside. The result, Intel claims, is a more than doubling in performance compared the previous generation of Intel integrated graphics.

Architecturally, the GPU has been has brought completely on-die.

Remember, previous Intel processors with integrated graphics actually contained two separate chips in the CPU package, one chip with cores and cache, the other with graphics and uncore features such as the memory controller.

At launch, all Sandy Bridge processors have on-die graphics. In terms of 3D performance, the detail spec changes include an upgrade from DX10 to DX10.1. However, much of the performance increase comes from the boost in clockspeed from a maximum of 900MHz to a maximum of 1,350MHz, model dependent.

Things get a little more complicated if you further examine the different models. Among desktop variants, only the two K series chips tested here get the full-fat version of the new graphics core with 12 execution units, known as Intel HD Graphics 3000. All other models make do with the 6-unit Intel HD Graphics 2000.

Odd as it may seem, we believe the other chips in the range do actually contain the full 12 execution units. Most likely for marketing reasons, Intel has decided to disable them on some models.

The other big news involving the graphics core is a new video transcoding engine known as Quick Sync Video. It’s a dedicated hardware core for accelerating 2D video encoding and it’s in every single Sandy Bridge chip. Intel says it delivers at least twice the performance compared with previous architectures encoding video in software, but a little Intel birdie tells us you can often expect much more than that.

Like pretty much every new Intel architecture Sandy Bridge also brings revised vector instructions. This time round, the new instructions are known as AVX and essentially compliment the existing SSE vector instructions.

Oh and, if you care, the new graphics core supports HDMI 1.4 and, in turn, stereoscopic 3D video including Blu-ray 3D.

Finally, regarding the chips themselves, a quick lesson in Intel’s new nomenclature is essential.

All Sandy Bridge processors get some kind of 2000 suffix. Core i3-2100 chips are dual-core processors with HyperThreading and are therefore quad-thread. The Core i5-2300, 2400 and 2500 series are a mix of dual-core with HyperThreading and quad-core without HyperThreading.

Meanwhile, the Core i7-2600 series is quad-core with HyperThreading. If that wasn’t complicated enough, you have the aforementioned K series chips with fully unlocked multipliers. Then there are T and S series models with lower operating voltages and power ratings.

Overall, it’s pretty baffling stuff.

As for motherboards, all Sandy Bridge processors drop into the new LGA1155 socket. It’s not compatible with any previous Intel socket. In total, five new chipsets arrive with Sandy Bridge, but only the P67 and H67 are really relevant to consumers.

There’s not a great deal to choose between them, but the key differences include support for the integrated graphics core and video out with the H67, while the P67 exclusively gets the latest version of Intel’s Performance Tuning application and a few more options in terms of multiplier adjustment.

Another motherboard-related tweak is the introduction of the EFI firmware with all Sandy Bridge boards. Developed by Intel and already used by Apple in all its Mac computers, EFI replaces the traditional BIOS firmware with a much more powerful platform that supports high resolution graphical user interfaces, faster boot times, larger boot disks (over 2TB) and more.

With every new architecture comes a certain amount of intrigue. Intel’s Sandy Bridge brings much higher clocks, but it’s also interesting to note how performance compares on a clock-for-clock basis.

To find out, we compared the new Core i7-2600K running at 2.9GHz with Turbo disabled to the old Core i7-870, again at 2.9GHz with Turbo disabled. Also worth noting is the performance of the new video transcoding core and the integrated 3D graphics. In their own way, both are frankly staggering.

Stock clocked benchmarks

Cinebench R10 multi-thread

Intel Core i5-2500K: 39s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 35s
Intel Core i7-870: 46s
Intel Core i5-750: 59s
Intel Core i7-980X: 32s

Cinebench R10 single-thread

Intel Core i5-2500K: 2m 22s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 2m 19s
Intel Core i7-870: 2m 58s
Intel Core i5-750: 3m 17s
Intel Core i7-980X: 3m 00s

x264 HD video encode

Intel Core i5-2500K: 27fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 35fps
Intel Core i7-870: 28fps
Intel Core i5-750: 19fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 43fps

World in Conflict

Intel Core i5-2500K: 91fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 96fps
Intel Core i7-870: 78fps
Intel Core i5-750: 75fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 90fps

Memory Bandwith

Intel Core i5-2500K: 18.6GB/s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 18.7GB/s
Intel Core i7-870: 17.3GB/s
Intel Core i5-750: 16.9GB/s
Intel Core i7-980X: 17.8GB/s

Idle power consumption

Intel Core i5-2500K: 125W
Intel Core i7-2600K: 130W
Intel Core i7-870: 115W
Intel Core i5-750: 110W
Intel Core i7-980X: 145W

Peak power consumption

Intel Core i5-2500K: 190W
Intel Core i7-2600K: 215W
Intel Core i7-870: 210W
Intel Core i5-750: 180W
Intel Core i7-980X: 245W

Overclocking

Maximum overclock

Intel Core i5-2500K: 4.4GHz
Intel Core i7-2600K: 4.6GHz
Intel Core i7-870: 3.9GHz
Intel Core i5-750: 4.1GHz
Intel Core i7-980X: 4.2GHz

Cinebench R10 multi-thread

Intel Core i5-2500K: 34s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 29s
Intel Core i7-870: 30s
Intel Core i5-750: 43s
Intel Core i7-980X: 26s

x264 HD video encode

Intel Core i5-2500K: 32fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 41fps
Intel Core i7-870: 33fps
Intel Core i5-750: 27fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 51fps

World in Conflict

Intel Core i5-2500K: 98fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 102fps
Intel Core i7-870: 90fps
Intel Core i5-750: 89fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 94fps

Clock-for-clock comparison (Turbo disabled)

Cinebench R10 multi-thread

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 46s
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 51s

Cinebench R10 single-thread

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 3m 5s
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 3m 28s

x264 HD video encode

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 27fps
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 25fps

World in Conflict

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 88fps
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 77fps

Integrated graphics

Call of Duty 4 @ 1,280 x 800

Intel Core i7-2600K – HD Graphics 3000: 32fps
Intel Core i5-655K – HD Graphics: 14fps

World in Conflict @ 800 x 600

Intel Core i7-2600K – HD Graphics 3000: 22fps
Intel Core i5-655K – HD Graphics: 8fps

Quick Sync Video transcode engine

720p H.264 encode in software

Intel Core i7-2600K: 45s

720p H.264 encodewith Quick Sync Video

Intel Core i7-2600K: 12s

First a quick précis of our review chips. The Intel Core i5-2500K is a quad-core, quad-thread chip with 6MB of L3 cache memory and clocks in at 3.3GHz standard and 3.7GHz maximum Turbo frequency. It’s yours for approximately £160 unboxed and effectively replaces both the old dual-core Core i5-655K and quad-core Core i5-760.

A partially locked Core i5-2500 is also available at the same clockspeeds for about £10 less.

The £225 Core i7 -2600K, meanwhile, sports four cores, eight threads, 8MB of cache as standard and Turbo frequencies of 3.4GHz and 3.8GHz respectively. It slots in approximately where you would previously have found the likes of the Core i7-870 and Core i7-875K processors in the price list. Again, there’s also a marginally cheaper Core i7-2600 alternative that lacks the fully unlocked multiplier.

With all that logged away, it’s time for some performance analysis. In a word, these chips are stunning.

At stock clocks, the new Core i5-2500K comprehensively blows away an old Core i7-870. Put another way, the new mid-range chip hammers the old high-end offering. It’s literally faster in every benchmark including video encoding, gaming and professional rendering and sometimes by a margin of over 10 per cent. As for the comparison to the old Core i5-760, it’s brutal. The new chip is as much as 30 to 40 per cent quicker.

Unsurprisingly, then, the new Core i7-2600K absolutely hoses its progenitor, the Core i7-870. We’re talking 25 to 30 per cent more performance absolutely, positively everywhere.

If that wasn’t astonishing enough, the i7-2600K actually gives Intel’s mighty Core i7-980X six-core flagship processor a real scare. The 980X is, for instance, only about 10 per cent quicker in the Cinebench rendering test and 20 per cent faster in HD video encoding. But it’s slower for gaming.

Remember, the i7-980X is a £750 processor.

If you’re wondering where the performance gains come from, much is down to increased clockspeeds, but the new processors would still be 10 per cent quicker even running at the same frequencies. Somehow, Intel has made the fastest CPU architecture on the planet significantly faster.

As for overclocking, the news only gets better. Our i5-2500K hits the wall at 4.4GHz, while the i7-2600K motors on to 4.6GHz. That’s courtesy of an air cooler. It’s silly numbers, frankly.

As if that wasn’t enough, the Quick Sync Video hardware transcoding engine adds yet another dimension. Using a special build of Cyberlink MediaShow Expresso, it’s possible to compare video encoding with and without the transcoder enabled. Our test video is crunched in 45 seconds in software mode. Flick the switch on the transcoder and it drops to just 12 seconds. Bonkers.

Finally, there’s the performance of the new Intel HD Graphics 3000. Here again, it’s a story of massively improved grunt. Put simply, it’s over twice as fast as the previous Intel HD graphics and massively quicker than any other integrated solution. It’s genuinely up to the task of playing older games such as Call of Duty 4 at decent detail settings.

Newer titles, however, require lower resolutions and defenestrated eye candy.

We’ll make no bones about it. Intel’s latest processors present us with a major headache. On the one hand, there’s a hell of a lot we don’t like about the Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K. All of which has to do with what we believe are probably silly marketing decisions, not engineering issues.

We don’t like the fact that Intel has locked down proper overclocking to certain models. We hate that Intel has limited the faster HD Graphics 3000 integrated 3D core to these two K series processors. We’re thoroughly cheesed off that the new chips require a new socket, chipsets and motherboard.

And we’re borderline homicidal with rage regarding Intel’s ludicrous branding scheme.

But here’s the thing. In simple CPU performance terms, the Intel Core i5-2500K and Core i7-2600K are staggering. They overclock like the clappers. The integrated graphics is way better than anything before and the transcode engine threatens to annihilate the very idea of running some software on discrete graphics chips before it’s even taken hold.

They’re so good, in fact, they make nearly all of Intel’s supposedly high-end chips for the LGA1366 socket instantly redundant. Bloomfield-based quad-core Core i7 processors are toast. Even six-core Gulftown Core i7s look marginal.

Put simply, these new chips bring massive performance to a lower price point than ever before. How can you argue with that?

Related Links

• Read more processor reviews
• TechRadar’s Reviews Guarantee

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Note: This Intel Core i7-2600K review also reviews the Sandy Bridge architecture as a whole, as well as the mid-range Intel Core i5-2500K processor.

Ready or not, here they come. Intel is rolling out a thoroughly overhauled range of PC processors based on its new Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. Our first taste of the new chips comes in the form of the Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K desktop CPUs.

Thanks to the baffling array of chips, sockets and brands, we’ve barely got to grips with Intel’s existing CPU range. Certainly Intel’s main rival, AMD, has no answer in outright performance terms to the chips Intel already offers, but the relentless march of technology must go on.

So, ignore the familiar Core i5 and Core i7 branding. These are all new processors and they’re ready to roll.

As it happens, Intel could actually do with more powerful and, crucially, more power efficient processors for laptop PCs. Deep down, that’s what Sandy Bridge is really about. However, as we’ll learn, Sandy Bridge has a lot to offer for the desktop, too, including exciting new features such as a hardware video transcoding engine and much-improved integrated graphics.

At launch, it’s not quite a full range of processors. In total, Intel is rolling out 14 new desktop CPUs based on Sandy Bridge under the Core i3, Core i5 and Core i7 brands. Pricing extends from around £75 to £250.

The very top and bottom of Intel’s desktop range will remain unchanged. The six-core Gulftown derivative of the Core i7 and the entry-level Pentium chips live on for now. Everything else is effectively for the chop.

With new chips inevitably come new chipsets, but what you might not expect is the new processor socket. Known as LGA1155, it’s almost identical to the existing LGA1156. It loses just one pin. Problem is, the two sockets are entirely incompatible.

You cannot drop Sandy Bridge processors into any existing motherboard. Nor can you use any previous Intel processors with Sandy Bridge-supporting motherboards.

Although Intel will absolutely deny it, we believe this change in sockets is unlikely to have been a technical necessity.

Instead, at best, we suspect it represents a disregard for existing customers, and at worst a tactic designed to force whole a platform upgrade rather than drop-in CPU changes.

Unfortunately, the new socket isn’t the only dubious new feature that debuts with Sandy Bridge. Intel has also made a fundamental change to the chip’s architecture that has killed traditional processor overclocking using the CPU bus stone dead. We’ll come to the details later, but the bottom line is that Intel has brought overclocking under strict control.

It’s not completely gone, but it’s only available where and when Intel allows it.

However, don’t let those negatives convince you the new Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K chips are stinkers. Compared to their closest equivalents from Intel’s existing range – the Intel Core i5-760 and Intel Core i7-870 – the new chips are arguably in a different league.

In fact, even the mighty six-core Core i7 980X isn’t safe from Intel’s remarkable new Sandy Bridge architecture. It’s that good.

In terms of basic layout, the Sandy Bridge architecture that underpins the new Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K desktop processors is not a revolutionary redesign. For launch, Intel has cooked up dual- and quad-core derivatives.

All Sandy Bridge processors are based on Intel’s latest 32nm production process. Thus, in Intel’s “Tick-Tock” jargon, we’re talking Tock. In other words, Sandy Bridge is a new architecture on an existing silicon node.

Familiar features such as HyperThreading and Turbo Boost reappear with a bit of spit and polish. Likewise, most of the so-called uncore features look like a carry over. The memory controller remains dual channel with support for DDR3 DIMMs up to 1,333MHz.

As before, the on-die PCI Express discrete graphics interface delivers a total of 16 lanes. Multi-GPU platforms from AMD and Nvidia are supported, but again only in dual-card configuration with eight lanes per card.

Dig deeper, however, and you’ll dredge up some seriously significant changes. For our money, one of the most important is the newly integrated clock generator. In operating frequency terms, this change effectively binds the entire platform to the baseclock.

Bump up the baseclock and all core and uncore elements of the chip, including everything from the PCI Express bus to the memory controller and the cores themselves, gain frequency in proportion.

The upshot is that overclocking via the baseclock is no longer a goer. At best you’ll manage an overclock in the low single digits above the standard 100MHz frequency. Instead, significant frequency adjustments with Sandy Bridge is done through the CPU multiplier.

If you recall, Intel recently introduced a number of K series chips with unlocked multipliers. Until now, the special Ks didn’t make much sense, such was the ease and effectiveness of baseclock tweaks.

However, it now seems clear Intel was preparing the ground for the baseclock-locked Sandy Bridge architecture.

For Sandy Bridge, the overclocking drill goes like this. K series chips are fully unlocked up to a theoretical 5.7GHz while all other Sandy Bridgers are unlocked to the tune of four speed bins. Given the baseclock of 100MHz, that means a maximum overclock of 400MHz for all non-K models.

That’s a major reduction compared to the typical 1GHz overclock possible via the bus or baseclock with most existing Intel processors.

Overclocking aside, the other big change with Sandy Bridge involves video processing. For starters, Intel has given its HD Graphics a major kick up the backside. The result, Intel claims, is a more than doubling in performance compared the previous generation of Intel integrated graphics.

Architecturally, the GPU has been has brought completely on-die.

Remember, previous Intel processors with integrated graphics actually contained two separate chips in the CPU package, one chip with cores and cache, the other with graphics and uncore features such as the memory controller.

At launch, all Sandy Bridge processors have on-die graphics. In terms of 3D performance, the detail spec changes include an upgrade from DX10 to DX10.1. However, much of the performance increase comes from the boost in clockspeed from a maximum of 900MHz to a maximum of 1,350MHz, model dependent.

Things get a little more complicated if you further examine the different models. Among desktop variants, only the two K series chips tested here get the full-fat version of the new graphics core with 12 execution units, known as Intel HD Graphics 3000. All other models make do with the 6-unit Intel HD Graphics 2000.

Odd as it may seem, we believe the other chips in the range do actually contain the full 12 execution units. Most likely for marketing reasons, Intel has decided to disable them on some models.

The other big news involving the graphics core is a new video transcoding engine known as Quick Sync Video. It’s a dedicated hardware core for accelerating 2D video encoding and it’s in every single Sandy Bridge chip. Intel says it delivers at least twice the performance compared with previous architectures encoding video in software, but a little Intel birdie tells us you can often expect much more than that.

Like pretty much every new Intel architecture Sandy Bridge also brings revised vector instructions. This time round, the new instructions are known as AVX and essentially compliment the existing SSE vector instructions.

Oh and, if you care, the new graphics core supports HDMI 1.4 and, in turn, stereoscopic 3D video including Blu-ray 3D.

Finally, regarding the chips themselves, a quick lesson in Intel’s new nomenclature is essential.

All Sandy Bridge processors get some kind of 2000 suffix. Core i3-2100 chips are dual-core processors with HyperThreading and are therefore quad-thread. The Core i5-2300, 2400 and 2500 series are a mix of dual-core with HyperThreading and quad-core without HyperThreading.

Meanwhile, the Core i7-2600 series is quad-core with HyperThreading. If that wasn’t complicated enough, you have the aforementioned K series chips with fully unlocked multipliers. Then there are T and S series models with lower operating voltages and power ratings.

Overall, it’s pretty baffling stuff.

As for motherboards, all Sandy Bridge processors drop into the new LGA1155 socket. It’s not compatible with any previous Intel socket. In total, five new chipsets arrive with Sandy Bridge, but only the P67 and H67 are really relevant to consumers.

There’s not a great deal to choose between them, but the key differences include support for the integrated graphics core and video out with the H67, while the P67 exclusively gets the latest version of Intel’s Performance Tuning application and a few more options in terms of multiplier adjustment.

Another motherboard-related tweak is the introduction of the EFI firmware with all Sandy Bridge boards. Developed by Intel and already used by Apple in all its Mac computers, EFI replaces the traditional BIOS firmware with a much more powerful platform that supports high resolution graphical user interfaces, faster boot times, larger boot disks (over 2TB) and more.

With every new architecture comes a certain amount of intrigue. Intel’s Sandy Bridge brings much higher clocks, but it’s also interesting to note how performance compares on a clock-for-clock basis.

To find out, we compared the new Core i7-2600K running at 2.9GHz with Turbo disabled to the old Core i7-870, again at 2.9GHz with Turbo disabled. Also worth noting is the performance of the new video transcoding core and the integrated 3D graphics. In their own way, both are frankly staggering.

Stock clocked benchmarks

Cinebench R10 multi-thread

Intel Core i5-2500K: 39s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 35s
Intel Core i7-870: 46s
Intel Core i5-750: 59s
Intel Core i7-980X: 32s

Cinebench R10 single-thread

Intel Core i5-2500K: 2m 22s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 2m 19s
Intel Core i7-870: 2m 58s
Intel Core i5-750: 3m 17s
Intel Core i7-980X: 3m 00s

x264 HD video encode

Intel Core i5-2500K: 27fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 35fps
Intel Core i7-870: 28fps
Intel Core i5-750: 19fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 43fps

World in Conflict

Intel Core i5-2500K: 91fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 96fps
Intel Core i7-870: 78fps
Intel Core i5-750: 75fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 90fps

Memory Bandwith

Intel Core i5-2500K: 18.6GB/s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 18.7GB/s
Intel Core i7-870: 17.3GB/s
Intel Core i5-750: 16.9GB/s
Intel Core i7-980X: 17.8GB/s

Idle power consumption

Intel Core i5-2500K: 125W
Intel Core i7-2600K: 130W
Intel Core i7-870: 115W
Intel Core i5-750: 110W
Intel Core i7-980X: 145W

Peak power consumption

Intel Core i5-2500K: 190W
Intel Core i7-2600K: 215W
Intel Core i7-870: 210W
Intel Core i5-750: 180W
Intel Core i7-980X: 245W

Overclocking

Maximum overclock

Intel Core i5-2500K: 4.4GHz
Intel Core i7-2600K: 4.6GHz
Intel Core i7-870: 3.9GHz
Intel Core i5-750: 4.1GHz
Intel Core i7-980X: 4.2GHz

Cinebench R10 multi-thread

Intel Core i5-2500K: 34s
Intel Core i7-2600K: 29s
Intel Core i7-870: 30s
Intel Core i5-750: 43s
Intel Core i7-980X: 26s

x264 HD video encode

Intel Core i5-2500K: 32fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 41fps
Intel Core i7-870: 33fps
Intel Core i5-750: 27fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 51fps

World in Conflict

Intel Core i5-2500K: 98fps
Intel Core i7-2600K: 102fps
Intel Core i7-870: 90fps
Intel Core i5-750: 89fps
Intel Core i7-980X: 94fps

Clock-for-clock comparison (Turbo disabled)

Cinebench R10 multi-thread

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 46s
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 51s

Cinebench R10 single-thread

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 3m 5s
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 3m 28s

x264 HD video encode

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 27fps
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 25fps

World in Conflict

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 2.9GHz: 88fps
Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.9GHz: 77fps

Integrated graphics

Call of Duty 4 @ 1,280 x 800

Intel Core i7-2600K – HD Graphics 3000: 32fps
Intel Core i5-655K – HD Graphics: 14fps

World in Conflict @ 800 x 600

Intel Core i7-2600K – HD Graphics 3000: 22fps
Intel Core i5-655K – HD Graphics: 8fps

Quick Sync Video transcode engine

720p H.264 encode in software

Intel Core i7-2600K: 45s

720p H.264 encodewith Quick Sync Video

Intel Core i7-2600K: 12s

First a quick précis of our review chips. The Intel Core i5-2500K is a quad-core, quad-thread chip with 6MB of L3 cache memory and clocks in at 3.3GHz standard and 3.7GHz maximum Turbo frequency. It’s yours for approximately £160 unboxed and effectively replaces both the old dual-core Core i5-655K and quad-core Core i5-760.

A partially locked Core i5-2500 is also available at the same clockspeeds for about £10 less.

The £225 Core i7 -2600K, meanwhile, sports four cores, eight threads, 8MB of cache as standard and Turbo frequencies of 3.4GHz and 3.8GHz respectively. It slots in approximately where you would previously have found the likes of the Core i7-870 and Core i7-875K processors in the price list. Again, there’s also a marginally cheaper Core i7-2600 alternative that lacks the fully unlocked multiplier.

With all that logged away, it’s time for some performance analysis. In a word, these chips are stunning.

At stock clocks, the new Core i5-2500K comprehensively blows away an old Core i7-870. Put another way, the new mid-range chip hammers the old high-end offering. It’s literally faster in every benchmark including video encoding, gaming and professional rendering and sometimes by a margin of over 10 per cent. As for the comparison to the old Core i5-760, it’s brutal. The new chip is as much as 30 to 40 per cent quicker.

Unsurprisingly, then, the new Core i7-2600K absolutely hoses its progenitor, the Core i7-870. We’re talking 25 to 30 per cent more performance absolutely, positively everywhere.

If that wasn’t astonishing enough, the i7-2600K actually gives Intel’s mighty Core i7-980X six-core flagship processor a real scare. The 980X is, for instance, only about 10 per cent quicker in the Cinebench rendering test and 20 per cent faster in HD video encoding. But it’s slower for gaming.

Remember, the i7-980X is a £750 processor.

If you’re wondering where the performance gains come from, much is down to increased clockspeeds, but the new processors would still be 10 per cent quicker even running at the same frequencies. Somehow, Intel has made the fastest CPU architecture on the planet significantly faster.

As for overclocking, the news only gets better. Our i5-2500K hits the wall at 4.4GHz, while the i7-2600K motors on to 4.6GHz. That’s courtesy of an air cooler. It’s silly numbers, frankly.

As if that wasn’t enough, the Quick Sync Video hardware transcoding engine adds yet another dimension. Using a special build of Cyberlink MediaShow Expresso, it’s possible to compare video encoding with and without the transcoder enabled. Our test video is crunched in 45 seconds in software mode. Flick the switch on the transcoder and it drops to just 12 seconds. Bonkers.

Finally, there’s the performance of the new Intel HD Graphics 3000. Here again, it’s a story of massively improved grunt. Put simply, it’s over twice as fast as the previous Intel HD graphics and massively quicker than any other integrated solution. It’s genuinely up to the task of playing older games such as Call of Duty 4 at decent detail settings.

Newer titles, however, require lower resolutions and defenestrated eye candy.

We’ll make no bones about it. Intel’s latest processors present us with a major headache. On the one hand, there’s a hell of a lot we don’t like about the Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K. All of which has to do with what we believe are probably silly marketing decisions, not engineering issues.

We don’t like the fact that Intel has locked down proper overclocking to certain models. We hate that Intel has limited the faster HD Graphics 3000 integrated 3D core to these two K series processors. We’re thoroughly cheesed off that the new chips require a new socket, chipsets and motherboard.

And we’re borderline homicidal with rage regarding Intel’s ludicrous branding scheme.

But here’s the thing. In simple CPU performance terms, the Intel Core i5-2500K and Core i7-2600K are staggering. They overclock like the clappers. The integrated graphics is way better than anything before and the transcode engine threatens to annihilate the very idea of running some software on discrete graphics chips before it’s even taken hold.

They’re so good, in fact, they make nearly all of Intel’s supposedly high-end chips for the LGA1366 socket instantly redundant. Bloomfield-based quad-core Core i7 processors are toast. Even six-core Gulftown Core i7s look marginal.

Put simply, these new chips bring massive performance to a lower price point than ever before. How can you argue with that?

Related Links

• Read more processor reviews
• TechRadar’s Reviews Guarantee

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Well Christmas has come and gone and the new year is literally just days away. In 2010 the CrackBerry theme roundup brought you over 250 themes, and we intend to keep it up in 2011! We can’t do it without you guys though, so keep sending in tips for themes you would like to see showcased. Developers, keep developing! Hopefully the new year will see some exciting releases from RIM, and with those releases, themes for devices that as of yet have none. I know my fingers are crossed! Have a safe and happy New Year’s everyone!

read more

CrackBerry.com‘s feed sponsored by ShopCrackBerry.com. BlackBerry theme roundup for Dec 28, 2010 – 50 copies of Core by jmerhi up for grabs!

View full post on CrackBerry.com blogs

Imagine my excitement when I opened up my inbox this morning to find a press release from Texas Instruments that TI has officially announced their new TI OMAP4440, the latest in the OMAP 4 family of CPU’s. The new CPU boasts:

• 1.25x increase in graphics performance
• 30 percent decrease in webpage load time
• 2x increase in 1080p video playback performance
• clock speeds as fast as 1.5 GHz per ARM® Cortex™-A9 MPCore™

According to Remi El-Ouazzane, vice president of OMAP platform business unit:

The increased performance given by the OMAP4440 applications processor illustrates TI’s ability to push mobile computing possibilities with the right processor architecture enveloped in the right platform. We seized an opportunity to enhance the platform capabilities driving the OMAP4430 processor’s success today. As OMAP4430 processor-based products hit the market in first half 2011, we’re arming our customers with a huge performance boost via an easy migration to OMAP4440 processor for their next wave of exciting devices. The resulting user experiences will radically impact how consumers continue to integrate mobile technology into their daily lives.

The new OMAP4440 will be sampling in Q1 of 2011, and TI expects mass production to start in the second half of the same year. The new CPU is said to increase capabilities of  mobile video teleconferencing, stereoscopic-3D and gesture recognition. For a full lineup of technical specs, hit the break for the full presser.

What do you think about TI’s new processing power? Be sure to let us know in the comments!

Read More…

TI announces new OMAP4440 mobile processor, speeds of 1.5 GHz per CPU core

View full post on Android News, Rumours, and Updates

The ASUS 1015PN netbook, announced this week, features next-gen Nvidia ION graphics with 1080p playback and Nvidia Optimus graphics-switching technology.

It features a 10.1-inch display (1024×600 resolution), Windows 7 Starter, the new Intel Atom N550 dual-core processor, 1GB of DDR3 RAM, a 250GB 5400RPM hard drive plus 500GB of free ASUS web storage. The built-in Nvidia ION graphics have 512MB of DDR3 dedicated memory. ASUS claims the 1015PN can get up to 9.5 hours of battery life. It weighs in at 2.8 pounds and 1.4 inches thin. The Eee PC 1015PN is $429.99 at Amazon, in red, white, black, and blue.

Asus also combines Intel’s Core i3 processor and NVIDIA Optimus technology in the 13.3” U30Jc Notebook ($849 at Amazon). NVIDIA Optimus technology chooses the best graphics processor for running a given application, automatically switching between the NVIDIA discrete GPU or Intel integrated graphics for optimum speed and battery life.

View full post on dailywireless.org

If you thought you could multi-task on your smartphone now, you ain’t seen nothing yet!  ARM has announced their upcoming Cortex™-A15 MPCore™ Processor.  It’s a low power chip that ranges from single to quad core processors for multiple hardware applications, but we are mostly interested in what we can slap into our next super-powered smartphones.  That being said, for smartphone applications, the Cortex A15 will run anywhere from 1-1.5GHz in single or dual core configurations. ARM is claiming their Cortex-A15 MPCore processor will be capable of delivering speeds up to 5x that of today’s most powerful smartphones.

The speed of these releases are crazy considering we just heard about Samsung using the ARM Cortex-A9 that can do dual-core at 1GHz a few days ago.  It’ll be exciting to see how well these fair in both power and battery life as ARM claims an even better low-power range.  Below is a quick snippet from ARM’s site regarding the Cortex’s usage in a mobile environment.

View full post on Google Android News Android Forums

Speedier performance for more or less the same money is always welcome. That’s exactly what you get from the new Intel Core i5 760. In almost every regard, it’s identical to the existing Core i5 750 processor.

It’s therefore a quad-core chip based on Intel’s 45nm Nehalem processor architecture. What it does offer, however, is a speed bump from 2.66GHz to 2.8GHz. Not exactly a spectacular explosion in performance, we admit. But then Intel is only asking for an extra fiver.

In any case, even after a year on sale, the Core i5 750 is still an excellent all round performer. The slightly quicker Core i5 760 is only going to be better. The only snag is the arrival of AMD’s new Phenom II X6 1055T beast. Six cores for a similar £150 or so price tag is awfully hard to resist.

Fire up any of Intel’s Core i5 processors and you’ll be greeted by four little green graphs in Windows Task Manager. That indicates the presence of four logical processors and therefore support for crunching a quartet of software threads in parallel.

But not all logical processors are equal. Intel’s Core i5 600 series chips are actually dual-core models that support two threads per core thanks to HyperThreading. Core i5 700 series CPUs lack HyperThreading. Instead, you get four bona fide execution cores and one helluva lot more performance. Effective as HyperThreading is, it’s no substitute for a real processor core.

Despite a relatively modest 2.8GHz stock clockspeed, it’s therefore no surprise to find the Intel Core i5 760 flattens the Core i5 661 and Core i5 655K in literally every performance benchmark. You have to wonder why anyone would want to pay more for one of those Core i5 600 series chips. Intel would no doubt justify the price premium by pointing to the Core i5 600′s integrated graphics.

Anyway, a much tougher nut for the Core i5 760 to crack is AMD’s new six-core processor. The Phenom II X6 1055T is actually slightly cheaper despite giving the Core i5 760 a pretty solid schooling in our multi-threading tests. As ever, however, the 760 hits back with awesome gaming performance. It also shows the Phenom chip who’s boss in our file decompression test.

It’s also disappointing to find the new 760 does not appear to offer any additional overclocking headroom. In our testing, the older Core i5 750 actually hits higher frequencies.

We liked:

If you fancy four cores for the price of two, it’s hard to argue against the Core i5 760. It’s cheaper than many of Intel’s latest dual-core processors and hammers them for all round performance. At this price point, it’s also the finest gaming CPU on the market.

We disliked:

Intel has a nasty habit of artificially hobbling some of its mainstream processors. So it is for the Core i5 760. By switching off HyperThreading, Intel has compromised the 760′s performance in highly threaded applications such as video encoding and handed the advantage to AMD’s similarly priced six-core Phenom II X6 1055T. Shame.

Verdict:

Replaces the Core i5 750 as our favourite gaming chip. No HyperThreading is a bit of a bummer.

Follow TechRadar Reviews on Twitter: http://twitter.com/techradarreview

Related Links

• Read more processor reviews
• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Six cores, 12 threads, one billion transistors and a whole lotta processing power. That’s the Intel Core i7 970. It’s a fabulous technological achievement. But can it really be worth nearly £700?

Admittedly, the Core i7 970 is a bit cheaper than Intel’s top six-core chip, the Core i7 980X. But it’s still a tough ask given that AMD will sell you its own six-core Phenom II X6 1055T CPU for around one third the price. What the AMD chip doesn’t give you, however, is the very latest technology. The Core i7 970 sports literally the most advanced PC processor die on the planet.

Part of the 970′s advantage comes down to microprocessor architecture. Known as Nehalem, it’s as good as it currently gets thanks to features such as HyperThreading, a triple-channel memory controller and the super-fast QPI interconnect.

The Core i7 970 is also hewn from Intel’s latest 32nm silicon. That means the chip itself is physically smaller than most current quad-core processors including Intel’s own Core i7 870 and AMD’s Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition. In theory that means it should be cheaper to manufacture. For now, Intel isn’t passing on those cost savings to customers.

There’s no doubting the sheer power of the Intel Core i7 970. Try this for starters. In our HD video encoding benchmark it bangs out nearly 42 frames per second. That absolutely blows away both the quad-core Intel Core i7 875K (27 frames per second) and the six-core AMD Phenom II X6 1090T BE (26 frames per second).

It’s a similar story in the professional 3D rendering test. The 970 is miles ahead. Arguably even more impressive are the game and file decompression results – benchmarks that do not normally favour CPU parallelism. The Core i7 970 is usefully ahead of the Core i7 870 and more than 50 per cent faster than the Phenom II X6 1090T.

In performance terms, therefore, no compromises are required. That’s because the 970 backs up its hefty parallelism (six cores and 12 threads) with a 3.2GHz clockspeed. Whatever the workload, it’s damn quick. In fact, the only CPU that operates in the same ballpark is the Intel Core i7 980X, which is of course a slightly higher clocked version of the same six-core processor die.

The one area where you might expect all those cores and threads to cause a problem is overclocking. But even here the Core i7 970 puts on a decent show, ramping up to 4GHz courtesy of nothing more than an air cooler and some voltage tweaks. It’s all very impressive until you remember the price. It’s possible to buy a very nice desktop PC, complete with processor, graphics and screen, for the cost of this CPU.

We liked:

In a word, performance. Whether it’s games, media encoding or just multi-tasking, the Core i7 970 has delivers rude amounts of it. But what else did you expect from six of the most advanced processor cores money can buy. The damn thing even overclocks well.

We disliked:

In a word, price. Awesome as the Intel Core i7 970 is, it’s also awesomely expensive and simply poor value compared to quad-core processors costing one third the price. In fact, if you’re willing to spend this much, you may as well go all the way with the Core i7 980X.

Verdict:

A six-core masterpiece in 32nm silicon. Shame about the grand-master pricing, though.

Related Links

• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee
• Read more processor reviews

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Samsung Electronics has introduced a dual-core 1 GHz Cortex A9-based CPU for tablets, netbooks and smartphones.

Codenamed Orion, the chip features a pair of 1-GHz ARM Cortex A9 cores, each comes with a 32-kbyte data cache and a 32-kbyte instruction cache. It reportedly doubles the Hummingbird’s performance, while improving battery life, allowing 1080p video capability and HD recording. The single core Hummingbird processor powers the Epic 4G and the upcoming Samsung Tab.

Samsung also included a 1-Mbyte L2 cache to optimize CPU processing performance. A graphics processing unit allows Orion to deliver five times the 3-D graphics performance of the previous processor generation from Samsung.

Samsung did not state whether the GPU is based on Mali licensed from ARM Holding plc, a PowerVR core licensed from Imagination Technologies Group plc or a third alternative.

Storage options include NAND flash, moviNAND, solid-state disk or hard disk drive. A GPS receiver is embedded in the processor.

Orion’s display controller can drive two on-device screens as well as driving a third external display such as a TV or a monitor, via an on-chip HDMI 1.3a interface. It will be available to some customers in the fourth quarter of 2010 and is scheduled for mass production in the first half of 2011.

Meanwhile, LG has teamed up with NVIDIA for the Tegra 2 processer, a 1GHz chip. LG is claiming that they will produce the world’s first dual-core cellphones, and that a line of them will hit in Q4 2010.

The next generation Tegra chip features a dual-core ARM Cortex -A9 Processor with an Ultra Low Power NVIDIA Graphics Processing Unit (GPU).

The Samsung Galaxy S family uses the speedy single core 1 GHz Samsung Hummingbird CPU. Variants of the phone are now available on all four major U.S. carriers.

They include AT&T’s Samsung Captivate ($199.99-499.99), T-Mobile’s Samsung Vibrant ($199.99-499.99), and Sprint’s Samsung Epic 4G ($249.99-499.99). Today the Verizon Fascinate ($199.99 direct, with contract), became available on Verizon.

Samsung has shipped 1 million Galaxy S smartphones in the U.S. in the first 45 days since their mid-July launch, the company said Monday. For comparison, the iPhone 4 sold 1.7 million devices in the first weekend.

Samsung, the world’s largest television manufacturer, may run Google’s Android software in their tvs to compete with Sony and Apple, says Bloomberg. It will work with Google TV, which is being developed with Sony and Intel.

Google will launch its service to bring the Web to TV screens in the United States this autumn and worldwide next year, according to CEO Eric Schmidt. It will allow full Internet browsing via the television, and will be free. Google would work with a variety of program makers and electronics manufacturers to bring it to consumers.

Schmidt also said Google would announce partnerships later this year with makers of tablet computers that would use Google’s Chrome operating system, due to be launched soon, rather than its Android phone software, which has been used for mobile devices until now.

View full post on dailywireless.org

Want the finest CPU money can buy? Look no further than the Intel Core i7 980X. It’s the undisputed world heavyweight champ among chips. Just remember you’ll need a lot of it. The money, that is.

But what a processor you get in return. The Core I7 980X is, of course, a six-core beast. But this is six-cores Intel style, so that’s two threads per core and a dozen of those little green graphs when you fire up task manager. That’s unparalleled, er, parallelism in a PC processor.

In that context, even AMD’s Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition looks rather ordinary. It may have six cores. But each is single-threaded only. Moreover, AMD’s underlying CPU architecture is pretty ancient while the Intel Core i7 980X is literally the latest thing, right down to is impossibly tiny 32nm underpinnings. What it isn’t however, is unique. The recently released Core i7 970 is largely the same six-core, 12-thread processor at a slightly less offensive price point.

Among the super rich of this world, there’s a level of wealth colloquially known as screw-you money. Put simply, if you’ve got enough dosh, you can say “screw you” without consequences to anyone, any time. For people like that, it’s results that matter, not cost. For people like that, Intel has a very special PC processor. It’s the Core i7 980X.

As our benchmark results show, it’s without exception the fastest PC processor on the planet. So, it’s much quicker in our multi-threaded tests than AMD’s best six-core effort, the Phenom II X6 1090T BE.

It’s also an absolute monster in benchmarks that traditionally favour chips with fewer cores but higher clocks, such as gaming and file decompression. For that you can thank the 980X’s 3.33GHz operating frequency. In performance terms, there really are no downsides with this six-core beast.

Indeed, you might expect a chip with over a billion transistors to run hot and not take kindly to overclocking. If so, you’d be forgetting that the Core i7 980X is based on Intel’s fancy new 32n production process. It’s actually smaller than Intel’s quad-core processors. What’s more, it hits an astonishing 4.3GHz when overclocked.

So, that’s the most cores, the highest thread count, the most advanced microarchitecture and the highest clockspeed. No wonder the Core i7 980X is a prince among processors. It’s just a shame it has a princely price tag to match. We also worry about the 980X’s LGA1,366 CPU socket. Intel plans to drop it next year, putting a definite limit on any upgrade path.

We liked:

Can a CPU be considered aspirational? If so, the Intel Core i7 980X is it. It’s a smorgasbord of cutting edge technology and clearly the fastest and finest CPU you can buy. It’s all of Intel’s know how in a multi-threaded masterpiece. We want one. And we want it badly.

We disliked:

Placing a premium on performance is all very well. But charging nigh on £800 for a PC processor is plain bonkers. It’s sad, because it renders the Core i7 980X effectively irrelevant. Virtually nobody can afford it. Given Intel’s track record in regards ongoing socket support, the LGA1,366 form factor is a worry, too.

Verdict:

The fastest PC processor we’ve ever tested. But so expensive, nobody can afford it.

Follow TechRadar Reviews on Twitter: http://twitter.com/techradarreview

Related Links

• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee
• Read more processor reviews

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Giving a dual-core processor performance to rival many quad-core chips is quite an achievement. Intel has managed just that with the Core i5 661. Problem is, it also costs as much as many quad-core processors.

The challenges for the dual-core Core i5 661 begin with Intel’s own Core i5 750 and 760 chips. Both are cheaper than the 661 but pack a pair of extra cores. That’s a fundamental advantage that even the Core i5 661′s clever HyperThreading technology will struggle to overcome.

However, things get really silly when you consider the opposition from AMD. Not only does AMD offer a slew of quad-core chips for less money, including the range topping Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition. Even the six-core Phenom II X6 1055T is cheaper. Crazy.

Of course, what none of the chip above can offer is the Core i5 661′s integrated graphics core. Exactly how much that is worth, however, is another matter.

Technically, the Intel Core i5 661 is a thoroughly intriguing chip. Exceptionally quick for a dual-core processor, it also packs a graphics core integrated into the processor package itself. If industry analysts are to be believed, this kind of CPU-GPU “fusion” processor is the way of things to come.

Back in 2010, the reality is more mundane. The Core i5 661′s 3D rendering abilities are feeble. Admittedly, motherboard-based integrated cores from the likes of AMD or NVIDIA are not much better. But the fact remains this latest integrated graphics core from Intel is effectively worthless for gaming. Fortunately, its 2D video decoding prowess is pretty solid.

Anyway, of more significance is the Core i5 661′s performance as a traditional CPU. For a dual-core processor, it’s awesome. Thanks to HyperThreading technology, a healthy standard clockspeed of 3.33GHz and the Turbo feature which boost clocks by a further few hundred MHz or so in certain conditions, the 661 beats other dual-core chips with an extremely large stick in highly-threaded software such as video encoding. It even gives quad-core chips such as AMD Athlon II X4 620 a scare.

That sounds impressive until you realise the Core i5 661 is more expensive than any quad-core processor from AMD and even some Intel quad-core chips. The Core i5 750 and 760 are both cheaper and faster. Then there’s the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T. Despite being cheaper, it packs six cores and absolutely annihilates the i5 661 in heavily threaded apps.

In other words, the addition of an integrated GPU isn’t nearly enough to justify the Core i5 661′s premium pricing. That’s especially true when you note that supporting motherboards are no cheaper. In fact, if you really wanted to pair a six-core AMD processor with an integrated motherboard, you could. And it would still work out cheaper than the 661 and its fancy fusion graphics.

We like:

Intel’s Nehalem CPU architecture makes for an uncommonly quick dual-core CPU. For most PC users, most of the time, it’s all the CPU they’ll ever need. It’s also power efficient, cool running and offers a glimpse of the future courtesy of its CPU-GPU fusion architecture.

We dislike:

In a word, price. The Core i5 661 is at least £50 over priced. Yes, it has a graphics core integrated into the CPU package. But it’s a decidedly feeble graphics core of little value to gamers. Moreover, AMD offers a six-core processor for the same price. ‘Nuff said.

Verdict:

Fusion may be the future. But for now, this CPU-GPU chip costs too much and delivers too little.

Follow TechRadar Reviews on Twitter: http://twitter.com/techradarreview

Related Links

• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee
• Read more processor reviews

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Late last summer, Intel rolled out the Core i5 750 based on Lynnfield, its mainstream Nehalem-class CPU. It became an instant favourite. Sure, it was short of a feature or three compared to Intel’s finest, including HyperThreading. But for the money, there was nothing to touch it.

Fast forward 12 months and the Intel Core i5 750 is hanging in there. That’s despite the arrival of the new Core i5 760 [link to review], a similar but slightly faster quad-core model, and several new dual-core, quad-thread Clarkdale chips such as the Intel Core i5 661.

The Core i5 750 has also soaked up an onslaught from AMD in the form of both quad-core chips such as the AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition and the latest six-core AMD Phenom X6 1055T. Somehow, however, this plucky little quad remains relevant, especially if gaming grunt is high on your list of priorities.

At its stock 2.66GHz clockspeed, the Intel Core i5 750 puts on a decent show. Thanks to four cores, 8MB of cache and a dual-channel memory controller, there’s plenty of multi-threaded muscle for media encoding or image rendering.

In fact, compared to Intel’s new dual-core processors, such as the Core i5 661 and Core i5 665K, the Core i5 750 is an absolute bargain. We’d also take it over any of AMD’s Phenom II X4 chips. That includes the excellent Phenom II X4 965 BE in its most recent C3 stepping.

However, inject the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T into the equation and things get a little more complicated. For just one pound more than the 750, the 1055T gives you six cores and a lot more grunt than the Core i5 750 in highly threaded applications such as video encoding.

The arrival of the new Intel Core i5 760 hardly makes life any easier, either. After all, the 760 is essentially the same chip clocked 133MHz higher. But it only costs an extra fiver. Surely that makes it a no brainer?

Not necessarily. In our overclocking tests, the Core i5 750 actually has the edge over the new 760 model. Of course, mileages vary when it comes to overclocking results. Pick another pair of chips off Intel’s production line and the results could very well be reversed. But the main point to absorb is that the newer, slightly pricier chip isn’t necessarily faster in extremis.

What’s more, both at stock clocks and overclocked, the Core i5 750 beats seven shades out of the six-core AMD Phenom II X6 1055T in software that benefits more from the strength of individual cores rather than the sheer number of them – think games or file decompression.

We liked:

In an age where core counts and fancy features grab all the headlines, the Core i5 750 proves that four cores and a solid underlying CPU architecture still gets the job done. As a gaming chip, it remains one of our favourites. It’s hardly a slouch when it comes to media encoding, either.

We disliked:

If content creation and other highly threaded applications are your bag, there’s no doubting AMD’s Phenom II X6 1055T is the weapon of choice at this price point. Likewise, the arrival of the new Intel Core i5 760 has left the 750 looking a little redundant.

Verdict:

A great gaming chip that’s just beginning to show its age.

Follow TechRadar Reviews on Twitter: http://twitter.com/techradarreview

Related Links

• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee
• Read more processor reviews

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

While we knew a few things about Toshiba’s Smartpad, now possibly called Folio 100, a few more details have leaked out. We knew that the device was going to be a 10in, Tegra 2-powered Android tablet. But we didn’t know anything about the CPU or what version of Android that the iPad competitor would be running. Now apparently, those details are making their way to the surface.

The Folio 100 will (probably) feature the Nvidia Tegra 250 CPU, a dual core Arm A9 processor running at 1GHz. This dual core processor will be pushing Android 2.2 at a supposed resolution of 1024×600.

To further gain a leg up on the iPad, the Folio 100 will feature a 1.3MP webcam for use in video calling and 32GB of removable storage (16GB built in). This is in addition to the (again rumored) 802.11 b/g/n WiFi connectivity, 3G connectivity (another tablet that makes calls, interesting), HDMI 1080p port, USB 2.0 (why not 3.0?) and USB 2.2 mini audio jack. Keeping the tablet running will be a 1020mAh battery that is capable of 7 hours of usage.

If you want to catch a live glimpse of Toshiba’s tablet (as well as Samsung’s Galaxy Tab) then head over to IFA which begins on September 3rd in sunny Berlin, Germany.

Toshiba’s Android tablet will be a 10in, dual core powerhouse

View full post on Google Android News Android Forums

Straight from Macworld Lab: Benchmark results of two new iMacs, both of which sport Intel’s 3.2GHz Core i3 processor.

View full post on Macworld

Macworld Lab has tested the new entry-level iMac powered by the Core i3 processor; here’s our test report.

View full post on Macworld

Many were surprised when business-centric Lenovo announced the more consumer-focused ThinkPad Edge, and this is a laptop just as suited to the everyday buyer as the business person.

The design is a far cry from the rest of the ThinkPad range. Instead of a plain black-box approach, Lenovo has painted the lid an attractive shiny red and included silver trimming to the chassis, and the result is a very desirable laptop.

The machine is as durable as it is attractive and the solid plastics give it a robust feel with the strengthened metal lid hinges only adding to this.

Minimal reflections

The 15.6-inch screen features a detailed 1366 x 768-pixel resolution and is ideal for creating word documents and spreadsheets. Like the Sony Vaio VPC-EB1S0E/WI, it isn’t particularly bright, but the lack of a shiny Super-TFT finish means there are virtually no reflections to contend with.

This laptop also boasts a lid which folds open 180 degrees, making it easy to get a comfortable viewing angle wherever you are sat.

This is the first Lenovo laptop to feature an isolation-style keyboard. It provides a fantastic typing experience and is equally as firm as the Sony, the only difference being the Lenovo’s keys travel a little further. If we had to choose between the two, we would opt for the Sony, however, as the lack of a dedicated numeric keypad here is a little disappointing.

The Intel Core i5 430M chip used here provides the excellent performance. This means those after uncompromised power for either work or play will find plenty to like here and you’ll have no problems running both office and multimedia applications.

The inclusion of an integrated graphics card means you’ll be able to play only the most basic of games, but older (and internet) games should run fine. Likewise, basic photo editing won’t be a problem.

Portability is the cornerstone of any business laptop and, although there are much lighter options available, the Lenovo’s 266-minute battery life is impressive – for the price at least.

A whole raft of Lenovo software is included to help you manage your power consumption and connect to available networks. The programs are intuitive, allowing you to connect to your router at home with ease, while balancing your battery life and performance requirements, for example.

Ultimately, the ThinkPad Edge impresses and the power and usability on offer make this is a great choice for both the business person and average consumer.

Related Links

• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee
• Read more laptop reviews

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

The Extreme Edition CPUs from Intel are the real performance daddies of the desktop world. Costing over £800 for a little slab of silicon though they really should be. So what is it about these Extreme chips that makes them so damned fast? It’s the unlocked multipliers that allow the extreme tweakers to overclock the nuts off these processors.

It’s also a feature that would be trivial for Intel to add to any of its current CPUs. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could have the unlocked multiplier in a more affordable chip? In fact, you already can if you go for one of AMD’s competitively priced Black Series CPUs.

And perhaps it’s the AMD Black chips that explain the arrival of Intel’s new special K pairing. Yup, Intel has released a couple of cut-price processors with unlocked multipliers that are aimed squarely at performance enthusiasts.

Say hello, therefore, to the new Core i5-655K. The new K-series chips are closely related to existing processors in Intel’s desktop range. The 655K clocks in with the same stock frequencies as the existing Core i5-650 model.

So, that’s a base clockspeed of 3.2GHz and a maximum Turbo frequency of 3.46GHz. In all other regards, the spec is as per the 650 model. Thus, we’re talking two cores, each with support for a pair of software threads, a dual-channel DDR3 memory controller, 4MB of L3 cache and a 73 Watt TDP.

The 650 and the new 655K are both Clarkdale chips, of course. That means you’ll actually find two chips inside if you crack open the CPU package (not something we advise!). The first packs the pair of processor cores and the cache memory and is hewn from Intel’s latest 32nm silicon.

The second is on Intel’s 45nm production processor and contains the memory controller, I/O and integrated graphics core. Like it or loathe it, this kind of CPU-GPU ‘fusion’ architecture is the future.

But what about the pricing, you ask? We’re still struggling to come to terms with the amount Intel asks for all versions of the dual-core Clarkdale processor. Depending on how you look at it, therefore, the £189 655K is either reasonable value for £30 more than the 650 or just silly money given that you can have a quad-core Bloomfield chip for the high-end LGA 1,366 socket for the same price.

There’s one final factoid you probably won’t find Intel advertising. Both chips are based on the same silicon stepping as their multiplier-locked brethren. Thus it’s a C2 stepping for the 655K. That’s important if only because of the expectations it raises regarding outright overclocking prowess. On the face of it, you wouldn’t expect either to significantly out-clock existing models. Well, not unless Intel has hand-picked these chips for overclocking prowess. There’s only one way to find out.

Not only can you adjust the Turbo settings per core. In other words, you define how many steps Turbo increases the multiplier when anywhere from one to four cores are under load. You can also fettle the wattage and amperage cut-off points for Turbo mode, theoretically giving the chip more headroom. But to cut a long story short, ditching Turbo and going global tends to give the better results.

For the record, you can also do all of the above via Intel’s Control Center app for Windows. It’s basically Intel’s answer to AMD’s Overdrive. Or at least it would be if it was any good.

But it requires a reboot to apply most of the important overclocking settings and it only works with a small selection of own-brand Intel boards. So, it’s not. It’s rubbish.

As for the Core i5-655K, lifting the CPU voltage to 1.375V allows a maximum frequency of 4.2GHz. The result is immensely impressive performance for a dual-core processor.

The problem, of course, is that you can have a quad-core chip that will clock very nearly as high for the same money. Any quad-core Core i5 or Core i7 chip running at or near 4GHz blows this plucky little dualie away.

What we’d much rather have, therefore, is an unlocked K variant of our old favourite, the i5-750. An Intel Core i5-755K? Now that would really be something.

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

The Extreme Edition processors from Intel always have been and always will be overpriced irrelevancies. What else can you say about a series that typically cost upwards of £800?

The problem isn’t just pricing, either. In outright performance terms, Extreme Edition chips are often no more than 15 to 20 per cent faster than CPUs costing a third or less the price. Value for money they most certainly ain’t.

Of course, the latest Extreme is a bit special thanks to offering more cores than any other Intel processor. But with more mainstream six-core chips pencilled in for later this year, even the Core i7-980X will soon resume the Extreme Edition’s traditional rip-off role.

Despite all this harshing on Intel’s flagship CPU line, however, there’s one aspect of the Extreme family we’ve always loved: the unlocked CPU multiplier. It’s a feature that makes for idiot-proof overclocking and takes memory out of the equation.

It’s also a feature that would be trivial for Intel to add to any of its current CPUs. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could have the unlocked multiplier in a more affordable chip? In fact, you already can if you go for one of AMD’s competitively priced Black Series CPUs.

And perhaps it’s the AMD Black chips that explain the arrival of Intel’s new special K pairing. Yup, Intel has released a couple of cut-price processors with unlocked multipliers that are aimed squarely at performance enthusiasts.

Say hello, therefore, to the new Core i7-875K. The new K-series chips are closely related to existing processors in Intel’s desktop range. The 875K lines up next to the Core i7-870.

The base clockspeed is 2.93GHz with a top Turbo of 3.6GHz, theoretically anyway. In our experience, you won’t always see a full return on that Turbo promise.

Anyhoo, the 875K is a Lynnfield processor and thus a quad-core 45nm specimen with two threads per core, a dual-channel memory controller, 8MB of L3 cache and a 95 Watt TDP. Again, all of the above is shared with the plain old 870.

Beyond those headline specs, there’s not all that much to know. The K-series chips drop into the LGA 1,156 socket and come boxed and branded with a big silver flash reading “Unlocked”. More significantly, they also come sans CPU cooler. That’s not a huge vote of confidence in Intel’s stock heat sinks. Nevertheless, it’s the right call. Most overclocking enthusiasts would prefer to choose their own cooler.

More intriguing is that Intel has positioned the 875K £100 below the 870.

That’s right, the 875K has identical clockspeeds and cache, adds the unlocked multiplier but will typically sell for £310 to the 870′s £420. Admittedly, we always felt the 870 was seriously overpriced. Yet this topsy-turvy positioning from Intel seems completely bonkers. But then, Intel’s marketing is madness all round at the moment.

How else can you explain the fact that Intel introduced a new branding scheme in the Core i3, i5 and i7 monikers that was supposed to add clarity but only confuses. There’s no way of telling from those brands how many cores you’re getting or even which socket a CPU drops into.

Out of the box, the 870 and 875K are unsurprisingly very close when running at default settings. Slightly disconcertingly, it’s actually our dusty old 870 that has the slight edge.

The fact, for instance, that it’s one frame per second faster in the X264 HD video encoding test isn’t much of a worry. It’s close enough to be statistically insignificant. But the 870′s five Watt power consumption advantage, both under load and at idle, doesn’t bode well. Chips that clock up well also tend to be chips that use less power.

Time, then, to unleash those clocks. With the 875K, you have plenty of options. Like any Lynnfield chip, you can give the baseclock, set to 133MHz as standard, a twiddle. The problem with that, of course, is that you’ll take the memory clocks with you. You’ll definitely end up with your memory running at some funky non-standard frequency and at some point you will have to step in and knock the dividers down a notch or two.

Much better, therefore, to avail yourself of the 875K’s unlocked multipliers. Here you essentially have two options. You can either go old school, switch off the Turbo function and ramp up the global multiplier setting for all cores. With the 875K, the multiplier range extends from nine to 63. The latter works out at 8.4GHz, so let’s just say you have plenty of scope. The other option is to bring Turbo mode into the equation.

Not only can you adjust the Turbo settings per core. In other words, you define how many steps Turbo increases the multiplier when anywhere from one to four cores are under load. You can also fettle the wattage and amperage cut-off points for Turbo mode, theoretically giving the chip more headroom.

But to cut a long story short, ditching Turbo and going global tends to give the better results. Even with the Turbo wattage and amperage ceilings raised, the 875K won’t run consistently at overclocked Turbo speeds.

Unfortunately, what it also won’t do is run any faster than the old 870. Both chips top out at 4GHz with the CPU voltage upped to around 1.35V to 1.375V, the latter being a range we’re comfortable with regards long-term reliability. Unsurprisingly, there’s little to choose between the two in our overclocked benchmark results.

Given that the 875K is much cheaper than the 870, the new K series offering is still a no-brainer. But it’s still disappointing to find the unlocked multiplier doesn’t translate into at least a little more oomph.

Related Links

• TechRadar Reviews Guarantee
• Read more processor reviews

View full post on TechRadar: All PC & Mac feeds

Intel announced a new six-core Core i7 processor, while also cutting the prices of some chips by up to 48 percent.

View full post on Macworld

Once again we present our exclusive spoilers for the latest Magic: The Gathering set. This time, for the 2011 Core Set that gathers together the best and most classic monsters and spells from the game’s various lines.

The Magic: The Gathering game expands every year, introducing new worlds filled with deadly preils, new wars between ancient enemies, and fantastic new adventures. AT the center is the Magic core set, representing the game in its purest form: evocative spells, menacing creatures, and infinite possibilities. But even at its core, the experience is ever changing. The Magic 2011 core set continues that tradition.

Prerelease Date: July 10-11, 2010
Release Date: July 16, 2010
Launch Party: July 16-18, 2010
Magic Online Release: August 2, 2010
Game Day: August 14, 2010

See our two spoilers after the jump.

And here they are!

Sheesh! Forum comments suggest the Platinum Angel is not as tough against expert players as noobs might think, but yow! At first glance it looks amazing. And not to be outdone, the Serra Ascendant also features a neat power, healing its owner while delivering damage. And if you pack tons of life, the Ascendant suddenly becomes a 6/6 critter costing only a mana! Two great cards.

View full post on GeekDad

Ballistic’s HC case, coming this summer, is a heavy-duty case that will provide your iPhone 4 with four layers of shock absorbing protection.

View full post on Macworld

I was just listening to the AndroidGuys podcast and they talked about a conversation they had with someone from T-Mobile about future projects.

The rumor goes that a Dual Core 800Mhz processor device with a 4.3″ Screen based on some form of new display technology will be hitting T-Mobile before the holiday season.  What’s even more interesting is that the device is reported to be the flagship device for Android 3.0 or Gingerbread.

There are many names floating around like the HTC Vision or could it even be related to Project Emerald?  Who knows!  These are all rumors and nobody really knows, but it sure could make for a very exciting 2010 holiday season.

So for all you guys, including me, who bitch about the lack of good hardware on T-Mobile, let’s hope this pans out.

View full post on AndroidSPIN

If you mastered the routine in Nickel Buddy’s original Anywhere Abs fitness application for BlackBerry, you’ll want to check out their newly-released next installment, Anywhere Abs 2: Core Edition. This edition features six now exercises focused on building up your core, which are broken out step by step. At any time you can pull up a detail explanation of each exercise and the app features a countdown time and three different levels of difficulty.

As I said in my post to the original Anywhere Abs, just having it installed on your device is a good thing… never mind actually it, but just seeing the icon on the homescreen everytime you check your email forces you to sit or stand a little straighter and flex those abs. It sells for $2.99 and you can grab it at the link below.

• Learn More / Download Anywhere Abs 2: Core Edition >>

CrackBerry.com‘s feed sponsored by ShopCrackBerry.com. Get ready for the beach with Anywhere Abs 2: Core Edition

View full post on CrackBerry.com blogs