Question:
Anyone else disappointed with Santa Rosa?
The new Santa Rosa technology has been alive and kicking for almost a month now, and I have to say that (examining it as I will below) I think it's the most lackluster refresh to Centrino since its inception. I'm sure those of you who have shelled out $2,000 for a new SR rig will gladly disagree, but here is what Santa Rosa has to offer, in order of MOST importance to LEAST importance (in MY opinion):
1) 800 Mhz FSB. This is up from 667 Mhz with Napa/Merom. A whopping increase of 133 Mhz. I realize that FSB Mhz are not equivalent to general CPU Mhz, i.e. a change in FSB is greater than a change in general CPU Mhz, but still... the difference has only really been seen in SuperPi results. Woo!
2) DX10 cards. What a letdown. Nvidia is sure taking their sweet time with their 8 series mobile lineup. They're already planning to release the 9 series in November for desktops due to the 8 series poor performance in DX10 games. Does that mean we can be seeing a 9400M/9600M release sometime next Spring? Who knows. Which brings up another thing. All of you G1s-A1/G2s-A2 users out there that think your 8600 GT GDDR3 is gold... it's not. Here's perspective for you: the best DESKTOP gpu, the 8800 ultra, is having trouble getting respectable framerates in DX10 mode with any high settings or higher resolutions. What makes you think your mobile chip is going to perform better? You'll be playing DX10 games in DX9 mode with your new 8 series card. So I have to ask, what is the point of the 8 series card then? Why not just get a previous-gen 7 series card for cheaper? Oh, and using DX10 means that (at least as of now) you are stuck with using Vista, an OS which makes me barf (again, as of right now).
3) Intel Turbo Memory, i.e. Robson technology. UGH! How many times must it be said? Google it and see the results for yourself: it's USELESS! I mean, I have to give it to Intel that the idea is great, and if implemented properly, could be a huge success for performance and battery life. But cmon, it does nothing currently and sometimes even worsens things. Adding more RAM, anywhere (be it general, video, or now this), should HELP your system right? Apparently not. Oh, and just like DX10, using this useless technology throws you into the whirlpool that is Vista. Sweet!
4) Wireless N cards. And finally, here we go. There is no defined standard yet for N technology, nor will there be for a year or so. Not only that, but there will be no general public usage for it for a very long time. I can't see my university overhauling its G-network for N anytime soon.
Okay, so this is a rant, yes. But let's look at it this way... Penryn will be out first quarter next year, 2008. 45nm fab process seems, at least to me, to offer more promising results than this joke that is Santa Rosa. I say that if you are in the market for a notebook that you need right now, don't automatically discard the previous-gen ones, because their performance is nearly equal to the new Santa Rosa notebooks, and they're also a heck of a lot cheaper.
/end my $0.02
Answer:
Re: Anyone else disappointed with Santa Rosa?
you raise some good points. you also missed a few points. in general, i think your expectations are too high. its just and updated chipset.
dx10 video cards are completely unrelated to santa rosa. they are not attached or together in any sense except that intel's santa rosa came out at about the same time as nvidia's 8 series. wait for crysis and ut3 before making dx10 judgement. the 8600m gt is considerably faster than its predecessor (go 7600/7700) even in dx9 games, should you choose to stick with windows xp. the 7 series didn't even introduce any gaming tech beyond what the 6 series offered, but i doubt you would recommend a 6 series card for a new purchase despite it being cheaper.
intel turbo memory is like a side feature of santa rosa. you can still mark your PC "santa rosa" and sell it as such without turbo memory. i agree that it is sort of a flop at the moment. its possible that an update could make it more useful or something... who knows. thats not the only feature of santa rosa though.
santa rosa also introduces some other dynamic clocking functions that preserve and extend battery life and can increase performance. thats probably the biggest deal.
802.11n is useful assuming you have a use for it. we have had enough wifi bandwidth to handle internet since 802.11a, so....
Answer:
Re: Anyone else disappointed with Santa Rosa?
Well yes,Only a few applications can take advantage of higher FSB...
Yes,but dont forget you get really good video acceleration which frees cpu,so more power saved.
and one could say there aint any 'native' dx10 games..well,we'll have to wait to see..and new OS + new drivers + new architecture messed up the drivers too as you may see..
Turbo memory hasn't given us what we expected,MS is a part to blame..
We can hope vista SP1 sorts it..
N is backward compatible with g,And it gives some good speed increase for HD streaming et all..
I dont know whatever you meant by
uhmm....why is this thread in the ASUS forums?
mods please move it to hardware
also, I must agree that Santa Rosa was overhyped. It's just a slight change here and there that increase performance and battery life, but it's not some whole new processor. Don't expect THAT much out of it or you'll always be disappointed.
I'll second that.
As always, Intel and its marketing bandwagon have done an excellent job of creating a huge buzz for their products
Answer:
Re: Anyone else disappointed with Santa Rosa?
won't directx 10 cards see a performance boost on directx 10 games, while directx 9 cards do not because they do not take advantage of the new features.
Answer:
Re: Anyone else disappointed with Santa Rosa?
What I can't understand is why the world and their grandma has ordered a new notebook purely because of these two technologies, namely santa rosa and nvidia's 8000 cards. I'd say the nvidia cards are justified, they do seem more powerful in DX9 than previous cards from ATi or Nvidia, but this huge rush to be at the forefront of technology mystifies me.
Then again, my TV is not flatscreen, plasmascreen, LCD, widescreen, HD ready or digital. My most powerful laptop is three years old. I'm not a new tech person! I'm too poor!