Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > OMG! Intel confirms 3.2ghz EE!

OMG! Intel confirms 3.2ghz EE!

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - OMG! Intel confirms 3.2ghz EE!

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 01:56:59 AM

Link.

Quote :

Intel representatives just contacted DailyTech with the following information:

The Core 2 Extreme processor (Conroe based) will ship at 2.93GHz at Core 2 Duo launch. We will also have a 3.2GHz version by end of the year. And as you know, the Quad Core enthusiast SKU, Kentsfield, is planned for Q1'07.



Take that AMD fanboys!

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
YO_KID37   06-01-2006 at 01:59:51 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Link.

Intel representatives just contacted DailyTech with the following information:

The Core 2 Extreme processor (Conroe based) will ship at 2.93GHz at Core 2 Duo launch. We will also have a 3.2GHz version by end of the year. And as you know, the Quad Core enthusiast SKU, Kentsfield, is planned for Q1'07.



Take that AMD fanboys!

Hold Up! before you start bashing AMD fan boys!!

Why Do they run at 1066Mhz Instead of 1333Mhz? they are also loosing 100Mhz so it won't be the "AMD Bashing" FSB Extreme Edition as everyone thought

They are slowing from 1333mhz X 2.5= 3332.5Mhz
to 1066 X 3= 3198Mhz A total of a 134.5Mhz in speed loss and about 267Mhz in FSB

Reply to YO_KID37
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 02:02:30 AM
- 0 +

975 and 965 chipsets don't support it.

Reply to Action_Man
YO_KID37   06-01-2006 at 02:04:24 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

975 and 965 chipsets don't support it.



How Sad :cry: :cry: :cry: But you can Just Overclock beyond 3.6Ghz right?? because i so badly want a Conroe over 1333MHz and a speed uncompared to with a Regular Non EE Conroe

Reply to YO_KID37
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 02:06:43 AM
- 0 +

They'll probably release it next to the 985 chipset which I believe supports it (well it better!) and yes you could just overclock it.

Reply to Action_Man
mad_fitzy   06-01-2006 at 02:09:28 AM
- 0 +

All of your posts start with "OMG". You might aswell post in caps to, 9-Inch style.

Reply to mad_fitzy
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 02:12:23 AM
- 0 +

Why? That would be hypocritical of myself and just plain stupid.

Reply to Action_Man
mad_fitzy   06-01-2006 at 02:13:40 AM
- 0 +

Thats what im trying to point out. You get up people for using all caps yet you start all your posts with "OMG". How is that so detracted from using all caps.

Reply to mad_fitzy
YO_KID37   06-01-2006 at 02:14:41 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

They'll probably release it next to the 985 chipset which I believe supports it (well it better!) and yes you could just overclock it.



YAY! That's why i Love being a Overclocking Nerd! I want to get that System and then Just overclock that Monster!! Anyone Else in Toronto Getting that System?? IF not I'll be the fastest Thing In Toronto Until NewYears Eve 2007

Reply to YO_KID37
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 02:16:14 AM
- 0 +

Are you serious? Because thats just plain stupid.

Reply to Action_Man
Heyyou27   06-01-2006 at 02:16:51 AM
- 0 +

Looks like it'll be a nice core, but I can't help but wondering what the TDP is. (Whatver it is, it'll be lower than my current core)

Reply to Heyyou27
YO_KID37   06-01-2006 at 02:19:03 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Looks like it'll be a nice core, but I can't help but wondering what the TDP is. (Whatver it is, it'll be lower than my current core)



It's most likely at 89W, because the Non-Extreme Edition are at 65W and the Memroms are touted to be at 35W right?? Correct me if im wrong about the Memrom TDP

Reply to YO_KID37
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 02:21:34 AM
- 0 +

I'm betting ~ 70watts.

Quote :

because the Non-Extreme Edition are at 65W and the Memroms are touted to be at 35W right?? Correct me if im wrong about the Memrom TDP



Correct.

Reply to Action_Man
K8MAN   06-01-2006 at 03:11:43 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

They only announced it today because they've seen what AMD are doing with their Rev.G 65nm SOI.
It's a good indication that 2.93Ghz at launch has a lot more poential for us to squeeze out(and current proven data says so).


Well I'm glad that they are at least acknoledging that AMD might have something scary in the works and are binning higher chips. Too bad about the 1333mhz chipset issue. Anyone remember when I joked about Intel having to build themselves a super-pipelined northbridge to keep up with bandwidth demand in the next few years :wink:

Reply to K8MAN
the_vorlon   06-01-2006 at 03:29:57 AM
- 0 +

Maybe I am just old and cynical, but what Intel is doing makes perfect sense.

People who buy the FX and EE chips do so for bragging rights - pure and simple.

To pay $700 for a chip that real world is maybe 5 or 6% faster is just nuts.

AMDs FX60 is, objectively speaking, on balance looking at all benchmarks (and not just cherry picking a few bandwidth sensitive gaming tests) about 6% faster than a 3.73 ghz 965 EE - but look at all the huge press, fanboy support, etc it has earned AMD.

Intel will release a 2.93 ghz Conroe, and quietly stockpile split bin 3.2s till needed, and sell every 2.93 at a premium they can...

Untill they need the 3.2, which they will sell at a premium while quietly stockpiling split bin 3.46 ghz parts....

Untill they need the 3.46 parts...

Rinse.. lather... repeat...

AMD almost ceratinly could have cherrypicked 3.0, maybe 3.2 ghz parts long ago for their FX series...

They didn't, because they didn't have to...

END OF STORY....

Reply to the_vorlon
Mike995   06-01-2006 at 03:45:28 AM
- 0 +

The shear fact of the matter is that AMD cannot get too 3.2 ghz or 3.0 for that matter their fastest chip will be the FX 62 @ 2.8 ghz, and if you buy that chip theres almost no overclocking headroom.

Reply to Mike995
306maxi   06-01-2006 at 04:31:39 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Link.

Intel representatives just contacted DailyTech with the following information:

The Core 2 Extreme processor (Conroe based) will ship at 2.93GHz at Core 2 Duo launch. We will also have a 3.2GHz version by end of the year. And as you know, the Quad Core enthusiast SKU, Kentsfield, is planned for Q1'07.



Take that AMD fanboys!

Intel fanboys unite!!!!!! :P

Reply to 306maxi
Caboose-1   06-01-2006 at 04:41:19 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Link.

Intel representatives just contacted DailyTech with the following information:

The Core 2 Extreme processor (Conroe based) will ship at 2.93GHz at Core 2 Duo launch. We will also have a 3.2GHz version by end of the year. And as you know, the Quad Core enthusiast SKU, Kentsfield, is planned for Q1'07.



Take that AMD fanboys!

Intel fanboys unite!!!!!! :P :roll: Fanboys disgrace the very company they support. Would you like to have thousands of: "iNTEL iS tEH rOXXORZ nAD tEHY pWN tEH AmdzORZ bECUZ,,,,, tEHY r tEH ROXXOR2!!!!!11onene," behind you?

Reply to Caboose-1
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 04:46:22 AM
- 0 +

It was a joke, lighten up man.

Reply to Action_Man
Caboose-1   06-01-2006 at 04:48:38 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

It was a joke, lighten up man.

Righty.

Reply to Caboose-1
306maxi   06-01-2006 at 04:49:36 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Link.

Intel representatives just contacted DailyTech with the following information:

The Core 2 Extreme processor (Conroe based) will ship at 2.93GHz at Core 2 Duo launch. We will also have a 3.2GHz version by end of the year. And as you know, the Quad Core enthusiast SKU, Kentsfield, is planned for Q1'07.



Take that AMD fanboys!

Intel fanboys unite!!!!!! :P :roll: Fanboys disgrace the very company they support. Would you like to have thousands of: "iNTEL iS tEH rOXXORZ nAD tEHY pWN tEH AmdzORZ bECUZ,,,,, tEHY r tEH ROXXOR2!!!!!11onene," behind you?

I should have used the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags :P

Anyway I would never buy AMD. My 2.8c is oVeRCLoXXoRReD to 37Ghz and beats even the highest spec Cray supercomputer :P

OMFG I am teh 1337!!!!!!

*shudders* I hate fanboi's. I would never become one or genuinely post like one myself 8O

Reply to 306maxi
ivan_lee05   06-01-2006 at 05:25:54 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

They'll probably release it next to the 985 chipset which I believe supports it (well it better!) and yes you could just overclock it.



no 985 chipset yet, it was planned to introduce after Q2 of 07. for the mean while. the Intel 975xbx 2 will handle the revised conroe and the 1st quad-core kentsfield.

[Intel's Secret Weapon For Kentsfield : Bad Axe 2][/i]

Reply to ivan_lee05
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 05:31:48 AM
- 0 +

Thanks for that. Bearlake better be badass.

Reply to Action_Man
306maxi   06-01-2006 at 05:41:34 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Thanks for that. Bearlake better be badass.



And if not????? What are you gonna do? Release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark, they shoot bees at you? :P

Reply to 306maxi
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 05:44:46 AM
- 0 +

*closes the door and locks it*

Reply to Action_Man
JonathanDeane   06-01-2006 at 06:14:55 AM
- 0 +

Yeah this didnt surprise me at all honestly with the different OCing results I have read it realy seemed like Intel was holding it back a bit (why not?) The thing that does surprise me is the 1333 bus I think they may be running into some data corruption issues ? well I hope they get it ironed out :) they need to get that bus up to speed :)

Reply to JonathanDeane
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 06:17:49 AM
- 0 +

Woodcrest runs at 1333 fsb with no issues like I said before, chipset issue.

Reply to Action_Man
306maxi   06-01-2006 at 06:26:09 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Woodcrest runs at 1333 fsb with no issues like I said before, chipset issue.



Agree. It's probably a matter of them wanting to not play their cards too soon. Why play your cards straight up when you can hold back and over a period of time and be seen to be making progress. Also releasing products on a 1333Mhz FSB would also mean that the processors will use RAM that's even more expensive. I'm sure there are no "issues" as such and it's Intel just holding back :)

Reply to 306maxi
michaelahess   06-01-2006 at 07:03:42 AM
- 0 +

I find it interesting that everyone is going back to believing the "megahertz myth" again.

Just an observation. I'm far from a fanboy of either :D

Reply to michaelahess
K8MAN   06-01-2006 at 07:04:21 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

*closes the door and locks it*


Hanging out with Cruise,Travolta, and R Kelly again AM?

Reply to K8MAN
K8MAN   06-01-2006 at 07:10:36 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Lame.



:lol:

Reply to K8MAN
pengwin   06-01-2006 at 09:04:51 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

All of your posts start with "OMG". You might aswell post in caps to, 9-Inch style.



this isnt the normal pics that are posted (dos keyboard + slinky)

but its pretty danm close

http://www.images.hostingvision.com/d/969-1/nfi.jpg

Reply to pengwin
1Tanker   06-01-2006 at 11:53:32 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

I find it interesting that everyone is going back to believing the "megahertz myth" again.



It's not a myth...per se. A 3.2 GHz Conroe WILL be faster than a 2.93Ghz

Conroe, all else being equal. No myth. :wink:

Reply to 1Tanker
Action_Man   06-01-2006 at 12:27:33 PM
- 0 +

Thanks but I've already got a warehouse full of the things.

Reply to Action_Man
linux_0   06-01-2006 at 12:56:39 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

Thanks but I've already got a warehouse full of the things.




I thought you might appreciate the joke :lol: :lol:

Reply to linux_0
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > OMG! Intel confirms 3.2ghz EE!
Go to:

There are 994 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.407 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them