Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

when does intel quad-core come out?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 7, 2006 7:53:26 PM

i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.

More about : intel quad core

July 7, 2006 7:57:40 PM

ok

If you wait for the latest and the greatest you'll never upgrade.

Quote:
i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.
July 7, 2006 8:03:23 PM

Q1/Q2 2007
Related resources
July 7, 2006 8:21:49 PM

Quote:
i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.



As soon as there's DDR2 3000. :oops: 
July 7, 2006 8:48:34 PM

lol software designers didnt even yet exploit the ful potential(not mentioning partialy) of dual cores, lol and u are thinking of geting 4?? lol thats thinking aobut the future :wink: ....but seriously, conroes are going to be here wor quite a while wont they? or will they become the next single cores(like) and quads will be treated as next gen dualcores, i mean in perspective to the past?
July 7, 2006 11:49:01 PM

Quote:
i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.



As soon as there's DDR2 3000. :oops: 

Are you saying that AMD has Quad Core ready for production, and they are not starting production until DDR2 3000 memory is released or announced or becomes widely available or that AMD will set a date for Quad Core's release once DD2 3000's memory release is stated?
July 8, 2006 12:02:33 AM

Quote:
i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.



As soon as there's DDR2 3000. :oops: 

Are you saying that AMD has Quad Core ready for production, and they are not starting production until DDR2 3000 memory is released or announced or becomes widely available or that AMD will set a date for Quad Core's release once DD2 3000's memory release is stated?


That was a bandwidth joke. :roll:
July 8, 2006 12:41:49 AM

oh the humility... :p 
July 8, 2006 12:45:05 AM

Couldn't help it. People downed AMD cause they need better latency. I guess we all have our problems designing CPUs.
July 8, 2006 1:22:25 AM

It all depends on what setup you have right now. If you have something that sucks!!! Then get the new conroe that come out this month. But if you have a decent system right now, then I would wait for a quad core. Yeah they might not have sofware the runs dual core right now!!! But they are going to be making nothing but software that will run off of dual cores. Some place that make PC's won't even sell single core right now.

Anywho it is up to you guys????? If you have the money spend it!!!!!!!The fastest system by AMD and the New conroe is overkill for all the new games out today!!!!
July 8, 2006 1:27:55 AM

Quote:
ok

If you wait for the latest and the greatest you'll never upgrade.

i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.


I'm one of these types:

While ( new technology comes out )
----input new technology data
----input new hype
----While ( waiting for new technology to release/debug )
--------If ( newer technology is in the works )
------------sleep until newer technology gets defined;
------------wake up - and go back to first loop
--------else
------------No new technology - AMD and Intel went bankrupt


No kidding. I have a P3 600 Mhz PC. I'm buying conroe!!!

Why? I do like the sound of Quad core. But, illuminatirex is right.
The software hasn't come up to speed there yet. But it will really fast.
How do I know. Because the new consolesPS3 and Xbox360 are multiple
cores. But, the real reason I'm not waiting, is because I'll end up waiting
even more than the first quad. The first quad is probably going to have
bandwidth problems with bottlenecks. Namely, the FSB. So then you'll
be waiting for them to solve the FSB problem.

If your satisfied with what you got. Wait, by all means. But, if your
waiting for the next little edge. Game over - you lose.
July 8, 2006 1:52:40 AM

I can understand that, but the problem is this: the first quad cores from Intel are expected to have thermal issues, such that it might be best to wait for the next reduction in process. We could be back (almost) to Prescott levels with the circa 2007 quad cores from Intel. That makes Conroe a better deal right now, at least if you aren't running a server.

But what do I know? I'm still stuck with a P4 Northwood 2.8 and a P4 630 Prescott for my PCs until I upgrade to dual core. Get what works for you if you don't mind the heat issues. Me, I regret ever getting that Prescott!

Somehow, I thought that maybe this time around, Intel would allow just a bios flash to accept a Conroe, but no, they changed the voltages so you need a new socket T board anyways. Why can't they be more user friendly like AMD? Cue commercial: "Wow, I could have gotten a socket 939 and A64!"
July 8, 2006 1:55:12 AM

Quote:
i think i'm skipping on conroe and i'll buy a quad core when it eventually comes out.



As soon as there's DDR2 3000. :oops: 

Are you saying that AMD has Quad Core ready for production, and they are not starting production until DDR2 3000 memory is released or announced or becomes widely available or that AMD will set a date for Quad Core's release once DD2 3000's memory release is stated?


That was a bandwidth joke. :roll:


but DDR2 with 3000(bandwidth) are already release right? the DDR2-400 PC3200..

well, quad-core does'nt need large bandwidth memory.. even a DDR2-667 can run with quad-core
July 8, 2006 2:24:36 AM

Quote:
but DDR2 with 3000(bandwidth) are already release right? the DDR2-400 PC3200..

well, quad-core does'nt need large bandwidth memory.. even a DDR2-667 can run with quad-core


That's not quite how it works. The DDR2 I meant is DDR2-3000 or ~PC2 24600.

DDR1 is PC 3200
DDR2 is PC2 3200
July 8, 2006 2:25:21 AM

lol ur a interesting "type" lol very hm...C++'ish :wink: lol and in regards to quad cores ok we can wait for them , but look....octocores are on the horizon...lets wait for those :wink:

....to be honest i just want to get a good pc that will run the games of this year, 2007, and maby some early 2008 (which i doublt) on max visual setings , considering my monitor only alows a max resolution of 1280x1024, and ill be hapy with that, so I figured out that that midrange/to mid/high dx10 series gpu, and that 2 gigs of RAM (later upgraded to 4, max 8 Gb's:wink: ) and that core 2 duo 2.4 Ghz, should do the trick, with a nice motherboard., and so far ill stay with win xp for teh next year or 2(depending on vista, if it will be worth it "eficiency"/quality wise, especialy for gaming :wink: )
July 8, 2006 2:51:04 AM

Quote:
lol ur a interesting "type" lol very hm...C++'ish :wink: lol and in regards to quad cores ok we can wait for them , but look....octocores are on the horizon...lets wait for those :wink:

....to be honest i just want to get a good pc that will run the games of this year, 2007, and maby some early 2008 (which i doublt) on max visual setings , considering my monitor only alows a max resolution of 1280x1024, and ill be hapy with that, so I figured out that that midrange/to mid/high dx10 series gpu, and that 2 gigs of RAM (later upgraded to 4, max 8 Gb's:wink: ) and that core 2 duo 2.4 Ghz, should do the trick, with a nice motherboard., and so far ill stay with win xp for teh next year or 2(depending on vista, if it will be worth it "eficiency"/quality wise, especialy for gaming :wink: )


Hmm. Glad you like my humor - but it is sooo true!

That's why I'm building my own system this year. And from now
on, I'll be doing the upgrade path. But, I'm waiting on Dx10
boards, oh my! - waiting on the real conroe extreme (1333 FSB),
oh my! I told ya, I was like this.....
If Dx10 gets delayed until VISTA, I'll get a cheap board. Which will be
10x better than what I got now.
The conroe extreme, I really waited the faster FSB. Will re-evaluate the
situation when all the pieces come togther this fall. May get a cheaper
conroe to hold me off a little.
July 8, 2006 2:55:06 AM

This is all very interesting, though, when you think about it. There are some people who spent $$$$ for the Presler 965 who couldn't wait a few months and now they are even considering getting a top of the line Conroe. I have a Presler 955 and while it may not function as good as a Conroe might, does that mean that the majority of the software out there won't run on my system? I think my system will do fine and be able to perform with todays games and software admirably and I am probably going to stick with it until quad core comes out - whether I would get AMD or Intel will remain to be seen. I think I would be better served upgrading my graphics card (which, in the long run, will be cheaper than getting a top-of-the-line Conroe and supporting motherboard) - especially since I don't run SLI or Crossfire and just overclock my GPU.
July 8, 2006 4:36:33 AM

Quote:

If Dx10 gets delayed until VISTA, I'll get a cheap board. Which will be
10x better than what I got now.
The conroe extreme, I really waited the faster FSB. Will re-evaluate the
situation when all the pieces come togther this fall. May get a cheaper
conroe to hold me off a little.


DX10 will only be VISTA. I guess the technical reasons are good, but it sounds like a way to get a coveted market that wouldn't normally go VISTA right away.

See this from Guru3D:
Quote:
In other news, TheInquirer got the official word that Direct X 10 won't find its way to Windows XP. So anyone who plans to buy Direct X 10 hardware and plans to use its full potential will have to buy Vista as well. The current driver model on the Windows XP is the limitation. One of the key points of Direct X 10 is to be the ability to have more independent objects and the current driver model on Windows XP simply won't be able to deal with it. Direct X 10 hardware will of course run Direct X 9 games and it is also supposed to do so fast.

They also report that the first DirectX 10 titles will be ready at the same time s Vista and, if we are lucky, we might be able to buy both Vista and DX 10 titles in early 2007

http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=4034

I am so tempted to just stick with my 2.8 Northwood and Prescott until VISTA and DX10, but a budget socket 939 and X2 sounds good this year. The only games I'm playing right between now and then are Oblivion and HOMM 5.
July 8, 2006 3:07:27 PM

to be honest i think if one has an old system (like mine which i got in 2001) building a new system now-this year, or when dx10 carrds come out would be the best solution, the prices of core 2 duos will go down , as the hype for them wil go down, and those who have good systems right now would be beter of waiting for quad cores,

btw in regards to that Guru3D article, i think just geting that dx10 gpu and windows xp home oem(because its the cheepest :wink: )is teh best thing to to , and in that about year or 2 from vistas release upgrade the os to vista, then the simingly oldie gpu would gain new "life" with the full suport of dx10, but anyway one would look at it the new dx10 gpus will be strong enough in themselves to last a while....hopefully, if even the midranged cards from the dx10 linup will beat the 1900xt or the xtx they will be way worht waiting for, and to be honest i prefare to wait with my oldie system, and get a nice system rather than get a mediocore system/parts now and then upgrade to a not so great but a bit above average system later on, thats why i was waiting for the 1900xt prices to go down, to buy it, but becaues of dx10 cards coming out ill just wait, and spend that 100 more on the gpu , than geting a 900 series card now(so i would be able to play some games now), I began looking areound for a new build last summer, waiting that couple months longer will not make much of a difference (althou I am quite unpatient :wink: ) and know that what i will get will be above the specs that i wanted to get, but waiting for quads its out of the question, if they would come out in lets say march 2007 maby i would wait for them to come out so that the core 2 dou's price would go down and then i would just get a beter core 2 duo.
July 10, 2006 12:03:29 AM

Quote:

btw in regards to that Guru3D article, i think just geting that dx10 gpu and windows xp home oem(because its the cheepest :wink: )is teh best thing to to... to be honest i prefare to wait with my oldie system, and get a nice system rather than get a mediocore system/parts now and then upgrade to a not so great but a bit above average system later on, thats why i was waiting for the 1900xt prices to go down, to buy it, but becaues of dx10 cards coming out ill just wait, and spend that 100 more on the gpu , than geting a 900 series card now


I want to adopt VISTA early on one PC, we'll have 2 or 3 by then. We have two now and the only issue I have is whether to just upgrade the mobo, CPU and GPU on the current Northwood box, or build a new one. It has a Cooler Master 450watt with active PFC and dual 12 volt rails (+18 and +16) but it's not SLI ready and I was thinking of Crossfire on the new PC with two X1600XT's until next summer when midrange DX10 cards are out.

I always end up building midrange PCs every 3 years and upgrading something on the off years. I'm in the usual position of not being able to afford an Alienware or Falcon Northwest but knowing enough about PC's to build them and avoiding the usual E-Machines or Dell.

Though I wear bifocals now, and actually paid to have the socket T mobo and processor installed (and I installed everything else), I've been building PCs since my first 386SX when the processor came soldered on the motherboards and no one expected to need more than a 40 meg hard drive or more than a meg of RAM with DR DOS 6.

Before that it was gaming on mainframes (Advent!) and home PCs like the Atari 1200, Laser 128 and Commodore 64. If I didn't play PC games and if my wife didn't do 3D animation, we'd probably still be using a K62-450 and a Pentium III 733 for our two PCs.

I am so glad that console prices have finally caught up to upgrading a PC, now people can't argue that it's so much cheaper to get a console. They can still argue that it's easier, but upgrading's easy enough for me and it's fun besides.
July 10, 2006 12:21:48 AM

to be honest i never realy liked consoles, just the fact that they have only one use-games, is not worth geting them, and besides there is no posibility of upgrading them, pc's on the other hand have much more multirasking options. and are more "expandable" upgrade wise. for now ill be just building a new pc with the old win xp, vista is just to overrated(so far). and as usual m$ is trying to get more cash from people by having the dx10 tied to vista.
July 10, 2006 12:23:39 AM

Quote:
If Dx10 gets delayed until VISTA, I'll get a cheap board.


Er - DX10 is Vista only

Quote:
Which will be 10x better than what I got now.


Will it? How? 10 x better thana P4 2.8? Much as I'd love this to happen please show us all how.
July 10, 2006 12:25:36 AM

there wil be ways to get dx10 quality, not having vista :wink:
July 10, 2006 12:38:56 AM

Sure.

Buy an X-Box 720
July 10, 2006 12:47:23 AM

i didnt mean that :wink: ....lol didnt i say before that consoles are crapy? :wink: (in my opinion) :wink:
July 10, 2006 12:51:34 AM

Well, if you know other ways to get DX10 on something other than Vista, speak up, don't just type a lousy wink ;)  like that.

If you doni't know, then just shut up or go away or both.
July 10, 2006 2:19:12 AM

hm... ur reply:
"Sure.

Buy an X-Box 720"

would u reply to it "If you doni't know, then just shut up or go away or both." ? see i would but i didnt do that, even thou that you didnt even have an idea what u ere writing about.....why people just flame others, without even thinking what they wrote in the past? :cry: 

and in reards to geting the dx10 efects on non vista os, there might be a way :wink: i might try to do it when i build my new rig, i doubt it would work on this pc that im using at present.
July 10, 2006 11:04:34 AM

Quote:
there wil be ways to get dx10 quality, not having vista :wink:


I beg to differ. The visual quality of games supporting DX 9.0c and DX 10 might be very close, but DX 10's geometry shaders won't be doable on DX 9 hardware, or with DX 10 hardware running under Windows XP.

I'm far from a Microsoft booster. IMHO (to use Elder Scrolls lore imagery) Microsoft is the 800lb Imga styling itself "Baron Bill" while sniffing a scented corner of its cloak when it encounters all the lesser hairless apes.

I do have to admit that they are forcing gamers to be early adopters of Vista because of DX10. I think we'll see more than just Microsoft owned studios requiring Vista over the next couple of years.
July 11, 2006 1:35:32 PM

i didnt mean it will be posible to get all the efects of dx10 but i ment more than regular dx9 ofers us so far, btw i heard a new dx9 is coming out dx9L will that be a dx 9 emulation for vista which normaly will be using dx10? btw i heard there might be a problem with the new dx10 cards, and support for older games (1 or 2 years old) on vista, are the rumors true? will ity mean that some games like fear, battle for middle earth 2 , age of empires 3 and couple older games wont work at all in vista?

thx
!