I7 920 to be discontinued...

...we all knew the 940 was going out due to the 950... but what's up with ditching the 920?

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/05/28/intel-to-discontinue-core-i7-920-940-cpus/1
48 answers Last reply
More about discontinued
  1. gawddangs?

    So that means i7 owners are screwed on any future CPU upgrade options since it's gonna be uber expensive...

    I guess this is good news for the i5...?
  2. Well... I guess we'll just have to change mobo's and CPU's(as well as heatsink brackets if you bought aftermarket)... Good thing I decided to get the cheapest i7 than wait for the 975 only to know that the socket is obsolete within a year... good luck to every i7 user out there...
  3. Bluescreendeath said:
    gawddangs?

    So that means i7 owners are screwed on any future CPU upgrade options since it's gonna be uber expensive...

    I guess this is good news for the i5...?


    Yeah - until AMD can get their butts caught up to Intel's core i7 chip. Hop to it AMD.

    Good news is I've got more PC than I need with the 920 for at least the next 3 years - probably closer to 5.
  4. ^ I hope it's not a gaming PC because if it is then lower that max to 2 1/2 years.

    On topic though, if they discontinue the 920 then they've lost pretty much 80%+ of i7's sales. They must have been really trusting in i5, well they better hope that AMD doesn't just bring in some kick-ass processor under $400 the day after the 920 is discontinued.
  5. Well, except looking at the i5 lineup, the top end i5 should be as fast as (or faster than) an i7 920 anyways, so they aren't losing that price/performance spot, just replacing it. Besides, they have always been open about their intentions with i7 as an extreme high end part anyways.
  6. Seems like X58 will be fine. Gulftown 32nm with six core will work on some X58. I will more than happy to have a six-core processor and probably I will not stress about upgrading for some years.
    http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12443&Itemid=1
  7. eh? you'll better buy that 920 while you still can. lol?
    Future upgrades will cost a ton, but probably by that time there's something completely different on the market and you'll need a whole new rig anyways...
  8. cjl said:
    Well, except looking at the i5 lineup, the top end i5 should be as fast as (or faster than) an i7 920 anyways, so they aren't losing that price/performance spot, just replacing it. Besides, they have always been open about their intentions with i7 as an extreme high end part anyways.


    Yeah - but I just stretched my build budget to get an i7 with the intention of a future upgrade on the socket. If I'm limited solely to 500.00 cpu's and AM3 is still available as a socket to build on - you'll be darned sure I'll be inclined to become an AMD fanboy - on the basis they are more consumer friendly.

    I'm still glad I got the i7 - but Intel shafting it's customer base isn't something I consider a favorable attribute.
  9. They are not making any money on the i7 920 ... so it makes sense to remove any product that competes with present LGA775 offerings (Q965 and higher) and upcoming i5 products ... which are cheaper to produce.

    I bet the mobo manufacturers will be spitting chips ... mobo sales for i7 sockets would mainly be with a 920 purchase I imagine.
  10. isn't the top end i5 a 2.93ghz though? and it still costs $562 or something like that so although you'd get more performance it would cost nearly double the 920.

    @hefox, sure, you can still get a 32nm 6 core cpu for x58 later but less than 6 months later amd will have rolled out their 28nm line or their 45nm 12 cores.
  11. Reynod said:
    They are not making any money on the i7 920 ... so it makes sense to remove any product that competes with present LGA775 offerings (Q965 and higher) and upcoming i5 products ... which are cheaper to produce.



    Not sure on that one. Maybe there's just not enough demand for their higher end chips to be worth it in their view - and hence not enough volume at the price they'd like to charge.

    Any way you slice it - there's only so many people willing to pay 500 or 1,000 dollars for a processor. Getting rid of the 920 isn't going to change that any.
  12. Helloworld_98 said:
    isn't the top end i5 a 2.93ghz though? and it still costs $562 or something like that so although you'd get more performance it would cost nearly double the 920.

    @hefox, sure, you can still get a 32nm 6 core cpu for x58 later but less than 6 months later amd will have rolled out their 28nm line or their 45nm 12 cores.


    Oh really?! It never even crossed my mind. Oh course something better will get on the market in 6 months. It always does. This is nature of IT world. But also matters how well this 12 cores will work and if it will be able beat the 6 core from Intel.
  13. ^ well 12 real cores are better than 12 hyperthreads so it should do better in apps that can use that amount of threads.

    also normally it doesn't get that much better in 6 months, normally it takes 9-12 months to get that much more power.
  14. Yes, but I'm pretty sure that AMD's 12 core is not a consumer product. It will probably be available as an Opteron only.
  15. Intel was upfront about their future plans for the i7. That's why I didn't upgrade to i7. The current Q9's are good enough / fast enough.
  16. ^ so far.

    and don't amd enter the desktop market around the same time as the server market with the same technology?

    except K10.5, it's different because the opteron version of the same tech comes out after the desktop version.
  17. Hmm, I'll believe this when Intel announces it or a few more reputable sources than unnamed "Taiwanese motherboard manufacturers" mention it.
  18. Amother reason to cut the i7 920 would be to force clearance of excess Penryn stock on 755.

    Pehaps the eild on the i7 are poor too?? Perhaps more costly to produce?

    I imagine with the recession Intel has an aweful lot of inventory of core2 ... and the yeilds on those were very good ... so plenty of 965 etc higher end quads in boxes on shelves.

    They did announce several price cuts on those.

    The 45nm core2 quads are not to be sneezed at either.

    Very good overclockers and still slightly faster than Phenom II ... plus the mobo price is comparable ... much cheaper to make than the i7 boards.
  19. EQPlayer said:
    ...we all knew the 940 was going out due to the 950... but what's up with ditching the 920?

    http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/05/28/intel-to-discontinue-core-i7-920-940-cpus/1


    Speculation is so FUN... (or is that FUD?)

    Intel is still selling 975 chipsets. So I think that this rumour is just that - a rumour. If it proves out to be a fact, it would be the shortest lived chipset in Intel's history to the best of my knowledge.
  20. Don't forget to buy i7 for future proofing, this tech is going to be around for years to come!
  21. So i7 920s get owned by the i5s in terms of gaming? dangs
  22. Quote:
    I agree. Theres no use for anything more than quad unless your running a server anyways, so even a 6 core would be just a dumb purchase this year.

    Hell neither Intel or AMD can even build a 3ghz quad at less than 125/130w.


    The Q9650 is a 3GHz quad. I believe the TDP is 95W. I believe Intel can and did build a 3Ghz quad before.
  23. Helloworld_98 said:
    isn't the top end i5 a 2.93ghz though? and it still costs $562 or something like that so although you'd get more performance it would cost nearly double the 920.

    @hefox, sure, you can still get a 32nm 6 core cpu for x58 later but less than 6 months later amd will have rolled out their 28nm line or their 45nm 12 cores.


    28nm in 2010? I doubt it. Intels 32nm is coming in 2009 and their 22nm is set for 2011. Considering even IBM stated they were having trouble with HK/MG they plan on 32nm (not as easy as they thought) I doubt AMD will have anything smaller than 32nm until 2012+.

    And as said before, their 12 core is going to be a Opty not a Phenom. Even so I would admit 16 real cores would be pure overkill for a gaming mashince....
  24. Quote:
    I agree. Theres no use for anything more than quad unless your running a server anyways, so even a 6 core would be just a dumb purchase this year.

    Hell neither Intel or AMD can even build a 3ghz quad at less than 125/130w.


    Yep. Q9650, 45nm, 95W, 3.0GHz Core 2 Quad.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115130
  25. In like 2016, I'm gonna buy the cheapest system available, and its gonna smash every single i7 compy...

    Hehe...
  26. amdfangirl said:
    In like 2016, I'm gonna buy the cheapest system available, and its gonna smash every single i7 compy...

    Hehe...


    ...But will it be AMD? And if not, how 'cheap' will 'cheap really be in 2016?
  27. I swear I'm from the future. I know alot of things from the future...

    Like how the EU buys AMD, Barack Obama eats an apple, Luke Skywalker destroys the Death Star...
  28. amdfangirl said:
    I swear I'm from the future. I know alot of things from the future...

    Like how the EU buys AMD, Barack Obama eats an apple, Luke Skywalker destroys the Death Star...


    My crystal ball seems to think that your first prediction is dead wrong... Maybe Motorolla, if they weren't so much in the hole, or TI... But why would they want to? But the EU? Over your govt's dead bodies. (But at the current rate, THAT might happen.)
  29. ^ +1
  30. Anand's latest article seems to agree with my views.

    Note ... I am not Anand.

    I have better carpentry skills than he does for a start.
  31. amdfangirl said:
    I swear I'm from the future. I know alot of things from the future...

    Like how the EU buys AMD, Barack Obama eats an apple, Luke Skywalker destroys the Death Star...


    PURE FUD!!!!

    We all know Luke destroyed the Death Star a long time ago...
  32. Back in the 70's, or was it a long long time ago?
  33. Bluescreendeath said:
    Back in the 70's, or was it a long long time ago?


    No, just in a galaxy far, far away.
  34. Heh, I dont know, some days breakfast seems like it was a long time ago...
  35. Reynod said:
    Amother reason to cut the i7 920 would be to force clearance of excess Penryn stock on 755.

    Pehaps the eild on the i7 are poor too?? Perhaps more costly to produce?

    I imagine with the recession Intel has an aweful lot of inventory of core2 ... and the yeilds on those were very good ... so plenty of 965 etc higher end quads in boxes on shelves.

    They did announce several price cuts on those.

    The 45nm core2 quads are not to be sneezed at either.

    Very good overclockers and still slightly faster than Phenom II ... plus the mobo price is comparable ... much cheaper to make than the i7 boards.


    Hmm, everything I've read indicated Intel's yields on 45nm are excellent - surpassing their excellent 65nm yields at every stage. Granted the i7 is monolithic, but given the fact that AMD has had to sell quite a few monolithic P2 X3's, I'd bet that Intel's yields are better.

    The Anandtech article didn't indicate the i920 was on the way out either - I'd think that if AT knew that, it'd be all over the Dailytech news. IMHO, these "discontinued" rumors are pure FUD until proven otherwise, about on a par with AMD discontinuing their 955 already.
  36. amdfangirl said:
    I swear I'm from the future. I know alot of things from the future...

    Like how the EU buys AMD, Barack Obama eats an apple, Luke Skywalker destroys the Death Star...


    Methinks somebody has been nipping at the chocolate liqueur again :D
  37. Current i7 news mentions the new i975 and i950, but no mention of any discontinuance of the i920:

    Quote:
    Numerous online stores have started to sell Intel Corp.’s yet unannounced microprocessors. The move indicates that the world’s largest chipmaker is about to officially release them and improve its performance leadership in the high-end market.

    The new processors are Intel Core i7 975 Extreme Edition (four cores, 3.33GHz, 1MB L2 cache, 8MB L3 cache, 6.40GT/s quick path interconnect bus) as well as Intel Core i7 950 (four cores, 3.06GHz, 1MB L2 cache, 8MB L3 cache, 4.80GT/s quick path interconnect bus). The new Extreme processors costs about $1100, whereas the highest-end non-Extreme processor for $600 to $650.

    Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition chip that works at 3.33GHz uses newer stepping and can boast with lower power consumption and hence overclockability compared to its predecessor. It is highly likely that the Core i7-950 is also based on the same D0 processor stepping.
  38. fazers_on_stun said:
    Methinks somebody has been nipping at the chocolate liqueur again :D


    ;)
  39. Intel is making to much money from this chip to discontinue it, it's their low end money maker, do not believe this.
  40. Intel could have some method to this madness, and the lynnfield does fill the gaps perfectly. I don't think they expected the 920 to be such a monster and take over 90% of all I7 sales, the 940 just might come down in price a bit as they draw new lines in the sand...
  41. Annoying news, if true. This will mean we're forced into a decision to go with the mainstream socket, and be limited to mainstream CPUs, or go with the performance socket, and potentially have to pay out the ass later down the road when Intel only releases overpriced extreme chips for it.

    Without a crystal ball to see whether the i7's bandwidth advantages will pan out into superior performance down the road... or whether Intel will release worthwhile mainstream chips 2 years from now... or how overpriced the Socket LGA1366 chips will be...

    I'd almost rather risk going with i5's socket LGA 1156, since I have a greater fear of having to dish out $700-1000 for a CPU down the road, than there not being any decent mainstream CPUs available. Suppose, if I make the wrong decision, at least I didn't spend as much on the mobo and such, while with 1366 the risk is higher right along with the part costs.
  42. i don't understand, ditching a big seller. it's like McDonald's ditching the Big Mac or Burger King ditching the Double Whopper with Cheese or Rubio's ditching fish taco's. i just don't get it.
  43. Quote:
    I agree. Theres no use for anything more than quad unless your running a server anyways,.

    And
    fulle said:

    Without a crystal ball to see whether the i7's bandwidth advantages will pan out into superior performance down the road...


    That is not true at all.
    Nowadays this tech is wellcomed and its expected mobile brothers have been waited for months already
    it seems that not many people knows about yet, but i7 and its 1366 socket has been the base for the first real-world stable workstations for musicians latency-wise.

    Before i7, even with good Core 2 duos everything (soft & hardware options) has to be very carefully tweaked to avoid glitches and pops latency induced, particularly at live configurations.

    There are different latency measures for this use here

    You see, for any musician wanting to carry a laptop (not even an actual Latitude E6400 cuts it) + midi controllers + soundcard to a giig and then to be able to securely perform or record it -error free-, this tech is a dream that is being pushed into the future already since Intel's last year decision to delay the i7 tech into laptops... and now the rumour comes that i7 bandwith (and its correspondendt lower latencies for multitasking ) are going to be ditched off for i5... :o

    Terrible news indeed (for a large but segmented market) if they come to be true.
    Listen Intel, dell & all, -if you are listening- some of us are not buying because your lappies are yet not clearly delivering and i7's promise has to be mobile for that to happen...Faster duos and embeded what not 32 45 extras will not deliver what we aim for... bandwith.

    The moment that it comes out, reasonably costing (920-940 range), I'd personally (and pbbly many more users) will spread the news on musician, Djs, forums. So far the reliable tool is not out, hence you cant measure its sales..
  44. i5 will have the lower latency and higher bandwidth of i7. It will have even lower PCI-E latency due to the on die PCI-E controller, and the memory controller is identical except that it only has 2 channels instead of three (and I seriously doubt if any musical stuff would stutter with 15-18GB/sec of bandwidth, but not with 25). Basically, it should be just as good as i7 for that application.
  45. amdfangirl said:
    ^ +1



    hmmmm..... your signature line says:

    "Silting your wrist lowers blood pressure, maybe you should try it?"


    Since I have decided to become an advocate for spelling and grammar on the Internet, I have noticed that at least 1/2 of all people on the Internet can't "speel", while grammar is rilly, rilly bad. So, I noticed this, but it made me wonder: how do you "Silt" your wrist? Do you submerge it in a slow-flowing river for a few days until it is covered in silt, or ????

    Since I need to lower my blood pressure, I am most anxious to find out how this works!

    Or, maybe it would be better if I mind my own business and just assume that "your" doing "your" best? That may lower my blood pressure even more than "silting my wrist"?

    Am I the only person who knows how to turn on the spell checkers in Windows? It "rilly" isn't that hawrd too dew....
  46. Nspace said:
    And


    That is not true at all.
    Nowadays this tech is wellcomed and its expected mobile brothers have been waited for months already
    it seems that not many people knows about yet, but i7 and its 1366 socket has been the base for the first real-world stable workstations for musicians latency-wise.

    Before i7, even with good Core 2 duos everything (soft & hardware options) has to be very carefully tweaked to avoid glitches and pops latency induced, particularly at live configurations.

    There are different latency measures for this use here

    You see, for any musician wanting to carry a laptop (not even an actual Latitude E6400 cuts it) + midi controllers + soundcard to a giig and then to be able to securely perform or record it -error free-, this tech is a dream that is being pushed into the future already since Intel's last year decision to delay the i7 tech into laptops... and now the rumour comes that i7 bandwith (and its correspondendt lower latencies for multitasking ) are going to be ditched off for i5... :o

    Terrible news indeed (for a large but segmented market) if they come to be true.
    Listen Intel, dell & all, -if you are listening- some of us are not buying because your lappies are yet not clearly delivering and i7's promise has to be mobile for that to happen...Faster duos and embeded what not 32 45 extras will not deliver what we aim for... bandwith.

    The moment that it comes out, reasonably costing (920-940 range), I'd personally (and pbbly many more users) will spread the news on musician, Djs, forums. So far the reliable tool is not out, hence you cant measure its sales..

    So, as a musician, you seem to be saying, you dont like the sound of this?
  47. Bluescreendeath said:
    So i7 920s get owned by the i5s in terms of gaming? dangs



    my D0 i7 920 OCed to 4 Ghz begs to differ....

    The true test of the i5 or i3 is how good do they OC, if they can hit at least 4.0~4.2 with a nice after market hsf (i have the true) or 3.5~3.8 with stock then they are just as good as the i7s (if they have the same perf/clock, they should if its the same core tech...), the 6 GB of LV ram is making me upgrade to win 7 64 RC1, and that wasn't what I was hoping for... while it was a more pleasant ride than the vista test I did with just hot off the shelf version (Office 2k3 crash, games instability, printer driver went nuts and UAC nagging me when at the time, it wasn't clear on how to nuke that off the planet).

    At least I can claim I rode out the beta for win 7 that is vista tho
  48. Itll be interesting on the 920, as its been the driving force of the 1366, and how well it competes with comparable i5s, if as you say, and were all wondering, just how well i5s oc.
    If they end up ocing at least as well as i7s, this will hurt the i7 sales overall, and keep them in a small niche IMHO. If this happens, what Intel does to decide on keeping the 920, or moving the other prices downwards on the newer i7s, who knows, since therell be a small definition of perf seen on DT, other than the PCI restrictions.
    Intels problem is, how will they seperate a difference, and thereby justify the i7s extra costs?
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Intel i7 Product