Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

I7 2600K Overclocked! 4.9 GHz!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 2:17:31 PM

Hey all! So heres a video of the i7 2600K, Sandy Bridge unlocked of course, being overclocked to 4.9 GHz stable on air:

http://apcmag.com/Content.aspx?id=6203

Stock frequency is 3.4 GHz, for a clock increase of over 44% on air! Keep in mind, this is a K edition, top end, and likely cherry picked for the best of the best one. Id expect these to hit 4.5 GHz air for the normal person with a normal air cooler and a good motherboard. Non-K edition really dont seem to be able to OC as of now.

More about : 2600k overclocked ghz

a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 2:24:45 PM

That made no sense :lol:  Care to explain? And does anybody else find it humourous how they specifically say to blot it out, and then at the very end it gives you a clear as day view of the side, and almost clear view of the times and scores? I DID! :lol: 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 2:32:49 PM

Like i said, Intel has always done this, and has always cherrypicked the very best manufactured ones to do this, with the most professional team, and so on. Like i said, normal people will likely be seeing 4.5 GHz. And sure thats good, but its 32nm, so its not really anything AMAZING per se. Id rather see scores, temps, voltage, and such.
Score
0
Related resources
September 16, 2010 2:49:27 PM

My i7 930 was at 4.2ghz for a little wile on air, ok temps were 70's on load playing Mafia II and Assassin's Creed II, and crashed 6 hours into game play. CPU related, doubtful..
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 2:56:29 PM

Yeah, and thats with likely not as good of a air cooler as they had, or as well of an air cooled case (no offense :lol:  ), it wasnt 32nm, and it wasnt cherry picked best of the best. So 4.9 GHz is great and all, but the circumstances dont make it much of a game changer.
Score
0
a c 133 à CPUs
September 16, 2010 3:22:05 PM

ares1214 said:
That made no sense :lol:  Care to explain? And does anybody else find it humourous how they specifically say to blot it out, and then at the very end it gives you a clear as day view of the side, and almost clear view of the times and scores? I DID! :lol: 

It never showed the final time and score. The highest score on the list is a xeon @3.2ghz (W5680) and the guy in the video said the score was north of 12 so all we got from that video is that its fast and it will be based clocked at 3.4ghz.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 3:46:23 PM

I said it almost was so clear you could see the time and score.
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 16, 2010 3:55:28 PM

Well I was close. First release of SB might hit 5GHz air and subsiquent releases and steppings might hit over 5GHz on air.

I wonder what liquid could do then....
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 4:14:41 PM

Subsiquent steppings might hit 5 GHz air. But this undoubtably was a cherry picked one, so i dont expect this. Down the road, definitely, but at the begining, nope. Maybe although. Liquid might be pushing 6 GHz, but assuming they used the best aircooler, which they likely did, id guess 5.5 GHz fairly easily. Pretty exciting stuff though. What im more excited about is the locked bus. If the bus is locked, and the multiplier is not on these K edition ones, then it means the only difference between the 3.4 GHz K edition and a 3.06 GHz K edition is JUST the adjustable multiplier being set higher. Now, knowing intel the 3.4 GHz one will sell for $100+ more than the lower multiplier ones, and the K edition themselves will come at a premium no doubt, but these means overclocking a 3.06 GHz K will be the exact same as 3.4 GHz, and extremely easy, and likely a very good value. Just crank the multiplier up on both of them. None of this $1000 black edition non sense.
Score
0
September 16, 2010 5:38:56 PM

Everytime I read about K-series being unlocked it seems they always mention they still only have 57-multipliers. If that goes down to sub 500Mhz, it means that even K series can't go past 6Ghz, regardless of cooling/voltage.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 5:49:38 PM

That is a possibility, but getting it past 6 GHz likely wouldnt be possible without the best LCS, or liquid nitrogen. Most people probably wont see it past 4.5-5 GHz.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 6:09:46 PM

4.4 -4.5 is possible on the current 32nm clarksdales, its the 45nm igp , which has the imc (memory controller) in those models that holds them back.
Going from 3.8 - 4.2 for current Intel Quads i5-i7's, to 4.0 - 4.7 for socket 1155 should be EXCITING for everyone. !


The rep at the end of the video, after he notes the rendering was done faster than a 12 core operton.
Behold the power of Sandy Bridge.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 6:37:09 PM

@ Notty, yeah, sure, but this was starting at 3.4 GHz. Lets say the avergae person with a good aircooler can get this to 4.7 GHz. 3.4 GHz-4.7 GHz is 38% increase, i7 was 2.8 to 4.1 GHz easy, and thats 46% increase. So now really behold the power of SB, its not like its getting better overclocking from stock necessarily. Its good, but its not an AMD crusher like half the people here have said. And @ ZZFH, yeah. the one anadtech got was over $550, the same used here. Then the locked version of that is $200 less. So its not gonna be good paying a premium for the unlocked ones. Then you get bumped down to now hyperthreading, which for some people may not matter, but is still a real bummer. :pfff: 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 6:43:11 PM

Please don't claim to know the pricing. Your guessing. Unless you have a link.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 6:48:42 PM

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

Quote:
It’s based on this roadmap that I mentioned some pricing earlier. If all stays the same, the Core i7 2600K will take the place of the Core i7 950, currently priced at $562. The 2600 will fit somewhere around the 680 and 875K ($342) and the 2500K will replace the i5 760/655K ($205 - $216).

The cheapest Sandy Bridge at launch will be the Core i3 2100, which will replace the i3 560 at around $138.


Tsk Tsk, always so untrusting. Granted, they might fluctuate a little at release, but those are it. Then on the CPU chart lineup:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

Only the 2600K and 2600 show hyperthreading. Considering those 2, as posted above cost $562, and $342 respectively, then that means the cheapest one, apparently, they might do something, but from this chart, the cheapest one with HT is $342. The Cheapest one that can OC is just over $200. And the cheapest one with both is $562 apparently.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 6:51:00 PM

Those were current CPU pricing. Now, you cant honestly tell me Intel will release them from very far away from those prices. The big price cuts were just to make room for this. And this follows Intels pricing lately. It wouldnt surprise me if they cost even more than what he said for current gen.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 6:55:38 PM

ares1214 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

Quote:
It’s based on this roadmap that I mentioned some pricing earlier. If all stays the same, the Core i7 2600K will take the place of the Core i7 950, currently priced at $562. The 2600 will fit somewhere around the 680 and 875K ($342) and the 2500K will replace the i5 760/655K ($205 - $216).

The cheapest Sandy Bridge at launch will be the Core i3 2100, which will replace the i3 560 at around $138.


Tsk Tsk, always so untrusting. Granted, they might fluctuate a little at release, but those are it. Then on the CPU chart lineup:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

Only the 2600K and 2600 show hyperthreading. Considering those 2, as posted above cost $562, and $342 respectively, then that means the cheapest one, apparently, they might do something, but from this chart, the cheapest one with HT is $342. The Cheapest one that can OC is just over $200. And the cheapest one with both is $562 apparently.

Listen , we still don't know the prices. He's postulating where the cpu's might compare to current offerings. Model positioning.
Also right now the i7 950 is 300.00 dollars.
A certain someone takes liberal use of 'AMD says' needs to be fact checked.
I also expect the 2500K to be a little more than 210.00 the current i5-760 price, but I won't complain if it comes in at that.
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 16, 2010 7:07:09 PM

ares1214 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

Quote:
It’s based on this roadmap that I mentioned some pricing earlier. If all stays the same, the Core i7 2600K will take the place of the Core i7 950, currently priced at $562. The 2600 will fit somewhere around the 680 and 875K ($342) and the 2500K will replace the i5 760/655K ($205 - $216).

The cheapest Sandy Bridge at launch will be the Core i3 2100, which will replace the i3 560 at around $138.


Tsk Tsk, always so untrusting. Granted, they might fluctuate a little at release, but those are it. Then on the CPU chart lineup:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

Only the 2600K and 2600 show hyperthreading. Considering those 2, as posted above cost $562, and $342 respectively, then that means the cheapest one, apparently, they might do something, but from this chart, the cheapest one with HT is $342. The Cheapest one that can OC is just over $200. And the cheapest one with both is $562 apparently.


If this is true, that 2500K will easily push AMD to make pretty large price cuts as well. I doubt that Phenom II will be able to keep up with SB on a clock per clock and this is a unlocked CPU meaning it will OC much like a BE using the multiplier mainly.

Then we have to just wait and see what the mobo vendors do. Asus has been showing promise with seperate EPU chips. Maybe they will find a way to allow us to clock the BCLK higher without frying the USB/SATA.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 7:18:54 PM

@ Notty, the 950 is $300 after how long on the market? If you honestly think the 2600K will release at $300 just because thats where the 950 is NOW, you cant guess. His guesses are right in line with what intel is, has, and usually does. i5 750 for $200, add hyperthreading for an extra $100, then add the next model up as far as clock speed to bring it up to $500+. Its the exact same thing. Those are very likely what Intel will release them at, and im sure he has some inside info, so his numbers seem right on. Even if they are a little off, the only direction id imagine them going is up.

@Jimmy, The motherboard fix is possible, but im not getting my hopes up. Intel obviously did it for a reason besides pissing off overclockers :lol:  Likely reason is possibly adds a tiny bit of speed, makes the motherboards cheaper, and lets them charge more for the overclocking models. I doubt intel would want them messing with any of those. Even then, it wouldnt surprise me if the added cost of the mobo makes it the same as buying an unlocked CPU. But i suppose it is possible. And AMD likely wont be getting many buys between the release of SB and Llano, but they just have to really consolidate their efforts in the low end, making Zacate go well, and using ATI, which is very much so ahead. But your definitely right, AMD is gonna be really behind and going to have to really cut prices if they cant hurry things up.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 7:50:55 PM

ares1214 said:
@ Notty, the 950 is $300 after how long on the market? If you honestly think the 2600K will release at $300 just because thats where the 950 is NOW, you cant guess. His guesses are right in line with what intel is, has, and usually does. i5 750 for $200, add hyperthreading for an extra $100, then add the next model up as far as clock speed to bring it up to $500+. Its the exact same thing. Those are very likely what Intel will release them at, and im sure he has some inside info, so his numbers seem right on. Even if they are a little off, the only direction id imagine them going is up.


Hoy, I don't suggest any price, and I don't think Anand did either. He addressed pricing in a round about way, because he knew people would ask.
So he went over the current model lineup and threw a dart at Sandy Bridge positioning.

Then you take literally , Anand said they are going to be XX.xx .
I disagree with that guessing.

First off your hyperthreading argument does not hold true on Clarksdale.
Intel Pentium G6950 99.00
I3 530 110.00
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2010 8:16:33 PM

That "guessing" as you call it is entirely logical, and extremely probable. And the SB we are talking about isnt in that price range, and therefore the point is moot. I provided what its replacing, and its current price range, and it fits it.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 6:47:26 AM

I think that this CPU should be priced like the i7 875K.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 11:04:35 AM

What CPU? Personally, from a purely speculative view point, which honestly likely will be partially true, i think:

2500: $169

2500K: $210

2600: $280

2600K: $350-500
Score
0
November 16, 2010 11:20:23 AM

what do you think would be a better deal? the 2600? or the 2500k? say you OC the 2500k to around 4.2 ghz how would that perform compared to the 2600?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 16, 2010 8:41:13 PM

gordon_81 said:
what do you think would be a better deal? the 2600? or the 2500k? say you OC the 2500k to around 4.2 ghz how would that perform compared to the 2600?


The 2500K could probably hit 4.5 GHz with decent cooling...
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 16, 2010 10:18:22 PM

jimmysmitty said:
If this is true, that 2500K will easily push AMD to make pretty large price cuts as well. I doubt that Phenom II will be able to keep up with SB on a clock per clock and this is a unlocked CPU meaning it will OC much like a BE using the multiplier mainly.

Then we have to just wait and see what the mobo vendors do. Asus has been showing promise with seperate EPU chips. Maybe they will find a way to allow us to clock the BCLK higher without frying the USB/SATA.


Hmm, from the other SB OC thread http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/293759-28-first-sandy...:

Quote:
Intel Core i7 2600K at 5120MHz on Nov 15, 2010 on air


So it looks like that the 2600K will be the gamer's choice, at least until the 6, 8 and maybe 10-core performance/extreme CPUs come out later in the year, and if there are a reasonable number of games able to make use of all those threads by then :p ..

Edit: Looks like the 2600K will also be a monster for rendering:

Quote:
During the demo, which you can see below, an Intel spokesman observes that the benchmark result in Cinebench is faster than a 12 core AMD Opteron.


I'd guess that 12-core Opteron is a Magny-Cours :p ..
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
November 16, 2010 11:03:17 PM

If the 2500K is $210 then I would be half tempted to just push for SB and not wait for 22nm and AMDs offering then. I mean a unlocked CPU that can push over 4GHz on air would be great for a long term build.

Dare I say that SB will probably not bottleneck any current gen or next gen GPUs in a multi GPU configruation for a long while.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 17, 2010 9:50:00 AM

jimmysmitty said:
If the 2500K is $210 then I would be half tempted to just push for SB and not wait for 22nm and AMDs offering then. I mean a unlocked CPU that can push over 4GHz on air would be great for a long term build.

Dare I say that SB will probably not bottleneck any current gen or next gen GPUs in a multi GPU configruation for a long while.


I forget, do both the 2600 and 2500 have HT? If the 2500 doesnt, then it hitting 4 GHz at $210 isnt so much better than the i5 750. Good thing it can probably hit 4.6GHz+ :lol:  If Llano is "based" on the Stars arch, id be interested in seeing how or if it does keep up.
Score
0
November 17, 2010 5:45:04 PM

the 2500 does not have HT, the 2600 does.

Clock for clock these will be faster than the i7 950 so will be better even at the same OC frequency right?

I can't wait to see the pricing. Hopefully the i7 2600k isn't really $500 vs $210 on the 2500k. At that price if they main difference is 8 threads vs 4, it will be tough for me to pay that much of a premium. If its $300 area vs $210 then maybe I'll splurge.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 17, 2010 5:50:14 PM

hogan773 said:
the 2500 does not have HT, the 2600 does.

Clock for clock these will be faster than the i7 950 so will be better even at the same OC frequency right?

I can't wait to see the pricing. Hopefully the i7 2600k isn't really $500 vs $210 on the 2500k. At that price if they main difference is 8 threads vs 4, it will be tough for me to pay that much of a premium. If its $300 area vs $210 then maybe I'll splurge.


My guess is 2500, $189-200, 2500K, $200-229, 2600 $259-289, 2600K $300-329, but thats just me. They very well may price the 2600K at $500.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 17, 2010 5:53:20 PM

Personally I'm interested in the mobile versions of the SB's, as I need a new 17" laptop since the old Dell 1710 crapped out last week with the faulty Nvidia 7900 GT GPU. I'd probably go for one with a discrete GPU however, since I do tend to play games on it when traveling, and although the onboard GPU looks good, I doubt it'll be as good as the 7900.

Nvidia's GPU settlement hearing is 12/20, and so I expect to either get a replacement for the Dell or get the GPU upgraded for free, but that'll take until next spring I guess.
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
November 17, 2010 8:05:21 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Personally I'm interested in the mobile versions of the SB's, as I need a new 17" laptop since the old Dell 1710 crapped out last week with the faulty Nvidia 7900 GT GPU. I'd probably go for one with a discrete GPU however, since I do tend to play games on it when traveling, and although the onboard GPU looks good, I doubt it'll be as good as the 7900.

Nvidia's GPU settlement hearing is 12/20, and so I expect to either get a replacement for the Dell or get the GPU upgraded for free, but that'll take until next spring I guess.


Believe it or not HP had a major problem with that and the nVidia 6200 GPU. SOOOO many dead video laptops. People asked about a mobo replacement since it was a on mobo GPU and I told them it wasn't worth it seeing as it was about $350 for the mobo and $100 for install.

If you do get a new laptop I would suggest going with Asus. They have really nice laptops and on a quality report, was somewhere aound 2-3x higher in scores than any other OEM. Plus they don't fill your OS up with crap ware at all.

As for the SB CPUs, I am not sure why they will have only one Core i7 to start. But I was thinking..... if the mobo makers find a way to at least give you control over the multiplier on the non K editions you could still OC the 2600 to 3.8GHz. Probably well over what you really need for anything but still nice.

As for the overclockers themselves, I would bet that they would disable the on board SATA and USB and use a PCIe SSD and a PCI USB for the rest so they can OC the BCLK. The only thing that stops the BCLK from going up from what I have read is the USB/SATA controllers.

But we shall see.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 17, 2010 8:29:45 PM

jimmysmitty said:
Believe it or not HP had a major problem with that and the nVidia 6200 GPU. SOOOO many dead video laptops. People asked about a mobo replacement since it was a on mobo GPU and I told them it wasn't worth it seeing as it was about $350 for the mobo and $100 for install.

If you do get a new laptop I would suggest going with Asus. They have really nice laptops and on a quality report, was somewhere aound 2-3x higher in scores than any other OEM. Plus they don't fill your OS up with crap ware at all.

As for the SB CPUs, I am not sure why they will have only one Core i7 to start. But I was thinking..... if the mobo makers find a way to at least give you control over the multiplier on the non K editions you could still OC the 2600 to 3.8GHz. Probably well over what you really need for anything but still nice.

As for the overclockers themselves, I would bet that they would disable the on board SATA and USB and use a PCIe SSD and a PCI USB for the rest so they can OC the BCLK. The only thing that stops the BCLK from going up from what I have read is the USB/SATA controllers.

But we shall see.


I wonder why they tied all the controller together? My guesses are:

  • Possibly intentionally limit overclocking on certain models to keep non overclockers safer and make over clockers spend more

  • Makes motherboards cheaper

  • It gives some performance boost or integration bonuses.

    Or all of them...or none :lol: 
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    November 18, 2010 3:35:17 PM

    jimmysmitty said:
    Believe it or not HP had a major problem with that and the nVidia 6200 GPU. SOOOO many dead video laptops. People asked about a mobo replacement since it was a on mobo GPU and I told them it wasn't worth it seeing as it was about $350 for the mobo and $100 for install.

    If you do get a new laptop I would suggest going with Asus. They have really nice laptops and on a quality report, was somewhere aound 2-3x higher in scores than any other OEM. Plus they don't fill your OS up with crap ware at all.

    As for the SB CPUs, I am not sure why they will have only one Core i7 to start. But I was thinking..... if the mobo makers find a way to at least give you control over the multiplier on the non K editions you could still OC the 2600 to 3.8GHz. Probably well over what you really need for anything but still nice.

    As for the overclockers themselves, I would bet that they would disable the on board SATA and USB and use a PCIe SSD and a PCI USB for the rest so they can OC the BCLK. The only thing that stops the BCLK from going up from what I have read is the USB/SATA controllers.

    But we shall see.


    Yep, I noticed that on the Nvidia's proposed settlement website - quite a few HP models listed as well as Dell's and some others. What's "funny" is that Nvidia has set aside $3M for replacements/repairs, but the legal fees (mainly to the class-action legal team) is something like $28M..

    First thing I usually do with a new laptop is reformat the drive and then do a fresh install of the OS & drivers, just to get rid of the crapware :p .

    I see Anandtech has a holiday preview of lappies, but no Sandy Bridge's yet. I'll keep Asus in mind when the reviews start coming out, thanks.
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    November 18, 2010 5:42:58 PM

    fazers_on_stun said:
    Yep, I noticed that on the Nvidia's proposed settlement website - quite a few HP models listed as well as Dell's and some others. What's "funny" is that Nvidia has set aside $3M for replacements/repairs, but the legal fees (mainly to the class-action legal team) is something like $28M..

    First thing I usually do with a new laptop is reformat the drive and then do a fresh install of the OS & drivers, just to get rid of the crapware :p .

    I see Anandtech has a holiday preview of lappies, but no Sandy Bridge's yet. I'll keep Asus in mind when the reviews start coming out, thanks.


    Asus and MSI for me...
    Score
    0
    a c 110 à CPUs
    November 18, 2010 7:05:52 PM

    ares1214 said:
    I wonder why they tied all the controller together? My guesses are:

  • Possibly intentionally limit overclocking on certain models to keep non overclockers safer and make over clockers spend more

  • Makes motherboards cheaper

  • It gives some performance boost or integration bonuses.

    Or all of them...or none :lol: 


  • You left out ...

  • Put nVidia out of the chipset business

    :ouch: 


    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    November 18, 2010 7:15:19 PM

    Wisecracker said:
    You left out ...

  • Put nVidia out of the chipset business

    :ouch: 


  • Would they really sabotage their own overclocking when Nvidia is already for all intents and purposes out of the chipset business?
    Score
    0
    November 26, 2010 2:40:23 PM

    The biggest problem with unlocked Sandy Bridge is memory bandwidth.

    Even if the average CPU yields 5GHz the old North Bridge has been moved to the CPU. That will limit memory throughput [increase], so, the CPU will be wasting cycles while it waits for data from system memory.

    So, for total system speed increase, what huge benefit will 5GHz be?
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    November 27, 2010 4:12:59 PM

    Danra said:
    The biggest problem with unlocked Sandy Bridge is memory bandwidth.

    Even if the average CPU yields 5GHz the old North Bridge has been moved to the CPU. That will limit memory throughput [increase], so, the CPU will be wasting cycles while it waits for data from system memory.

    So, for total system speed increase, what huge benefit will 5GHz be?


    From the Anandtech review :

    Quote:
    For some reason Intel stopped using the term un-core, instead in Sandy Bridge it’s called the System Agent.

    The System Agent houses the traditional North Bridge. You get a 16 PCIe 2.0 lanes that can be split into two x8s. There’s a redesigned dual-channel DDR3 memory controller that finally restores memory latency to around Lynnfield levels (Clarkdale moved the memory controller off the CPU die and onto the GPU).


    These are the dual-channel mainstream versions. Also saw in the first AT article where the L3 latency was reduced to 26-31 cycles from the 35-43 cycles in Lynnfield, so with the 8MB L3 versions, I don't see much of a problem with reads & writes. Isn't the Photoshop CS4 benchmark bandwidth sensitive? If so, it's worth noting that the dual-channel SB kept up with the tri-channel i7-980X. At least s2011 SB's will be quad-channel from what I've read.

    Should also mention that the PCIe lanes have doubled bandwidth over Lynnfield (5 GT/s vs. 2.5GT/s). So Intel does seem to have paid attention to various bus bandwidth issues...
    Score
    0
    November 30, 2010 8:03:59 AM

    What was meant with mainstream class? Is i7-2600K included in it?
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    November 30, 2010 5:52:11 PM

    andrern2000 said:
    What was meant with mainstream class? Is i7-2600K included in it?


    Yep - all the Sandy's coming out next month are considered "mainstream", in that they are dual-channel and (for Intel) reasonably priced :p .
    Score
    0
    December 1, 2010 1:17:38 AM

    fazers_on_stun said:
    Yep - all the Sandy's coming out next month are considered "mainstream", in that they are dual-channel and (for Intel) reasonably priced :p .

    I thought the i7-2600K is in the high-end class? Well, that's a good news :D 
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    December 1, 2010 8:42:49 AM

    andrern2000 said:
    I thought the i7-2600K is in the high-end class? Well, that's a good news :D 


    It is and it isnt. Ivy Bridge is coming out hopefully sometime next year, but within a year of SB launch. Thats more designed as "high end" for this gen. However the 2600K is the high end class for this generation. Similar to deneb and thuban a little. The 955 came out first, top of its class, go a few clock speed increases, then they release Thuban, the real high end. Not that deneb is high end.
    Score
    0
    December 1, 2010 12:12:18 PM

    Who cares?!? No one's HDD will keep up anyway!
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    December 1, 2010 5:33:50 PM

    ahthurungnone said:
    Who cares?!? No one's HDD will keep up anyway!


    Thats not very true, and its called SSD :kaola: 
    Score
    0
    January 8, 2011 5:23:28 PM

    Why would they put a graphic card in a CPU, for me it makes no sence since, we allready have a GPU.

    Becuase, the graphic inside the new SB can't really keep up with the Crysis or games like that.

    so i think its a waste tbh, when you still can buy GPUs to your PC
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    January 8, 2011 6:23:46 PM

    kivan2400 said:
    Why would they put a graphic card in a CPU, for me it makes no sence since, we allready have a GPU.

    Becuase, the graphic inside the new SB can't really keep up with the Crysis or games like that.

    so i think its a waste tbh, when you still can buy GPUs to your PC

    The graphics are meant for mainstream consumers(not us). Most people will probably use the integrated graphics for general use. The graphics will also be able to accelerate some tasks like browsing for the mainstream.

    I don't know why they put a stronger graphics chip in the K edition though, most will only sit there doing nothing.
    Quote:
    I wonder why they tied all the controller together? My guesses are:

    Possibly intentionally limit overclocking on certain models to keep non overclockers safer and make over clockers spend more

    Makes motherboards cheaper

    It gives some performance boost or integration bonuses.

    Or all of them...or none :lol: 

    I believe it is much easier for them to have one clock signal instead of multiple clock generators sending different signals all over the place.

    The guys at Intel know what they're doing, whether or not that is good for us is another thing. :sarcastic: 
    Score
    0
    February 8, 2011 2:13:14 AM

    Because of the 2600K's higher integrated graphic speed, I also wonder if 2600 sells as equal as 2600K? :) 
    Score
    0
    a c 127 à CPUs
    February 8, 2011 2:52:25 AM

    ares1214 said:
    Like i said, Intel has always done this, and has always cherrypicked the very best manufactured ones to do this, with the most professional team, and so on. Like i said, normal people will likely be seeing 4.5 GHz. And sure thats good, but its 32nm, so its not really anything AMAZING per se. Id rather see scores, temps, voltage, and such.


    Every company does this. Intel, AMD, nVidia and ATI (well AMD). They will take their best silicon and give it to testers and reviewers to make sure it looks its best. Thats why not every CPU or GPU will perform as well or overclocks well. Its marketing.
    Score
    0
    a b à CPUs
    October 24, 2011 9:11:40 PM

    ares1214 said:
    @ Notty, yeah, sure, but this was starting at 3.4 GHz. Lets say the avergae person with a good aircooler can get this to 4.7 GHz. 3.4 GHz-4.7 GHz is 38% increase, i7 was 2.8 to 4.1 GHz easy, and thats 46% increase. So now really behold the power of SB, its not like its getting better overclocking from stock necessarily. Its good, but its not an AMD crusher like half the people here have said. And @ ZZFH, yeah. the one anadtech got was over $550, the same used here. Then the locked version of that is $200 less. So its not gonna be good paying a premium for the unlocked ones. Then you get bumped down to now hyperthreading, which for some people may not matter, but is still a real bummer. :pfff: 



    you know what they say about asumming... looking back on this thread now, you made yourself look very inaccurate and not creditable. you were way off about everything. you werent even close about pricing nor about achievable clock speeds. this is a prime example of why not to speculate and a reason for bulldozers demise
    Score
    0
    !