Best offers
|
Core i7 I7-920 Quad Core Processor... | $349.99 Dell Home More info |
|
Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Quad... | $195.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Core i5 750 Qaud Core Processor... | $199.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Core i7 Extreme Edition I7-975 Quad... | $1195.70 PC Connection More info |
|
Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Quad... | $204.32 PC Connection More info |
AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE: Same Speed, Less Power
Today AMD is introducing a revision of its flagship Phenom II X4 965 processor rated at 125W, replacing the 140W part, as well as a new 3.1 version of its Overdrive overclocking software. We take a quick look at both to see what advantages they offer. Read More
-
Overclocked On Air: Intel's Core i5-750
Intel's new quad-core i5 and i7 CPUs for LGA 1156 deliver plenty of performance and impressive efficiency. But how far can they be overclocked? We take the entry-level model Core i5-750 as far as it'll go with a modest air cooler and benchmark it. Read More
-
Does Turbo Boost Help Or Hurt Core i5/i7's Power Efficiency?
Intel’s LGA 1156 processors serve up terrific new levels of performance to the mainstream. Now it’s time to look at how efficiency changed from Core 2 Quad to Core i5/i7. We found Turbo Boost technology to be a potential issue, despite its clear value. Read More
Partners
The Games selection
violent :
More Mindless Violence
Basic shooting game, but still so powerful! Use the mouse to take aim and shoot at the little beasties before they get to you. Use Space to reload....
|
crazy :
Interactive Boogy
Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
|
Sponsored links
Intel to Accelerate Core i7
Next news- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (28) |
- Share
Although prior Intel roadmaps did not mention Core i7 processors faster than the existing 3.2-GHz 965 Extreme Edition, the chip maker finally decided to introduce two faster models in the second quarter of this year.
Core i7 at 3.33 GHz Coming
Core i7-975 Extreme will be the company's flagship desktop processor for the upcoming months, delivering slightly increased performance thanks to a clock speed of 3.33 GHz. This equals a 4.2% clock speed increase when compared to the existing 3.2 GHz model. It is probably not really worth it, as we expect the price of this premium product to remain at $999.
However, the regular Core i7 product line will also receive a speed bump. The Core i7-950 will close the gap between the 2.93 GHz Core i7-940 processor and the Core i7-965 Extreme edition, providing a 3.06 GHz clock speed. All of the mentioned Core i7 processors are based on Intel's Nehalem architecture that is manufactured using the mature 45-nm process. They all require the X58 chipset and socket LGA1366, and they all come with 256 KB L2 cache per core and an additional, shared 8 MB L3 cache. No changes have been made to the power ratings, as all Core i7 processors remain at a TDP of 130 W, although the entry level models certainly stay well below that.
Havendale is History, Clarkdale Coming Up On Time
The latest Intel roadmap also says that the firm is on track to ship first 32-nm CPUs in the fourth quarter of 2009, which it says will be Clarkdale processors with integrated graphics. Havendale, which should have been the first product with integrated graphics, disappeared. Apparently, the Clarkdale multi chip package will consist of the 32-nm CPU paired with a 45-nm graphics unit. Clarkdale will be drop-in compatible with the 45-nm Lynnfield processor - both require the new socket LGA1156 and one of the upcoming 5-series chipsets (P55, P57). These differ from the existing chipset families by being a two-chip solution, which has the potential to lower cost and increase energy efficiency.
Source : Tom's Hardware US
Let me get this straight...
They make marginal clock speed increases, that could be achieved through Overclocking, and they expect this to be worth our time, much less, even more of our money?
I better be seeing some price cuts.
Or what? You'll curl up in a ball and cry about it?
i agree tindytim. what a waste of time! i think intel should invest all that silicon in something better and more affordable.
Or what? You'll curl up in a ball and cry about it?
No, I'll buy a cheaper model for a third of the price, OC it, then get the same performance.
Like computerninja7823, I think they could be pursuing new technologies and implementations, rather than repackaging than same model, with a variance that could be easily achieved by anyone who actually wanted it. It seems like a large waste of resources.
Have you been following CPUs very long?
How many Quad and Dual core processors has Intel released in 100mhz increments over the last three years? I'm only surprised that they're releasing just two more.
Let me get this straight...They make marginal clock speed increases, that could be achieved through Overclocking, and they expect this to be worth our time, much less, even more of our money?I better be seeing some price cuts.
Technically, since they are releasing these faster processors at the same prices as the previous models, you can consider that a price cut.
Have you been following CPUs very long? How many Quad and Dual core processors has Intel released in 100mhz increments over the last three years? I'm only surprised that they're releasing just two more.
Sure, but there are usually other improvements. Lower TDPs, More Cache, something that the end user can't easily achieve.
Correction, something the end user cannot achieve.
Let's break out the rulers and drop our trousers... that's the only way we can settle this semantic squabble.
They need to stop changing sockets!
The 1366 should last at least as long as the 775.
I'm upgrading from my q6600 when 32nm comes out
They need to stop changing sockets!The 1366 should last at least as long as the 775.
LGA 1366 isn't going anywhere. LGA 1160 is going to be for lower to mid ranged systems. And what I've heard of LGA 1567, it's going to be for servers, but intel may never implement it with the little news I've heard about it.
Let's break out the rulers and drop our trousers... that's the only way we can settle this semantic squabble.
I don't remember there being a squabble over semantics.
Well I was expecting something like Qx9650 Q9650 and Q9550. I'll wait some more time for the news... I hope that 940 comes down to $300 at least. Or a similar Lynnfield be available at $300...
Or I hope the 32nm quad / hexa core mainstream comes fast at about Q1 2010 so that I would dump my P4(yeah P4 1500mhz) finally...
Well I was expecting something like Qx9650 Q9650 and Q9550.
That was my expectation aswell.
We saw the Q6600 - Q9300 - Q9550
I don't ever remember any of the Core 2 line that added multiple processors that were just differently clocked versions of old processors.
Im thinking its an Anonymous Move Delayed due to competition, or AMD for short, but yeah, I remember all those C2D moves in higher clocks by 200 Mhz, or whatever, ..... no wait, on the other hnad, theyve never done this since C2D, have they? Hmmmm
Im thinking its an Anonymous Move Delayed due to competition, or AMD for short, but yeah, I remember all those C2D moves in higher clocks by 200 Mhz, or whatever, ..... no wait, on the other hnad, theyve never done this since C2D, have they? Hmmmm
Name 3 different instances where an Old Core 2 was re-released (after the initial releases) just with a higher clock speed.
From my understanding, these new chips are being released to introduce a new stepping. This new stepping will allow air overclocks to approach 4.5 GHz easily.
This thread is full of crap. People obviously can't read. 1366 isn't going away, but obviously a different socket is going to be needed for an IG solution.
No one is holding a gun to your head and saying that you have to be cutting edge, so quit your pisspants crybaby routine and spare me the drama.
The Allendale and Wolfdale series chips were all basically the same. Intel just raised the multiplier and shipped it like new every 4-6 months. If you check, they also did the same with Yorkfield. I don't like to differentiate by stepping, because you generally can't shop by that.
So havendale is for desktops or laptops...O.o
What I can't wait for is i7 in a laptop
I'm upgrading from my q6600 when 32nm comes out
I'm upgrading from my Athlon XP 2600+ when 32nm comes out!
The animal still runs XP after 6 years of nearly 24/7 operation!
I think it'll be a pain to part! Perhaps I can switch it with the Nano platform,to not feel the overwhelming technological improvements of the last decennia!
How can I still make coffee in the mornings before my pc has booted up, if it boots within 50 seconds?
No,serious, I'd probably rather want this newer technology over a Corei7,even if it appears to be lower in performance; I hope it's power savings will be more then obvious!
I myself am pretty satisfied with the performance of current core2duo processors and see no reason why I'd ever jump in the corei7 boat, unless I'd buy a demanding game...
Even then, crysis is not my thing, and there hasn't been a single game lacking in framerates on a Radeon 4850 connected to my 1280x1024 monitor.
And if there ever was, it probably runs on very high detail settings,which I no doubt could lower without missing too much eye candy!
It's nice to see though that Intel is continually moving forward (be it new versions of the chips, or their upcoming integrated CPU/GPU chip), while AMD unfortunately is still trying to figure out how to make a Quad Core CPU that's worth any money.
Nothing against AMD on a personal level, but they are just plain behind Intel right now.
Well I'm glad I waited to jump on the I7's Those new processors mixed with the new chipsets may produce great results for OCing.
It's nice to see though that Intel is continually moving forward (be it new versions of the chips, or their upcoming integrated CPU/GPU chip), while AMD unfortunately is still trying to figure out how to make a Quad Core CPU that's worth any money.Nothing against AMD on a personal level, but they are just plain behind Intel right now.
lol you do realize that the phenom 2 actually beats the i7 in gaming benchmarks right? moreover the price is much more competitive than anything intel has to offer. Don't be such a fan boy and do some actual research
lol you do realize that the phenom 2 actually beats the i7 in gaming benchmarks right? moreover the price is much more competitive than anything intel has to offer. Don't be such a fan boy and do some actual research
I'm no fan boy. I've owned ONE Intel CPU. And I've owned several AMD CPUs over the years. I used to be an AMD fan, but I haven't been impressed with them the last year or so.
My last few CPUs for example: Athlon T-Bird 1.4Ghz, 2 x Athlon 3500+, and an Athlon X2 4400+ (this one is in my wife's system now that I have my Q6600).
I'd be interested to see the benchmarks you mention, because I haven't seen anything to support that yet myself. If you're right, then I'd say it's about time for AMD.
Let me get this straight...They make marginal clock speed increases, that could be achieved through Overclocking, and they expect this to be worth our time, much less, even more of our money?I better be seeing some price cuts.
Dude, 1% of all computer users overclock. This product is not targeted at you.
My 920, biostar motherboard and 6 gig of Gskill is running Vista64 rock solid right now. Not a single crash yet! No need to wait for 3% speed improvement when 32nm comes out. BTW, XFX 260 black edition is one of the best buys out right now.