Trending

Intel Core i7-3970X Extreme Coming Near You in Q4

By

With Ivy Bridge-E not slated till sometime in 2013, Intel looks set to replace its current top-end Core i7-3960X with the Core i7-3970X just in time for the holidays.

(Image credit: DonanimHaber)

Information coming out of Turkish website DonanimHaber has Intel set to release its new top-end Core i7-3970X in Q4 2012. With the enthusiast-class Ivy Bridge-E not set to appear until sometime in 2013, it looks like the LGA 2011 socket will have something for under the Christmas tree this year!

The rumored i7-3970X is expected to ship with clock speeds of 3.50 GHz (Turbo Boost of 4.00 GHz). The six-core chip is based on the 32 nm "Sandy Bridge-E" silicon, and the LGA 2011 platform. With it being based on the 32 nm Sandy Bridge architecture, users should expect similar overclocking abilities as current generation Sandy Bridge processors. The processor shouldn't run into the thermal woes that plagued the release of Intel's newer Ivy Bridge CPUs this past May.

In addition, its feature-set is consistent with that of the Core i7-3960X, with 15 MB shared L3 cache, HyperThreading, and unlocked base-clock multiplier. DonanimHaber expects the TDP to be pushed up to 150W, though. Assuming the claims are true, expect the Core i7-3970X to supplant the $1,000 Core i7-3960X when it drops in the fourth quarter of this year.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

40 Comments Comment from the forums
  • sweetleader 25 July 2012 01:15
    I don't really see where the upgrade is compared to the 3960x. At least make it an Octa-core. The 3960x was already a waste of money over the 3930k anyways.
    Reply
  • Chainzsaw 25 July 2012 01:23
    For $1000 I would expect this CPU to be a native Octocore + HT. Does anyone know why this isn't Octocore? Is it because a special BIOS would be needed? Thermals (although I would assume with the latest cooling options this wouldn't be an issue)?

    Even though I would never buy one, or could even afford one, it would be a sweet CPU with CF or SLI though.
    Reply
  • vmem 25 July 2012 01:23
    tiny upgrade compared to the 3960x. the article was good in pointing out that this product is literally released just for "under the christmas tree". christmas can't wait for ivy bridge-E CPUs... so I guess for the few out there that's getting the chip CPU on the market this year, a 3970x will have to do
    Reply
  • guzami77 25 July 2012 01:48
    I currently run an i7-990x, and have a free replacement plan expiring January 2013.

    Looks like I'll be picking this one up.. but I dont see any reason anyone else would.
    Reply
  • xtreme5 25 July 2012 01:57
    OMG! another beast unfortunately they are extremely expensive, why don't Intel manufacturing 8 cores cpu like the failure bulldozer. hehe anyway intel knew that they are still better with thier quad-core cpu's as compared to bulldozer. please drop the prices of previous if this one is gonna to be a super expensive only 100mhz faster than 3960x. is it really worth over 3960x i don't think so??
    Reply
  • xtreme5 25 July 2012 01:58
    This chip could handle 4 way GTX 690.
    Reply
  • eddieroolz 25 July 2012 01:59
    The real news here isn't the 100MHz higher standard clock, but the fact that this may mean a new stepping for Sandy Bridge-E.
    Reply
  • classzero 25 July 2012 02:01
    I cannot afford Intel's Extreme pricing on their Extreme Chips.
    Reply
  • xtreme5 25 July 2012 02:03
    HAHA! only BILL-GATES can afford to buy all those chips.
    Reply
  • dragonsqrrl 25 July 2012 02:06
    ChainzsawFor $1000 I would expect this CPU to be a native Octocore + HT. Does anyone know why this isn't Octocore? Is it because a special BIOS would be needed? Thermals (although I would assume with the latest cooling options this wouldn't be an issue)?Even though I would never buy one, or could even afford one, it would be a sweet CPU with CF or SLI though.I mentioned this in the 3960x review, but I don't think there's any TDP headroom left for an octa core at 32nm while maintaining the higher clocks expected of i7's. When you look at the eight core Xeons they're all clocked significantly lower, the highest being clocked at 3.1GHz with a 150W TDP.

    This makes sense, given the different target markets for the two lineups. The Xeons put more emphasis on wide execution, and the workloads tend to benefit much more from absolute thread count as opposed to absolute clocks. While thread count is still important for the LGA 2011 i7's, it's ultimately targeted at consumer/semipro applications which still tend to favor higher clocks (this is quickly changing though). It's basically a balance between Xeon and LGA1155 i7's. I would certainly like to see an octa-core i7, but like I said in that initial 3960x review, it probably won't be possible until Ivy Bridge-E.
    Reply