View Full Version : Intel QX9770 Review Thread
Yoxxy
11-19-2007, 08:05 AM
QX9770 reviews already starting to filter in.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3154
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/596/1/
BeardyMan
11-19-2007, 08:09 AM
are they also avaible? Q1 08 no? :)
natedog420
11-19-2007, 08:15 AM
are they also avaible? Q1 08 no? :)
not sure when they will be out but i think your sig is wrong.
BeardyMan
11-19-2007, 08:18 AM
not sure when they will be out but i think your sig is wrong.
my sig ain't wrong, it's from a review that popped up today, and due al the bad comments on phenom i did find this picture hilarious and it putted a smiled on my face since it performs where it needs to perform for a benchmarker ;)
Origin_Unknown
11-19-2007, 08:23 AM
the legit review one is hardly fair with the amd cpu
twiggy
11-19-2007, 08:27 AM
my sig ain't wrong, it's from a review that popped up today, and due al the bad comments on phenom i did find this picture hilarious and it putted a smiled on my face since it performs where it needs to perform for a benchmarker ;)
Ummm maybe read the review again..
The overall 3DMark06 scores show the Phenom is more positive light than they should because of the different graphics cards at work on the two testing setups -- remember the Phenoms were running dual Radeon HD 3850 cards while the Intel Core 2 and AMD Athlon CPUs were running a single 8800 GTX card. The CPU tests aren't affected though and once again the Phenoms split the pack of existing dual- and quad-core CPUs.
Jacky
11-19-2007, 08:55 AM
I don't understand why Anandtech's sample was that bad (while legit reviews' was OK). Isn't it emberassing for Intel to send out such a POS? Judging by all the 45nm goodness we see in the Intel- &xtremeoverclocking section the increase in power draw should be much lower. What we have seen at anandtech was ridiculous, even more than the *super weak* showing of K10.
It's sad that when it comes to power draw the 45nm yields don't seem to be were Intel would want them to be...
Jamesrt2004
11-19-2007, 08:57 AM
I don't understand why Anandtech's sample was that bad (while legit reviews' was OK). Isn't it emberassing for Intel to send out such a POS? Judging by all the 45nm goodness we see in the Intel- &xtremeoverclocking section the increase in power draw should be much lower. What we have seen at anandtech was ridiculous, even more than the *super weak* showing of K10.
It's sad that when it comes to power draw the 45nm yields don't seem to be were Intel would want them to be...
to be honest all Intel would say to that, is Every chip is not the same and it's not going to be a retail CPU
tbh we have an idea what the chips will perform like, and what intel will be doing is making it so they all perform the same and not have this oddly high power draw etc :)
all i'm guessing is bad ES
Hmm.. ~265w load?:shakes:
Zucker2k
11-19-2007, 09:51 AM
I want to believe Anand's review hardware was the issue. Notice the stock clocks with 1.336v showing in CPU-Z? That's just wrong.
Jacky
11-19-2007, 10:51 AM
to be honest all Intel would say to that, is Every chip is not the same and it's not going to be a retail CPU
tbh we have an idea what the chips will perform like, and what intel will be doing is making it so they all perform the same and not have this oddly high power draw etc :)
all i'm guessing is bad ES
sure there is some variation. but that was extreme :D
justin_c
11-19-2007, 10:55 AM
too much TIM.
savantu
11-19-2007, 11:01 AM
The voltage is very very wrong.TIM or not , you can get such massive jumps in power only through voltage.
Probably the board doesn't support well the new part.
Hmm.. ~265w load?:shakes:
That's total system power consumption,it's not only for the CPU...