Printable View
The point of i5 is basicly price and size. I think mATX will be the new norm with i5. Plus the boards gonna be very cheap as you can also imagine from the prototype one. However it does restrict abit as in 2 x8 or 1 x16 only. But we can just aswell get used to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
Opps! Yes 4 cores, 8 threads, thanks for pointing that out!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinas
interesting.. so is there any specific reason one would ditch the e4600 and get the corei5 ? i mean what are the improvements. ??
Good to know whats on the horizon, but i5 seems less like an upgrade than i7 does.
Plenty... its all depends on the enduser though. Do you need 4 cores? Do you render/encode video, etc etc. Not to mention clock per clock it is more powerful and more efficient.Quote:
Originally Posted by saveus222
So it's i5, I wonder why it's not i6 though, higher is better for marketing unless there's space left between for future (lowend die shrinked chip for instance). I have no problem with it being dual channel, makes it easier for me to pick RAM => 2x2GB. So what are the planned SKU's for i5 you think, what will be the highest clocked part at launch? 3GHz? Don't tell me all will be so low clocked like this ES here. I want at least a 3.8GHz clock to satisfy from upgrading from a C2D CPU and I don't expect these low clocked SKUs like this ES to reach that (on air 24/7 stable). :p:
Hmmm, have you not read the specifications of i5 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by saveus222
We 're talking about a quad core processor which means in case you mess with video editing, rendering and generally multi-threaded applications (or if you play GTA IV the worst game ever optimizing-wise :D), then you are going to be glad for that upgrade ;)
Higher performance, with less wattage than kentsfields/yorkfields ...
Greater clock per clock performance :up:
I'm out ... :p:
Not 3Ghz at launch i think. but something like 2.83Ghz should be fairly sure. At at sub 300$ for the "top bin" i5.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Perhaps 32nm will be i6, i8 etc? ;)
Now the question is do you GTA4? :D
Waiting like 8 months just to get it cheaper is kinda, well, retarded :p: 45nm was more or less fine, it was like 2 months in between 45nm QX and dual cores. But more than half year, no way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
mATX, hmm, not for me - vga with accelero S1 (with 120mm fan) + xfi card is already 4 slots :D
Yea I think so too, but 2.83GHz part is fine as long as it clocks to 3.7~3.8GHz on air and price is sub 300 EUR which I'm sure it is as it's quite a while until Lynnfield launch still and i7 920 2.66GHz is sub 300 EUR so 2.83GHz i5 I'd really expect to at least match the one step lower clocked i7 920 in price by then. Hope we can expect to see such overclocks though, I have a feeling they'll come close in average to like 3.5 ~ 3.7GHz but not quite 3.8GHz other than on golden samples or going very excessive on cpu voltage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
i5 would OC just as good/bad as i7. Nothing different there, no extra voltage etc. Its simply a contest between 2-3way SLI/Crossfire and trichannel. Vs single card or "lowend" crossfire and dualchannel in those terms.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
8 months retarded? Ooooo you just called all those folks talking about Deneb for the last 13 months or waiting even longer than 8 months retarded. Now you take it back right now:yepp::rofl:
Blauhung did substantiate the Lynnfield OC woes rumors somewhat, so who knows. If it turns out it does overclock it should be a great buy, triple channel is quite pointless. PCI-E on-die is also way cool.
uhh no thanks. Not a fan of microATX boards, and the lack of PCIe channels could be a real problem, as more stuff (slowly it seems) moves from PCI to PCIe. Oh and define "cheap" because it seems one person's "cheap" is another persons "pricey" or somewhere in between or whatever. A solid number would be helpful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
That prototype board is hideously ugly and bare, but I'm assuming being a prototype the final product would be a bit more filled out?
The 16/2x8 pcie lanes on the ondie controller are only for the gfx, there are another 8 pcie lanes on Ibexpeak.Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyJJO
I'm wondering how 3D performance will compare to X58--someone should do a single-card comparison (x16 slot) and a taped-off SLI and CFX (x8-x8) comparison. Same clock speed, dual-channel memory, but how's performance with on-die PCIe?
Anyways--looks interesting. If I get the money, I'll probably go for i7 though.
If anything it should be faster , lower latencies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobsama
The only point in waiting is for revisions and bug fixes. Also as time passes the prices always seem to go down as well :) Sometimes waiting is a good idea if you don't absolutely NEED a new setup. If you can do what you need to with your current rig there's really no need to step it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
Oh my god this thread is moving beyond fast lol...
Duh, but how much faster? 1% 10% My question is whether or not PCIe communications saturates QPI enough to get a speed boost by moving the controller on-die. We'll see.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Graphics aint latency dependent. It wouldnt be that much of a change either in latency due to the already far traces I guess. So honestly I would say 0 difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobsama
Forget about overclocking Havendale/Lynnfield same as Bloomfield. It's different here since BCLK is routed (and controlled) a different way......
Here they probably only sold Phenom 2 this way.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
Q3 is late.:mad:
No thanks , i will pass , LGA775 FTW ....
Its perfect for people like me who wont upgrade this year, doesnt need many slots (M-ATX is enough), wont ever use more than 1 video card, and does not need much Bandwidth (dual channel is more than enough for games and most common apps).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I would like to see M-ATX going mainstream big time, while ATX being more of an workstation/enthusiast solution :)
Are you sure it's not the same FUD that was spread prior to i7 launch? I thought Intel's take is that motherboard manufacturers have to decide whether to enable or disable overclocking features. In fact I expect i5 to be just a lower binned i7, when it comes to overclocking.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman