what do you guys expect it's a 3.2ghz part versus 980x 3.33ghz part, price will be close :)
what do you guys expect it's a 3.2ghz part versus 980x 3.33ghz part, price will be close :)
Title edited and troll posts removed plus a little cleanup..
I see what you did there :rofl:, long live the magic 9th core!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
What is the practical advantage of paying this CPU 850 bucks over let's say a i7930 clocked to 3.2ghz in real life applications?
For example, for that money I can purchase another gtx480+SSD or two more SSDs and make my system feel much faster than simply upgrading to this CPU.
But now you've changed the title theres no need for the inverted comma's, I know that it's unfair to think that everyone on the forum would have a strong enough grasp of english to understand the poster was being ironic, but this shockingly bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
It's as if no one here has ever read a word english for anything but factual reasons, and any novel they've been subjected has been for a mark.
...even the Canadian. This place used to have a higher reading age I swear to god.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
And also don't forget the great Microcenter in store price.
Intel has been doing this for the last few years. Hasn't seemed to stop people from buying. Soon the i7 950 is set to drop from $562 to $294. I don't see folks digging out their pitch forks and torches just yet... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by v0dka
i think he was talking about wcg which cant use nvidia gpu power, only cpu power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Argh, still expensive. I was hoping for at least half price like the 940, 950 and 960 but I guess not due to no competition.
If Intel do have a consistent naming scheme, then 975 should be faster than 970. Would like to watch how they're gonna play the numbering games.
you can't really count in the reliability of their naming system. they even recycled their processor names, for example, there's a conroe e6300 and a wolfdale e6300. confusing as hell to new guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper_sung
year and a half later and they bring out a 970, No need to get one as my 975 still will run better as its unlocked..
I am surprised that it isn't more in the $500-$600 range since it has a locked multi, hex core or not.
Totally agree, The amount of chips intel is increasing is crazy.. im gonna have to note them down if they keep it up lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
I hope this chip ends up at 500-600$ and then we get a cheaper 2.66ghz variant.
As you say, a 2.66-2.8Ghz for $400-500 should be enough. People will overclock the hell out of it anyways.
Btw, if you want a render farm, crunching or things like that, put 2 or even 3 X6 1055T(at same clock 980X is at least 30-35% faster than thuban, price is not correct) systems together and enjoy the power.
As soon as AMD can provide real competition, the prices will drop. Until then, Intel can and does charge premium prices for their premium cpus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
Seems AMD can only add cores to combat 2 year old cpus like the i7 920. AMD really, really needs a processor refresh, but I'm afraid as soon as that's done, Intel just rolls out another new line of cpus just quietly waiting in the wings.
Huminn, dont think so. X6 1090T is in mostly multithread aplications and benchmarks (Cinebench, wprime) good as i7 965. And dont forgot at price, power co. (Thuban in load is more lower). Dont fear, Zambezzi coming in +-1/2 year
Last time i read 2012 :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
If one really wants to render and for cheap, one could look at AMD's MagnyCours as a solution... You could buy 2 8-Core chips for less than $600 and a decent dual socket board (from both ASUS & TYAN) for less than $500 (single socket boards come for less than $300)... Honestly, it would make a better buy what with having a future upgrade path in Bulldozer which is to come soon... All you'll need is to update bios, before you slot in the new chippery...
Then again, i can't see a reason why Intel would price its chip at 3.2 Ghz much lower than the one at 3.33 Ghz. It would make it very hard for Intel to justify the price for 980X if the 970 was priced much lower. There would be people buying it (mostly OC enthusiasts and oh, we at Xtremesystems aren't the only customers for any company), i wouldn't deny that, but many would switch in for the 970, after having a looksie at the price. Now, looking at the fact that Sandy Bridge uses a different platform altogether, i'd not consider Intel to be a good buy, in the longer run. This is where AMD should be gaining in on Intel, but the Intel PR storm is so blinding, be it official, or the fanboys/ fangirls talking about it, it almost obscures what is logically a better option... It remains a better option nonetheless...
Johnny87au: No, im still convinced, Zambezzi launch will in 1H 2011 and some ES we will "see" maybe to end this year in some chinese forums :)
And costs much less........Quote:
Originally Posted by Splave
AMD's best offering performs the same as 2 years old 920, and costs more too!Quote:
Originally Posted by SubZero.it
But that's the technology of the past, and totally uninteresting. 32nm is the norm now, and that's why this thingy got so expensive, there is no competition in high-end desktop CPUs from AMD yet.
Its been the case for a while now even the old q9550 performs on par with current gen Amd quad cores , Intel have gotten ahead in the game and now all we can hope as consumers is that they get some sort of breakthrough and can get closer to Intel.
2 year old i7 cpu is still the king of the hill , 2 years in this buisness is a really really long time Intel is just going to milk their advantage and release tech according to their own strategy.
AMD offering is much better: value/$,value/watt
There are times I'm ashamed that I have Intel platform, like now when I hear people defending Intel monopolistic strateries and price policies.
About i7-970: 850$ funny joke. I'll stay 4c.