Heh! "no VT" stands for Virtualisation Technology so probably you don't need it ;)
Printable View
Heh! "no VT" stands for Virtualisation Technology so probably you don't need it ;)
Ave,Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Thanks for the response. I read up on this "Virtualisation Technology" on the Intel website. I'm building a new rig, primarily focussed on Websites Designing/Development, Digital Animation, Rendering, Video Encoding, Authoring DVD's, Burning etcetera.
Keeping this in view, would you recommend the Pentium D 930 ($178) or the Pentium D 945 (no VT) ($163). The price difference isn't really much... but getting 3.4 GHz for less sounds better then getting 3.0 GHz for more, unless the Pentium D 930 has any advantage over the 945 that "i" would benefit from.
Thanks,
Mickey
Ave,
Question: The June 4th Price Cuts we were supposed to see ... when are they expected to hit online stores in US? It's 5th today, nothing visible as yet.
Thanks.
Give it two weeks ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey79
:D I can wait!
Have to wait for a Core 2 Duo motherboard anyways!
Thanks :)
Good thing I had already finished my coffee when I saw that pricing sheet; that E6600 price would have caused a spit-take all over my *monitor* (let alone the keyboard). That is easily a new low for a midrange processor at launch. And look at the pricing for the surviving Preslers and Smithfields! Sub-$200 Smithfield (especially the bargain-basement D 805) I was expecting; a sub-$200 P-D 930 (which does NOT replace the P-D 920, but is priced identically to it) I did not expect. However, that is indeed what happens in July when Conroe launches. But I'm curious; what is the reason for the new P-D 945 (which we are already aware does not support VT) and that sub-930 introductory pricetag? What *else* is it missing besides VT support?Quote:
Originally Posted by aMp
Actually, more like the 2.6C (the real midrange Northwood-C), as the 2.4C (for some reason) didn't venture outside of OEM territory very far (and would be quickly superseded by the 2.4E). The E6600 is shaping up to be the processor to finally get the last of the Northwood owners off the fence (in fact, it actually costs less than the 2.6C did at launch).Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooper
In terms of pricing for performance, the E6600 is, qute honestly, rather frightening.
the good deals lie in the e6600, 945 and 805! im getting a e6600 for me along with mobo and ram! getting a vid card and hdd for my current rig and using it for my lan basement and upgrading to the 945 in it then using my p4 650 in another mobo that i will buy for other rig in lan basement.
I know Intel's got manufacturing capacity coming out the wazoo, but I still don't get how they can offer a chip -- any chip -- with dual 4MB caches at a $316 initial price point. That size cache should mean huge dies, meaning Intel's not getting great yields no matter how polished the process. There are only so many big dies you can cut from a wafer.
Somebody help me out here. Are they really able to make chips like this in quantity for low cost, or are they selling at or near cost in order to stave off AMD? Some combination of both?
They are doing that to Try to hurt AMD alot, and they are willing to sell procs AT Production cost inorder to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by aMp
it doesnt have dual 4mb caches. it has a single 4mb cache that is shared between the cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by aMp