Printable View
no matter the name, i still dont get the point why should Qxxxx Users Should Upgrade for like 15% performance upgrade and to waste
a lot of money.. Q6600 a mainstream quad is not even maxed by any single game not even crysis.. so why bother and waste money..
if you are a benchmarker or a burnout fan of intel then i dont blame you but for simple home users this is nothing more then a waste of money
id like to get this piece buts its a real waste of money..
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxCactus
You're right, if all you do is play games. Better to spend money in GPU. If you just surf and e-mail like grandma even a quad is overkill.
But some people use computers for video editing, rendering, or crunching/folding - the hyperthreading looks to be beneficial and promising in these situations.
It's not Intel's fault that software developers aren't keeping pace!
You can say that about most things. Then again why upgrade fra X to Y all the time till we sit with something very old.Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxCactus
But its true that Q6600 and such is very strong. So if you already got enough, then no need to upgrade.
Personally I skipped quads at home, tho it was and still is so very tempting to get a 9000 series since they are so ultra cheap. But I gonna go from E6600 to some Lynnsfield version of Nehalem.
The same time I can also play all I play on 24" with a 8800GT. So even tho a HD4850 looks sweet...why upgrade? But with Lynnsfield I will upgrade GPU too :p:
But this is like in the GPU, besides benchmarks and crysis. Even old GPUs do very very well these days. Seems things have slowed down alot to be console compatible.
Agreed, I don't upgrade video cards, but I need a fast CPU in order to maintain my workflow. Single core= error Dual= slow for more apps. Quad= fast multitasking. I will upgrade my Q6600 to the i7 maybe means 7th generation idea? :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedMoMegaHurtZ
Pentium II is a Pentium Pro derivative. It doesn't have anything to do with Pentium :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by MadHacker
Firstly, some people actually do more things than play games with their computer. Secondly, not everyone has a quad. And if someone is looking at getting their first quad this year, I don't see any reason for them to spend their money on a Q6600 or Q9xxx when the FSB platform is just about to leave for good.Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxCactus
Put yourself in some different shoes, it's not a 'waste of money' to everyone.
What's with the "i"? Trying to be like Apple?.............
Exactly what I was thinking. Everyone will want the Intel 7 to go with Windows 7.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
I'd still prefer the Intel More-Powerful-Than-Superman-Spiderman-And-The-Incredible-Hulk-Combined.
How can you have PCI-E 1.1 speed with 2.0 specs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
i7 like 786?
What about Batman? Discrimination? :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Xope_Poquar
Why not, he's called the Dark knight:rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
And since Netburst sucked, it wasnt a worthy successor to P6. So we are back to P6 and here comes the real successor. I like it. :up::up::up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
P6 FTW.
i7 does that mean 7th generation intel? or what? or has this already been answered somewhere?
"core 2" stuck.
i dont see why i7 wont, but maybe marketing will think of something else.
And all I'm left here thinking about is a combination of i5/OS (former name for the "IBM i" OS) and Power 7...
Why not go all the way to hardcore "Appleness" and name it "iCPU"?
Actually they did it even before Apple. Just look at the company's name - "iNTEL". :D I'm joking of course. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
I'm surprised with the i7 thing too. I was expecting Core3 or something similar.
^Haha. :D
Now I wonder what they'll dub Gesher...
"Core i7 2"?
"Core i14"?
"Core i-of-the-beholder"?
PCIe 1.1 is 2.5, 2.0 is 5.0 3.0 is 8.0.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Its quite easy to have it at 1.1 speeds.
The benefits besides the speed is:
• Dynamic link speed management allows developers to control the speed at which the link is operating
• Link bandwidth notification alerts platform software (operating system, device drivers, etc) of changes in link speed and width
• Capability structure expansion increases control registers to better manage devices, slots and the interconnect
• Access control services allows for optional controls to manage peer-to-peer transactions PCI Express 2.0
• Completion timeout control allows developers to define a required disable mechanism for transaction timeouts
• Function-level reset provides an optional mechanism to reset functions within a multifunction device
• Power limit redefinition enables slot power limit values to accommodate devices that consume higher power
What a cluster of crap.
haha QFTQuote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Was Core 3 really that bad? There better be a good explanation for this.....
My vote for a name would be the "Intel Pentium Norris"
They could go with marketing pitch "It kicks /\55 and [C]hucks out the trash"
Oh yes. I went there.
But on a more serious note, from an average Joe stand point, I'd think Core 3 or Pentium 5 would have been easier. I suppose the number 7 is still involved so hopefully people will deduce that it should be faster / newer (I'm talking from a retail marketing standpoint ). Then again I see plenty of people that see Celerons at 2Ghz and instantly figure they must be faster than Core 2s at 1.67... same goes for the Phenoms, the 9xxx series modle numbers make people jump on them over the Q6600 and Q6700 (both found in a good few hp machines now ) I often find.
I doubt well see much in the ways of marketing for them until next year however (the Core 2s are still more OEM friendly due to the more mature platform and lower prices ) so once the Intel imbedded adds ( Dell etc ) start hitting the TVs people should figure out that these are Intel's newest cpus.
Sad thinking :mad: :down: :shakes:
New products, more competition = lower prices, not everyone can afford Q6600 even now @ 193$, but after launch of newer tech, its will be awesome value for money, imagine 140$ :D :up: :)
Now poor gamers can afford 8800GT, just for 120$, it can play all games @ respectable settings upto 1680x1050. Was it possible before GTX/48X0 arrival ??
We customers, buyers r winners :clap:
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxCactus
The name reminds me of the AMD K7 series. sigh..
*skips Nehalem / Westmere*
I'm going from QX9650 straight to Core i8. Sandy Bridge anyone?