Printable View
let me see if I have this right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
from 1996-1998
100mhz Pentium 1 vs 300mhz pentium III
now lets compare
06 to 08
2.8Ghz Athlon x2 vs. 3.3Ghz core 2 quad.
for some crazy reason I don't see a tripling-to-quintupling of performance.
I see a 50-130% increase, but not a 300-500% increase.
Most likely Intel set some limitation for the lower chips.
The value chips with the proper multipel will be interesting to see where they klock to.
4.5ghz on watercooling that is a good upgrade for me, not just pass 4ghz.
To do that on lower chips with low multipel seems not likely at all.
9.5 or 10x multipel seems needed.
Yes, but I remember the $1,300 U.S. price tag of the Pentium 100MHz and the $6,000 Tandy computer from the early 90's. Too long ago? How about the $875 FX-55 and $1300 P4 3.7 and FX-57's? Oh wait I forgot the $429 X2 3800 LOL! The thread is about Price to performance, not just performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by xlink
I think you missed my point about being Greedy here.
Price to Performance is about 40 to 400+ times better (app Dependant). Compressing something in 15mins that used to take 400mins for example. Or how about 28 Quake2 FPS compared to 859 via software rendering LOL!
Penryn or C2D and to some extent Athlons and Phenoms are a long way from being the bottleneck in just about any system (not all but most Dave). It's why I went with a Video card instead of a QC Processor. X1800 needed to be replaced before the C2D. When Penryn or even maybe Nehalem ships I'll get one and add another 3870 for some Crossfire action.
will anyone have any of the new quads for testing??
The Pentium Pro @ 200 MHz was released in Nov, 1995 and was essentially a PII without MMX. 450 MHz PII came out in August, 1998.Quote:
Originally Posted by xlink
Quote:
New Yorkfields postponed until February
With AMD struggling with its TLB bug, Intel should be leaning back and enjoying the ride, but unfortunately, there seems to be trouble in Intel land as well. According to a report published at PCinpact.com, Yorkfield suffers from some slight problems too. Apparently the "integrity" of the FSB frequency is not satisfactory and may even cause crashes. They have been able to force the error in the lab, but haven't observed these problems out in the open. Wolfdale is not affected by this, but will arrive as planned in January.
Source: NordicHardware
regards
WOOT!!! I just want a wolfie.....
Sucks for you guys......:p:
Well at least they won't release a half assed non working CPU like the Phenom. :D
You're right but there is no pressure on them to do so either. They can easily postpone the parts and keep selling those G0s.Quote:
Originally Posted by J@mmer
I might be wrong but that's what I think they're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
i wonder if ill be able to run some 8500 ram 1:1 on a x38 q9450? would be great if possible
doubt it 24/7 tho
The E8500 is listed as January 4 at my canada supplier at $289 CAD
I was told in about 3 weeks so that jives.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robilar
I called them back today to pre-order and the rep told me that they were sold out of their last shipment and put me on the next received order list?
I guess he was a bit confused.
even e8300 should rock 8.5 multi:hehe: cant wait to see some.
but only 10 bucks more for e8400? :nuts:
something very odd about the pricing.
Source engine games are less demanding on the graphics card than most current games. They scale better with CPU bumps because the graphics card isn't as much of a factor. Yes, I did just pull that out of my @$$, but I still think it's true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingcarcas
When I moved from a 7600GT 256MB to an 8800GT 512MB, the difference in the Orange Box performance was not really noticeable. You really have to hand it to ValvE for making games that run well even if you can't afford the latest hardware.
Yepp!:yepp: I noticed this as well on ATI cards. I went from an X1800 256MB to a 3870 512MB and Halflife 2 didn't seem much faster as almost all of my others Games exept Crysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by _g0
According to Charlie Intel has some issues with the 45nm process ramp up.
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...irl-intel-45nm
To cut it short , he's saying : there might be problems with the 45nm process , there might be not.If there are , I've told you so , if they aren't I've told you so too.
Talk about quality journalism.
AFAIK Intel started shipping 45nm parts for revenue in Q3 ( September ) they were launched mid November ( servers and XE ).
FAB32 went online in early December with 1st lot having mature yiedls ( copy exactly method ).
Could there be problems with 45nm process ? Could be , but I seriously doubt it.
dont really know if there are problems but retail availability of the
E5420
E5430
E5440
is quite good. only the lower speed and the higher speeds are still mia.
IIRC, its called "Scattershot Reporting". For those not familier, it refers to a Scattershot shotgun with a wide burst pattern. These are used in hunting small but fast prey where only a few pellets are needed to kill the animal. The weapon doesn't have to be aimmed very accurately to be assured a kill.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
So then when one of the many statements "scattershot" are correct, they can say see, we were right!
There's a slight problem with the current shipping 45nm CPUs SUPPOSEDLY, but it's not anything to really stress about if you have one.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
There is no slight problem IMHO, sure I can't say fact. All processors have errata and this obscure one is being used as an excuse for Intel to sell off old stock and stockpile the new stuff. Wanna bet if Phenom was phenomenal that we'd be already seeing Penryn? BTW, Intel is claiming a "FSB Bus integraty problem". Let's see, that's 1333MHz while Xeons aren't having problems at 1600MHz with same processor, ummmm, strange.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
Look, if Penryn ships at Current projected prices and or MSRP's, Intel or its partners can't get better money for current products. You guys think E6600 will still cost $234 or Q6600 $279 in March-08?
any more information ?:clap:
all i know is i want the release date for the penryns so i can schedual the appointment for the surgeon to remove one of my kidneys and sell it for some money.
LOL! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by generalpetres
I frankly doubt the latest "news" about the wolfdale's being delayed until Feb, along with a new E8300 cpu being released. The E8200 is scheduled to be $163 and the E8400 $183, but now stories are coming out about a E8300? That makes no sense. I think this is a hoax, and there will be no such processor being sold.
Daddy, I want an E8500...I want one now. I never really cared for oompa loompas.
well the published release date for Wolfdales of Jan 20th 2008 is only a few weeks away, and Intel have said nothing about them being delayed so far, so fingers crossed.
delays supposedly to fix fsb issues.
odd low clocks of these chips considering low heat.
hmmm
me thinks perhaps Intel might consider higher Ghz, and what the hell throw in 400fsb too. ie:
E8200 6 2.4Ghz
E8400 7 2.8Ghz
E8600 8 3.2Ghz
E8800 9 3.6Ghz
just daydreaming..
(most "current" Quad cores only make 430-450, so I'm guessing that's what's holding up the almighty switch to 400fsb, which IMHO would be disaster for overclocking headroom, but give Intel more marketing mumbo jumbo)
I'm disappointed with prices, and max of 8.5X divider if I don't go qx for the quads.
Honestly, their is not 1 45nm process that I'll be able to get past 3.6Ghz in a reasonable price range. Now with 8.5 being $150 more then 8.0, there is no reason to leave a q6600, the q6600 is the winner for overclockers.
Unless these can do 500 fsb easily, but I highly doubt that.
But what if you skipped Q6600 to wait on this bad boy! Let's not forget, 3.6GHz for Penryn will still be very Kick-A$$:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
Very true, but I would pick q6600 over a 8x penryn since with a maximus, (not sure how 45nm fsb is doing atm) and my q6600 over 450FSB is problematic and requires insane nb voltages , 470 1.75 NB isn't even stable ... , pll and fsb voltage won't help either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
But it would def be a hard choice. I'm gonna keep hoping for a 9X model in $500 price range to appear.
Sure, but that's for Drag racers here. Many of us rather just watch the Extreme Guys do it. I don't have water like many here and just depend on a Ninja to do its Best. I don't see myself doing much with a Quad Core but might go that way anyway. I know I want at least 3.1GHz model only overclocking to 3.6GHz is fine for me. I'll still look for others to overclock it to the teeth and cheer them on as they do so. Just because I like NASCAR doesn't mean I want to get out on the track and pretend to be Johnson or Gordon:)Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
Then again, maybe the 8400 for about $200 would be better.
When are the dual cores expected to be release?
If it was already stated in this thread Im sorry, I didn't have the time to read through it all.
I'm waiting for the prices to drop on the current core 2 duo's so I can get one for my new build. :up:
They are already out in new zealand.
in us maybe by next week
pre-order prices in Germany ...
E8500 = € 242
E8400 = € 170
http://www.hardwareschotte.de/hardwa...0+BX80570E8500
Yea the prices remind me of G0 launch where E8500 = E6850, E6750 = E8400 and E8200 = E6550 in price but now you get a higher multi for same price + greater overclockability & lower power consumption. :D
I think the E8400 is the best bang for bucks, 4 GHz should be doable with a P35 board and decent cooling
Prices in Romania:
E8200 - 169€
E8400 - 189€
E8500 - 269€
Website says they are in-stock but can only be sold on the 20th Jan. 11 Days from now, just gotta get some cash for this 8500 now :D
why buy 8500 when 8400 is almost 80€ cheaper?
Because 0.5x can make the difference for overclockers like me :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TEDY
Updated first post with the newer data.
:up:
Not mine but almost unbelieavable :eek: :eek: :eek: Air cooling (Zerotherm Nirvana NV120), 1.475v, E8400, FFS :eek: :eek:
I never thought i'd see an E8400 clocked so high, on air, with so little volts :D Click on pics for higher res.
http://ocidb.com/albums/userpics/10122/normal_8400s.jpg
http://ocidb.com/albums/userpics/10122/normal_PIIs.jpg
:eek: WOW! we got a fun new year a commin,
SWEET Clocks....:eek2:
can't wait... i wonder how long its going to take me to catch one "in stock" :ROTF:
Should be nice with a x38 or P5K-e :shrug: :D
what batch# is that :shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
[EDIT] is your friend from South/Central America by any chance???? owner of the CPU
No idea mate. Other people on that forum where i got the screen's from are harshly questioning it's validity. Can't quite think that it can be real myself to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Edit: nah. Romania.
You gonna post results on the 20th too? :p:
he got that screen from someone didn't he?Quote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
i am questioning the validity too
i think there is some sort of mistake or bug there
have a look
http://ocxtreme.org/forumenus/showthread.php?t=2277
i am having a hard time digesting that info and i reckon it's the same source
if this is for real i am shocked haha :D
mmmm more like 10th for me :DQuote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
Do you think the 8400's multi is worth the extra few bones over the 8300?:shrug:
No idea. SuperPI is close to that on the thread you linked but the voltage and frequency differs. Also, Kain's desktop setup (wallpaper, etc) is different. He'll post more about it tommorow i guess, people questioning him hard :) I'll post here when i find out anything new.
EDITED
Can't wait :D Planning to get an 8500 myself on the 20th.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
superpi times are different tooQuote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
on the second screenshot : the memory is 1:1
he running 550fsb and the memory is at 555... :confused:
Yeah, just noticed that myself. Any photoshop experts around? :) Could be a bug tho... I wish it's real anyway, if the retails turn out to OC a hell of a lot better then the ES's it would be awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supertim0r
HAHAHAH tell that :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::b anana: to get :banana::banana::banana::banana:ed AriciU
It's a "strange " bug in those circumstances. That's BS if you ask me. We haven't seen similar results from guys testing $h!t load of cpu (Andre, coolaler...)Quote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
Intel Core 2 Duo E7000 family coming April-May '08
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/2310/7000dq3.jpg
- April-May
- First Model for Core 2 Duo E7200 core 2.53 GHz clock, 1066MHz FSB and 3 MB L2 Cache, the tentative release April-May, 1000 prices for each priced $ 133 US dollars.
- Intel plans to introduce more Core 2 Duo E7000 family, and formally replace the existing Core 2 Duo E4600 and the upcoming Core 2 Duo E4700.
HKEPC
Hey guys, I've been busy with school work for the past month and couldn't keep up with the news. I tried finding the release
date for Yorkfields, the Q9450 to be specific, but haven't had any luck. I did found out there are some problems...But still....
Is there a release date for Yorkies out yet? Like a specific date, not just Q1.
Thanks in advance.
I would also like to know. I was either going to get the 8400 or the 9450, now I am dead set on the 9450. My Maximus Formula has been sitting in the box for almost a month now :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Slycer
newegg has the E8400 for $225 right now.
Answer here is really simple:Quote:
Originally Posted by strat4812
Wolfdale: available now
* 2 cores. More than any games out there use.
* clocks higher on FSB, less problems with heat.
* just as cheap as current Core2Duo.
* No compatibility issues with current motherboards.
York: could be March, maybe even April.
*4 cores. Great if you're REALLY into video transcoding/editing and 3D rendering.
* Otherwise two extra cores are like bulky baggage that you're hauling around...
* lower FSB and thus lower single-threaded performance. (ie 95% of applications)
IMHO: If past is any idication, I have funny feeling folks are going to snap up several early "good" batches of E8300/E8400. They are so cheap, you can easily buy half a dozen, cherry pick the best, and sell the rest on ebay. And while quad cores are tickling 3.5Ghz territory, I wouldn't be surprised if aii cooled Wolfdales dont just reach 4ghz, but punch right through.
You sure about the FSB?Quote:
Originally Posted by ***Deimos***
Okay, I don't want to litter in this thread but I really need to know this..
Is that thing about single-threaded performance true? I don't enconde. Well, I do. Reencode various videos to fit on my media
player, but I doubt that counts. I'm looking at the 8500 now, but that Q9450 is still very appealing though. I have pretty much
every other component already picked out..Just waiting for the CPU. I'm buying for several years, 4-5, so I want to be prepared.
So a basic question: Is the Yorkfield significantly faster than Wolfdale in everyday operations and applications? Games? Load times?
Thanks in advance.
Ultimately some folks think 4 Quad Cores will not have much RAW Per Core speed or MHz as Dual. In Theory Two Cores should be able to run faster than 4. That goes for overclocking as well. So, single and some Dual threaded apps should run faster than on Dual Core. The FSB's are the same until the Extreme Version ships later with 1600MHz FSB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slycer
Okay, so what do you think? And the 8500 is pretty pricey. The cheapest I could find is only about 50euros cheaper than the 9450.
And these chips seem to be about as scarce as the Yorkies. :(
Yes, the best X38 boards top out around 475FSB with a quad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Duals can hit +500FSB, just saw a thread of a Wolfdale hitting +600FSB.
quick question here, do the new e4000s have virtualization? if so they are my next CPU
Does anyone in Europe know of any stores that have the E8500 for a reasonable price [200-250€] and ship to other countries?
I like to think of this as comparing a BMW 4 door sedan or 4WD crossover like SuzukiQuote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
(this is the dual core Wolfdale)
to a full 8-9 passenger GMC Safar van or something like Hummer or Escalade (this is the quad core Yorkfield).
Basically, unless you already have a quad core processor, you dont need really need one, and like those racing stripes on your Corolla, it will only boost your ego. 5+ years from now your future "cellphone" might be more powerful than your computer, so forget about trying to "future proof".
MUMBO JUMBO TECHIE STUFF
Single core CPU are great. You can always be sure the core is being used ;)
But, although you can easily run dozens or even thousands of programs in parallel, some programs may appear to hang the system waiting on IO or other tasks that prevent system from context switching. Besides, 95% of the time the slowdowns are anything but CPU related: slowly loading Windows from hard drive, slowly retrieving web pages, waiting for video card to render the graphics, waiting for video card to decode your Blu-Ray movie.
Very few people are enthusiastically buying desktops anymore. Its no longer cool. Laptops have been surging in popularity last 5 years. And, even large clunky laptops are being replaced by sleek thin small notebooks - ie Apple Air. Eepc. 15 years ago you had to buy a big ugly $3000 white box to check your email. Its the 21st century now - Blackberrier, smart phones, and game consoles that put most computers to shame. For what you'd spend on a PC, you can buy 2-3 consoles with access to the 90% of console exlusive games.
Sorry my bad, you didn't mention Overclocking! 600FSB, hell I was Impressed with the 550 one guy had:up: I'm leaning more towards Wolfdale just as an Extremely Quiet system without water. With mulitple computers I'm just not multi-tasking enough to justify Quad anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
And not so best X38 might not make it to 450. And, if you dont have X38...430? 420?Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
Heck, there are even dual core processors that can barely go over 400.
Realisitically, for 24/7, with 8x multi Q9450 quad, you're looking at getting about 425fsb (giving you 3.4Ghz). So, 9x multi would be nice, and get you 3.8Ghz (if you take care of the very high power and cooling requirements), but expensive!
Wolfdale, even the cheap E8200 (8x), can get you to 4Ghz, since many P35, X38 and some P965 can do 500Mhz fsb. Even if you get only 3.8Ghz, power and cooling requirements are about half that of quad core... typically much quieter too.
http://www.chiphell.com/batch.download.php?aid=251
http://www.chiphell.com/batch.download.php?aid=252
Bloomfield is SOO going to be in my next rig. i just cant wait:D
nice :D
E8600 and Q9650 coming?
Intel Q9650 processor coming in Q3
http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.p...=17942&catid=2
Intel to launch 45nm dual core at 3.33GHz
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...=5504&Itemid=1
Wheres the E8200?? I'm still waiting for it to come to US??? :confused:
I want it NOW! :D
Anybody have any idea when? :shrug:
Nehalem core 1.4-1.5x bigger!!?? wha??Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
What could they possibly be using all that realestate on? Penryn already has single cycle SSE, shuffle, SSE4, and with micro/macro fusion pushing x86 IPC so high it megaHurts.
More execution units? Crazy branch prediction that predicts what user is going to click before they do it? :rofl:
BTW not looking forward to hyperthreading with Nehalem.. not bad concept, but simpler easier (albeit more die space) to have full extra core. Hyperthreading across multiple CPU cores would be kinda cool though.
Finally, not sure why Intel following the native quad core bandwagon - do they really except majority (re 80%) of market to buy this?
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.a...tno=499&pgno=7
We might even see return of P4 clockspeeds within a year. Would make for interesting comparison.. ie 3.6Ghz P4 vs 3.6Ghz Nehalem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Face
But, I doubt they'll release many wolfdale at 3.33GHz with existing VID. Certainly for higher clockspeeds they will be forced to go up to something like 1.25V and obviously higher TDP rating.... good to know they have lots of overhead there.
Still no update on timeline for the q9450, huh?
Q9450 is close to 470USD where i live. Low supply, high demand i guess. 2 weeks before its in stock.
So Q9450 will arrive after February 20 or so?
Probably mid march if were lucky :D
I'm gonna go for the super sexy Dualcore. By the time games/programs actually max out the Quadcores, there will be a better chip out.
Omg, now the store says mid march!. :confused: . If i dont get hold of one of these soon, im gonna walk into Intel and just take one.
MID MARCH, are they crazy, i need a Q9450 as the last pice of trhe puzzle to finish my build
they are in stock near me .....
BX80569Q9450 INT Intel® Core 2 Quad™ Q9450 - 3.00GHz, FSB 1333MHz, 12MB CACHE R 2,599
site?
3.00GHz :shrug:
Site pls?Quote:
Originally Posted by seanx
BS, theyre not 3 ghz
Core 2 Quad Q9450 SLAN6 (C0)
SLAWR (C1) 2667 MHz 2 × 6144 KiB 1333 MT/s 8x 0.85V – 1.3625V 95 W LGA 775 Feb-Mar 2008 EU80569PJ067N $316
Core 2 Extreme QX9770 SLAN2 (C0)
SLAWM (C1) 3200 MHz 2 × 6144 KiB 1600 MT/s 8x 130 W LGA 775 Q1 2008 EU80569XL088NL $1399
Core 2 Extreme QX9775 3200 MHz 2 × 6144 KiB 1600 MT/s 8x 150 W LGA 771 Q1 2008 $1499 (Skulltrail) but that's a sucker's price LOL!
That's all I've seen and don't know how true even it is;)
I bought a Conroe lol, i feel dissappointed but i rather have a working rig then nothing at all.
q6600 ftw
(couldn't wait so long)
BX80569Q9450 Intel® Core 2 Quad™ Q9450 - 3.00GHz, FSB 1333MHz, 12MB CACHE
this is in south Africa and place = Sahara.co.za
don't think any1 except a dealer can get price list though
will c if I can get online product list
http://www.sahara.co.za/SelectedHead.aspx?S=767
ha ha ha and who calls B/S now lol ;-)
With the Q9450, what would do you think I could safely OC it to for everyday gaming use using an Ultra-120 Extreme cooler?
Also, what do think I could OC the Q6600 to with the same cooler for everyday gaming use?
looks like they have their specs wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanx
he he it is possible . I have been too lazy to check on the intel site will look now ;-)