NEWS !! New Conroe Info

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

02-06-2006, 08:48 AM
Cybercat

2.6GHz will definitely challenge Intel's architecture efficiency against AMD. AMD might have theirs at 2.8GHz by then.
02-06-2006, 09:13 AM
onewingedangel

4 issue wide core vs 3 though, should counter the imc nicely.
02-06-2006, 09:23 AM
Cybercat

That, and the ridiculous amount of L2 cache.
02-06-2006, 05:45 PM
coldpower27

2.67GHZ/1066FSB/4MB @ 530US doesn't sound too bad though.

Also with the 3GHZ/1333FSB/4MB available on the server side for 850US, we could easily have an EE for 999US of this same chip but on the desktop.

It would be interesting to see what AMD Athlon FX Dual Core is like by then 2.8GHZ with DDR2, how competitive to say for certain however is hard to say.
02-11-2006, 01:19 PM
WoD

News - Conroe, Woodcrest, Merom

Maybe these are some interessting infos...

http://pics.computerbase.de/news/13053/1.gif

http://pics.computerbase.de/news/13053/2.gif

//Edit

http://img15.imagevenue.com/loc4/th_038db_Unbenannt.JPG

http://img145.imagevenue.com/loc113/...Unbenannt2.JPG

http://img144.imagevenue.com/loc31/t...Unbenannt3.JPG

Source computerbase.de (GER)
02-11-2006, 02:02 PM
perkam

Wow...the revolution cometh...

Perkam
02-11-2006, 02:24 PM
Cooper

Looks like E6600 gonna be very popular among Intel users. Hopefully those will be [/]mostly[/i] high OCable.
Also Very good prices
02-11-2006, 10:16 PM
Cybercat

$1300??? They can forget that.
02-12-2006, 01:48 AM
Cooper

Where did you saw that price ?
E6600 only 315$
02-12-2006, 02:21 AM
leejsmith

if you look on the left of the roadmaps they give estimated full system prices not cpu prices.
shame there is no socket / chipset information that would be usefull.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cybercat

$1300??? They can forget that.
02-12-2006, 03:12 AM
krille

WoD > Welcome to XS! :toast:
I see no Woodcrest info though?

Will there be no extra incentive except clockspeed to go EE?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooper

Looks like E6600 gonna be very popular among Intel users. Hopefully those will be [/]mostly[/i] high OCable.
Also Very good prices

Since E6600 will be fairly cheap and lowest bin, it shouldn't OC the most, but maybe good enough?

So, on a side note, if you assemble a $1500 system, Intel thinks at least $900 should go into the Intel CPU... RIGHT.
02-12-2006, 04:14 AM
WoD

Oh sorry, I forgot Woodcrest... i'm gonna fix it... ^^
02-12-2006, 09:54 AM
Cybercat

Quote:

Originally Posted by leejsmith

if you look on the left of the roadmaps they give estimated full system prices not cpu prices.

oh, didn't see that.
02-12-2006, 10:25 AM
Cooper

Quote:

Since E6600 will be fairly cheap and lowest bin, it shouldn't OC the most, but maybe good enough?

I mean it`s gonna be like 2.4C Northy ;)
02-13-2006, 04:57 PM
Sentential

Those numbers look more in line of what Ive heard. Frankly I still think 2.66 is high for Conroe, most of what I know tells me that it will cap off at 2.33 not 66
02-13-2006, 06:03 PM
vapb400

Quote:

Originally Posted by vrzone.com

Intel has a new revision of their D975XBX desktop board currently under sampling that will support the upcoming Conroe processors. The current D975XBX boards out in the market with revision -202 will not be able to support Conroe even with a BIOS update. The new revision D975XBX rev. -301 board will do just fine with changes to the certain motherboard components.

From VR-Zone

Hope that comes soon
02-13-2006, 06:40 PM
krille

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooper

I mean it`s gonna be like 2.4C Northy ;)

:slobber:

As for EE, it should be ~3 Ghz (since highest clocked Woodcrest is 3 Ghz). Which should go up against 2.8 Ghz FX-62. Intel may have a winner there, we shall see.
02-13-2006, 07:50 PM
vapb400

I'm thinking that XE would be 3.33. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that Intel always releases the desktop higher clocked chips before the server chips. I say we'll see 2.66 and 3.33 at launch and upto 3.0GHz on the server side, then a couple months later we will get the 2.93GHz desktop and a 3.33GHz server.

Thats what seems logical to me.
02-14-2006, 02:41 AM
DeltZ

i guess intel will have successfully made transition to pentium netburst to M tech with conroe.. Still can play "More MHZ the better" game.

edit: Also...Since the core seems to vary from quite low clock speeds to high (EE). What do we reckon the max OC is gonna be on these things? will it go beyond 5 ghz? I apologise if i'm a little behind :/
02-14-2006, 05:22 AM
onewingedangel

If you think of the lower clocked chips as being like the low voltage xeons that were clocked at half the speed of the normal chips, intel categorising the chips into different market segments isn't a new phenomena. However when you consider the chips design it will not clock anything like a netburst chip does under extreme cooling. The extreme cooling helps the long netburst pipeline achieve its potential, wheras conroe eliminates the problems of leakage and as such their should be much less wasted potential.
02-14-2006, 07:05 AM
ewitte

I'm having visions of 4.2Ghz+ Conroe under phase change :slobber:
02-14-2006, 08:06 AM
d@rkn1ko

you will need very good board for to go over 400 mhz fsb :slobber:
02-14-2006, 11:58 AM
Sentential

Quote:

Originally Posted by vapb400

I'm thinking that XE would be 3.33. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that Intel always releases the desktop higher clocked chips before the server chips. I say we'll see 2.66 and 3.33 at launch and upto 3.0GHz on the server side, then a couple months later we will get the 2.93GHz desktop and a 3.33GHz server.

Thats what seems logical to me.

Thats not gonna happen. Word on the street was that intel was petrified about how badly Conroe and Yonah was scaling, almost to the point that they thought of canning it and moving to plan C.

This timeline is easily followable and you can see where I am getting these facts from. The inital samples wouldnt do over 2ghz hence the 1.8 samples. The newer batches just as Presler was about to be released were doing rougly over 2.6 and now its sitting just below 3ghz. 3.3XE is simply not going to happen at all unless Intel can pull a major rabbit out of the hat.

From what I hear now the problem is semi-fixed but it will take atleast .45nm before we will start seeing over 3 on air. They are still suffering the same leakage issues since they still using "dumb" silicon compared to what AMD is using currentally
02-14-2006, 12:20 PM
maratus

Quote:

Originally Posted by d@rkn1ko

you will need very good board for to go over 400 mhz fsb :slobber:

Hope Conroe XE will have unlock multi...
02-14-2006, 05:03 PM
vapb400

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sentential

Thats not gonna happen. Word on the street was that intel was petrified about how badly Conroe and Yonah was scaling, almost to the point that they thought of canning it and moving to plan C.

This timeline is easily followable and you can see where I am getting these facts from. The inital samples wouldnt do over 2ghz hence the 1.8 samples. The newer batches just as Presler was about to be released were doing rougly over 2.6 and now its sitting just below 3ghz. 3.3XE is simply not going to happen at all unless Intel can pull a major rabbit out of the hat.

From what I hear now the problem is semi-fixed but it will take atleast .45nm before we will start seeing over 3 on air. They are still suffering the same leakage issues since they still using "dumb" silicon compared to what AMD is using currentally

Hmm didn't realize that. The easy clocking of Yonah to 2.7+ in a crappy (?) motherboard with a crappy heatsink is a positive though.

We are still looking at a Q3/Julyish release?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page