Printable View
The P55 and H55 chips in 1000 unit quanitites are both $40 each. However H55 motherboards should be cheaper to produce with perhaps fewer PCB layers, less VRM's, only a single PCIE x16 slot (no need for lane switchers) and etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
Don't look at the retail MB price. Especialy when it is new on the market. Two chip design is much cheaper to create and manufacture.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Clarkdale is more complicated inside, but to the external world it isn't complicated more then, for example, G31 chipset. Also big OEMs dont care to much about quality, unfortunately.Quote:
Less components on mobo does not mean the system will cost less, Clarkdale is very much more complicated than the run of the mill Phenom II or any C2D. In such a system quantity does not matter as much as quality.
Less then 100€ (incl. 20% VAT) and already cheaper then the G45 Mobos when they were introduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
The MSI-H55M-E33 is already below 80€ and is quite feature packed.
Looks good for a HTPC combined with a i3-530 you can get away below 180€ :cool:
Same money i spent 2 years sgo on my E5200 and P43 mobo with discrete card (HD2400 pro).
Well, Intel is very aware of the power of their own CPU's no? Then why launch something in the same price range with i750? That puzzles me. We have LGA 1366, we have LGA 1156, we will have Gulftowns. Heck, give us some 32nm quads and some cheapo 32nm dual-cores with no IGP and everybody would die to get one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesker
That is true, i3 is indeed appealing, and the part about i3 vs Phenom II X4 is just....well...let's admit it, it is completly delicious, it is the icing on the cake so to speak :DQuote:
But the Core i3's look to be a great bargain for anyone wanting to run a cheap HTPC or general office PC. You don't lose HyperThreading, you have a fairly high clock speed (~3.00GHz) and they're priced quite well. They even manage to outperform the Phenom II X4's in some benchmark, while they generally outperform the Athlon II X4 (except in 3D rendering).
Let's see:
H57:
ASUS P7H57D-V Evo between 167,3 and 189,9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a486951.html
H55:
ASRock H55DE3 between 96 and 104 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a491384.html
ASRock H55M Pro between 89 and 99 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a491392.html
ASRock H55M between 81 and 91 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a491393.html
ASUS P7H55-M Pro - 102.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a486949.html
Biostar TH55 XE - 94.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a489866.html
MSI H55M-E33 - between 78.7 and 130.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a487979.html
AMD 785G
ASRock M3A785GM-LE/128M (128 MB DDR3 sideport) - between 62.9 and 69.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a482241.html
ASRock M3A785GMH/128M (128 MB DDR3 SidePort) - between 66.2 - 77.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a450811.html
[ATX] ASRock M3A785GXH/128M (128 MB DDR3 SidePort) + CrossFireX - between 75 and 90 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a450814.html
ASUS M4A785T-M - between 69.3 and 111.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a459249.html
ASUS M4A785TD-M EVO (128 MB SidePort) - 71.9 and 120.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a447174.html
[ATX] ASUS M4A785TD-V EVO (128 MB DDR3 SidePort) - between 74.9 and 105.6 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a447175.html
Gigabyte GA-MA785GMT-UD2H - between 75.1 and 133.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a448155.html
[ATX] Gigabyte GA-MA785GT-UD3H (CrossFireX) - between 78.2 and 109.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a448154.html
MSI 785GM-E65 (128 MB SidePort) - between 82.9 and 132.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a449745.html
[ATX] MSI 785G-E53 - between 79.5 and 125.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a464203.html
MSI 785GM-E51 - between 64.9 and 101.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a449743.html
Sapphire PURE PI-AM3RS785G - between 59.9 and 84.1 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a459400.html
Elitegroup A785GM-M - between 69.9 and 83.3 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a450271.html
Biostar TA785G3 (128 MB DDR2 SidePort) - between 61.8 and 61.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a493305.html
DFI LANparty BI 785G-M35 - 89.9 EUR - http://geizhals.at/a473376.html
The only boards that come close feature wise, are the, ASUS M4A785T-M/TD-M EVO and the Elitegroup A785GM-M and the MSI H55 board is only 8€ more expencive and there is still some potential for a lower price.
Also the AMD boards currently lack some features i would miss on a HTPC, bitstreaming over HDMI as example. :)
these clarkdales looks like conroe on steroids(HTT, turbo-boost, QPI instead of FSB) to me.
Like intel has nothing to improve performance per core/thread and trying to sell new cpus making them look better with "steroids"
IMHO.
Ahem.. you know that Nehalem is faster clock/clock then C2... :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by netkas
You might want to re-read the reviews, the performance is better ish, but more importantly, the power consumption is way down.Quote:
Originally Posted by netkas
Just remember folks, these are the chips that will be in all your business computers in a few years, not in your high-powered gaming rig.
xbitlabs have the G9650 in their tests, clarkdale without HT/turbo at 2.8ghz looked very unimpressive, even against the pentium e6500 (wolfdale 2m at 2.93ghz) :(
Dell, HP, Gateway, etc don't buy retail boards, they design and have OEM's build them for them, and as well quoted above they cut specs and/or quality to the bone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
At least according to this roadmap, these CPU's are the bottom tier mainstream desktop chip. I don't know about other companies, but that is what our IT department specs out (they used to do the Value tier CPU, but burned by poor CPU performance, not IGP).
http://images.hardware.info/news/int...dmap-09-10.jpg
Sure I might be wrong, but I think these are exact going after coporate office, home office and basic internet desktops, where graphic performance (outside of displaying the screen) won't make any difference at all.
I dont see a problem there, despit its 5% lower clock its usually 3-6% faster then the e6500 with some cases beeing 3% slower... with some rare cases (where the memory subsystem comes into play up to 10% slower).Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectrobozo
Plus it needs less power then the P E6500.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectrobozo
Crysis WARHEAD:
Pentium G9650 - 67,24 fps
Pentium E6500 - 66,93 fps
Far Cry 2:
Pentium G9650 - 65,89 fps
Pentium E6500 - 66,86 fps
Resident Evil 5
Pentium G9650 - 48,9 fps
Pentium E6500 - 48,2 fps
HAWX
Pentium G9650 - 97 fps
Pentium E6500 - 100 fps
Left 4 Dead 2
Pentium G9650 - 103.95 fps
Pentium E6500 - 104.51 fps
Dirt 2:
Pentium G9650 - 59,4 fps
Pentium E6500 - 58,9 fps
iTunes 9 Encoding (less is better)
Pentium G9650 - 101 sec
Pentium E6500 - 98 sec
Acoustica Mixcraft
Pentium G9650 - 133 sec
Pentium E6500 - 135 sec
x264 fps (more is better)
Pentium G9650 - 9.87 fps
Pentium E6500 - 9.81 fps
Cyberlink MediaShow 5 (less is better)
Pentium G9650 - 278 sec
Pentium E6500 - 293 sec
Premiere Pro CS4 (less is better)
Pentium G9650 - 815 sec
Pentium E6500 - 293 sec
and so on... pattern is similar... and difference between old and new Pentium is really small. Unfortunately no one used Core 2 Due E7400 that would give much better picture 'cos of the cache
i looked over all the previews, but I'm still left with this debate:
what will consume less power in idle: s775 E5200 + G41 IGP configuration or new Pentim G6950 and its IGP?
If someone can deduct this please help or post a link!
You know that that i3 is intended to replace the E7xxx seriers, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
E7600 ~100€ = i3 530 and thanks to HT its faster in MT apps then a E8600 which still retails for 230€.
You might to check over in the AVS HTPC forums: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=26Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
A suspect this question might be answered over there quite soon
Or you can get an XBOX 360 for $199 that will blow both the intel and amd for video games. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
Because an IGP with dedicated memory cannot compare with one with shared memory. The dedicated memory is much faster and it's optimized for working with shaders and textures. So I prefer to compare apples to apples ;)!Quote:
Originally Posted by Xoulz
I did review the 790GX and I like it because it's very interesting and tweakable for a IGP. I didn't even know that X4 635 exists, thx for telling me :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
Great chips,great power consumption.Horrid pricing.
Somebody earlier pointed that these clarkdales are pointed at office computers.And that oems build they own mobos.
Yeah.They do.But its still cheaper to build am2+/am3/775 mobo for them then H55.
No office computer needs this much power,not at that price.
Workstation computers need more power,and they will get that with i750 or phenom 965.
I hoper for ulvs with arrendale ,for really low power consumption and higher performance due to the included 45nm igp.Didnt happen either, they are bit more powerful however no more battery life with teh ones premiered today.Shame too.
Normal gaming people with some kind of knowledge wont get them either, power consumption wont matter that much, they can get intel or amd quad/tri ,overclock them and get much more power.
Im not a AMD fanboy, i build computers for a living and most people wants something good enough and cheap enough.It mostly boils down to amd for me.However the Intel systems i build are not that much more pricey and more sensible then this.
we're not talking about price replacement... we were talking about level of performance gains that Dual Core Nehalem w/o HT & Turbo brings over Core 2 Duo!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
My point is that best possible scenario would be E7400 @ 1333MHz QPB (E8300 is no go 'cos of 6Mb L2)
every approach has it's values! my favorite is price-by-price ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by matose
so you've missed this thread: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=242455Quote:
I did review the 790GX and I like it because it's very interesting and tweakable for a IGP. I didn't even know that X4 635 exists, thx for telling me :D
;)
The same cpu with AMD brand on it and it's a must have, that's right Nedjo, no ? :D
errr... I didn't understand that?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
:shrug:
anyhow I've expressed my own choice of comparison, but sometimes that's not possible:
Core i5 650 - 180 EUR: http://geizhals.at/a451549.html
Phenom II X4 945 "C3" - 130 EUR: http://geizhals.at/a486332.html
I honestly can't see why would anyone spend money on i5?
As do I, G9650 is the replacemnt for the P E6x00 and i3 5xx are the replacement for the E7x00 as the i5 6xx are the replacment for the E8600 duals and Q8xxx quadcores.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
Why do you think they have similar prices in the first place. :p:
edit:
seems you insist that intel has to price its cpus accordingly to amd, but they dont do that. They just populate there price brackets for the different segments by replacing old models with new owns. They did this pretty much for ever. When ever a new or faster cpu comes out, it takes the top price bracket in that segment and all the others move down one bracket or get phased out (while remaining in the same price bracket).
A little overboard? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Wesker
[edit]
Well I gotta add this. :D It looks now like this will unquestionably be the year of Llano no matter what time of the year it's released!
Yeah, but where can you buy a 785G and not have sideport ..? Thus wouldn't apples to apples be with it enabled?Quote:
Originally Posted by matose