Printable View
http://content.intel.pcnalert.com/dm...N108967-00.pdf
Boxed version is gone as of 09/04/2009Quote:
Market demand for the Intel® Core™ i7-940 Processor has shifted to other Intel processors. The products identified in this notification will be discontinued and unavailable for additional orders after the "Last Product Discontinuance Order Date" (see "Key Milestones" above).
As I tried to tell Donnie, as much as X58 motherboards were overpriced, he should have been far more outraged at the pricing of the i7 940 and it looks like many folk were. :up::ROTF:
At $545, in this economy, I'm not surprised.
Especially since you can just get the 920 and overclock the darn thing.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyJJO
i never could understand the price of this processor, the only difference between it and the 920 are clock speeds. and there isn't a 2X increase in clock speed to support the 2X increase in price. intel will need to re-evalutate it's pricing models in the future to account for overclocking.
If intel really wanted to kick AMD out of the market entirely they would have made the 940 the 920's price and the 920 $200....
that said if they wanted to shift more sales to the 940 they should have made the 920 max 18x multi...
Preach it brother. :clap: :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
Maybe this wasn't technically viable but I would have thought it better to have the 920 as is, the 965 at 940 prices and a i7 at 3.6Ghz at the 965's price.Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
That's why I7 is a waste (of money) for gamer.
:yepp: you're right, I just used it as an example though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
oh well.. got to stick with my current set-up till the price stabilize..
flame baitQuote:
Originally Posted by damtachoa
How much is the e8600 ;)
Be careful when you get out of bed in the morning, you might knock over that framed picture of Jen-Hsun Huang on your night stand.Quote:
Originally Posted by damtachoa
What annoys me is you see many OEM's shifting 940 i7s as stock then some middle end GFX card. $250 can easily be spent elsewhere for superior performance.
Yar. The i7 940 was doomed from the very beginning. The middle-market mark was very much up-market. But you're right--an i7 910 (2.53GHz? 2.4GHz?) or 920 at $200 plus a 940 or something at $320 would have made a lot more sense. I was disappointed to hear about the spread between 920, 940, and 965/975. The bottom-line X58 boards ($180-200) are plenty for OEM. Toss in 3-6GB DDR3, an i7 920 at $200, and a 500GB drive and you've got a good system to start. I was looking before actually. With the Antec Sonata III with 500W PSU (Seasonic or Delta, doesn't really matter) at $90, the Barracuda 7200.12 500GB at $65, low-end HD4000, and the MSI X58 Pro at $190, that's a very affordable i7/X58 rig.
I almost bought one I'm glad I didn't I OC'd higher on my c0 920 b-batch CPU then I could with my buddies 940. I just got a d0 stepping 920 now, flat out beast I'm at 4.6ghz on ambient water temps and then the EVGA turbo that adds 200mhz after you get into windows so essentially 4.8ghz on benches/games.
LOL :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by YukonTrooper
Did anyone actually buy the i7 940? :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorlac
Those who wanted, went all out for the 965. Those who didn't, went for the 920.
well the thing is the i7 is essentially limited to >4.5 on air/water with an 940 the extra 450 mhz attainable from the 920 warrants exotic cooling. If your going to get exotic cooling then your probably someone who does LN2 as well, in which case you want the extreme edition anyway....
basically the 940 is a niche chip for the nearly non-existant market of benchers who run a fairly weak 24/7 phase system..... FAIL
While I agree that the i940 pricing is ridiculous - just as previous chips in that pricing segment (just below the extreme editions) - you guys need to know that the i940 is being replaced by the i950 D0. Now if it were left to me, we all should boycott that chip, but I know for a fact that there are many enthusiasts out there waiting for that particular chip because it offers the easiest way to break the 5Ghz barrier, save for the 965/975.
It's not only an "EVGA turbo" the "turbo" feature is used on all i7 platforms and is not just a static 200Mhz increase in speed. The turbo feature gives you a 1x higher multi than what it is at stock. So for instance the i7 920 has a 20x multi but with turbo enabled it kicks the multi up to 21x when the system is being stressed. SO if for instance you left the CPU at stock speed and enabled turbo the CPU would go from 2,660Mhz to 2,793Mhz when being stressed for a difference of 133Mhz.Quote:
Originally Posted by ulticool
This is no big deal they are being replaced by 950 and 975.
A Classified and a 920 D0 is still faster than a 940 with phase :)Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
You guys are focusing on price, but that could be fixed in an instant. All they have to do is make it cheaper. There's more to it, then. Eg: the 950.
Not that I'm saying the price wasn't ridiculous: I find the prices on everything but the bang-for-buck-chip (whichever that is at the time, as decided by intel's pricing scheme usually) are too high. There's usually one chip that's a clear winner, and by comparison, the others tend to look silly. With some differences explained by multipliers etc, but we're also such a small part of the market, I dont think that explains the trend in high prices.
I think that in turn you may find the price on the 950 to be silly. If not, it'll be the 'sweet chip' and the price on something else will look silly.
I for one couldn't see the justification in such a large premium in price but not performance over the 920, especially for overclockers, and if your not an overclocker, chances are you wouldn't need something that fast, I mean 940 for web surfing?Quote:
Originally Posted by 3NZ0
mass production i7 940 and i965 is on end ... next month will be released i7 950 and i7 975 instead of them
The price of that mid level 940/950 chip (approx $550) will probably dip to around $320 at some point. Sorta like Q6700 or Q9650. I bet in the fall.
I wish Intel would price their CPU's more like AMD does, the better models cost a decent amount more than the base models to account for the performance difference, but not this crazy doubling/quadrupling of the price for only a few percentage points more performance.
its OT but i wanna ask is there any price cuts for i7 expected from intel?
well, i7 is awesome, blame games for being terribly coded.Quote:
Originally Posted by damtachoa
You mean blame graphics cards manufacturers for not keeping up with CPU performance increases in the last few years :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by grimREEFER
Not entirely true, there where some really bad clocking 920's out there, Anand had some that could not even do 3.8...Quote:
Originally Posted by The0men
With the 940 you could basically buy a piece of mind that you can avoid the worst few chips out there. Of course, with the release of the 920 D0 that is not necessary anymore.
Always thaught that Core i7 940 was a waste of money. In my eyes there were only 2 processors: Core i7 920 and 965. Why were the 940 there, and why was it priced so darned high?
So you want Intel to price their chips like they are the underdog? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by urgrandpasdog
Remember AMD's pricing before Core 2 came out?
It makes no sense to me. Why not to reduce it's price to $300~350, then introduce the i7-950 at $400~$500, add i7-960(non EE, with locked multi) tot he list at $600~$650 and i7-975 EE at $999.
q6600 on water at 4.3ghz is still the king in gaming :)
Not really, tons of benchmarks are showing that you need a high-clocked I7 to fully feed a high-end SLI setup, let alone a Tri-SLI loadout. If anything, it's the CPU designers that are behind in delivering affordable chips that allow modern GPUs to stretch their legs.Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
+1 although it would be nice to buy the extreme edition for £20 more then the bottom chip,Quote:
Originally Posted by tool_462
Amd did do the same with athlon 64, if you want the best equipment you got to pay top price im afraid =(
-----------------------
On the games side of things it's the crappy lazy coding there game makers are doing to not support quad chips better.
why introduce a couple of new cpus at the same or higher price after even the old one wasn't in demand? THIS wouldn't make sense ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
however, the 920 is the only i7 cpu that's worth the money, imo; and while looking at future i5 cpus i'm quite sure that i'll skip this generation of cpus altogether. as a gamer i really don't see the point of upgrading to one of these, especially the i5 cpus, while having a decent c2q.
so yeah, that's probably the reason there's only demand for the cheapest i7 (920) and the extreme 965 with its unlocked multi for enthusiasts (with money :p:)
Agreed. With the 23x multi and boards that are able to push ~ 230 bclk easy i950 wil become a very nice alternative for the 975EE :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
Great point indeed. I've held back purchasing i7 hardware for myself as I've been waiting on the X58 stepping update to begin circulation, and since the 950 looks like it'll be out round the same time frame as X58 stepping update, might be a good choice. i7 965 are priced around $1800AUD, so the 975 will be even more locally, this is the next best thing!Quote:
Originally Posted by loc.o
Other point I would make is, we don't see all that much value in the 940/950 as a viable option because the low end 920 can run circles around it for half the price. Though many of us forget to consider that the 940 probably sold the most units through OEMs like HP, Dell, etc. You don't buy an off the shelf PC and overclock it, you buy it for what it offers and use it like that. If a 940 specs out higher than a 920, then the product is faster for a user who won't be playing with bios settings.
too bad... but maybe a wise decision since these times in our economy are extremely tight even for gamers.
p.s. I am doing an economics research paper on amd vs intel covering all aspects of the financial side of the two giants plus some commentary/opinion on the product lines of the two. if anyone wants to help or offer any suggestions or tips feel free to shoot me a pm.
The only thing in your eyes was AMD,:yepp::rofl:j/kQuote:
Originally Posted by Smartidiot89
I can't believe some of the things I'm hearing about prices compared to CRAP folks were calling good and great deals just 3 years ago about this time. i7 940 is from a better Bin than i920. They'll make room for i7 950 and it will sale as well. But not to me LOL!
I bought a 940 and it clocks pretty nice. Highest clocks between the 920 / 940 (atleast the batch I received), however I probably would be at the same with a 920 D0.
Won't be worth it to upgrade for me yet until 995 or something is released. I'm waiting for a factory clocked 3.6+ XE cpu is released.
So the 950 will replace the 940 with the same price range around $ 550 ???
Yes...Quote:
Originally Posted by icecpu
Quote:
Originally Posted by YukonTrooper
..should be sig'd.
partially the economy, partially Intel's fault. Not too long ago the Core 2 Quad lineup ranged from $250 (6600) into the $400-500 range.
lately CPU prices have come back down (Quad is 150 - 350, Duo is 60 - 230), then Intel left i7 in the old C2Q range.
Then they put turbo-mode on i7 so the 920 would, when needed, be a 940.
Really with i7 being positioned as the 'higher-level' chip Intel might be best suited following AMD a bit:
$230 i7 920 (i.e. what Microcenter currently charges)
$300 i7 920x (unlocked 920)
$800 i7 XE (top-binned, unlocked i7)
but that's just me
I just wish the CPU market would get as competitive as the GPU market. Look what the 48XX series did to nvidia's pricing. Those 280s dropped something like 200 dollars overnight after the 4870 numbers came out. If AMD could come out with a chip that is as fast, or at least nearly as fast as say the 920 and price it where they have their Phenom II 955 BE now... the price wars would be awesome.
As in the past if AMD had a chip that performed at the same level or better than Intel then AMD would be charging more for the higher bins. It's not like AMD want to be pricing their top BE's at low end Intel quad prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by cobra_kai
QFT.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Here are some AMD prices from 4 years ago.
Athlon 64 X2 4200+ $537
Athlon 64 X2 4400+ $581
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ $803
Athlon 64 X2 4800+ $1001
source
So true, to be fair I recall GeForce 6800 Ultras being $700 or so, *sigh* good, err, old days
Between Phenom II X3 and X4 and Intel's Core 2 Duo & Quad lines, the $80-250 segment is pretty damn good for CPUs right now.
i7 is cool for being the 'new tech on the block' and with the Microcenter i7 920 prices, it's hard to say no if you're building a new system, but ultimately there just isn't that much reason to go i7 or C2Q 9x50 or even an e8600 depending on what you need.
There's a lot more than goes into pricing than meets the eye. While it's possible to sell more chips at a cheaper price, whether or not it's a good idea depends on the price elasticity of demand. This determines how many more chips will be sold given the price, so a price drop of $1 might only sell 1 more chip, or a price drop of $100 might only sell 3 or 4 more chips so it really depends on this measurement along with many other factors to correctly determine prices to maximize revenue and profits.
:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
I'm not surprised the 940 was the biggest fail I ever seen... the 920's made them look bad on the OCing / price / performance department, the 950 is going for the same route for sure...
i965 is going going gone as well...09/04/2009
http://content.intel.pcnalert.com/dm...N109259-00.pdf
Quote:
Market demand for the Intel® Core™ i7-965 Processor Extreme Edition has shifted to other Intel processors. The products identified in this notification will be discontinued and unavailable for additional orders after the "Last Product Discontinuance Order Date" (see "Key Milestones" above).
Lol so they use the exact same wording.Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel
Maybe we all shouldn't analyse their wording much, they clearly just change the model number and reissue the same statement each time ;)
As much as a Q9550Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
Ok, bye-bye i7 940! :D