Originally Posted by
Monstru
I can understand Intel's point of view and benefit from this move, but I do not understand what is the target audience for these chips withe the current parameters in place (price, other Intel family CPU's in the same price range, competition's offer in the same price range, etc). In other words, why would someone buy i661 instead of i750??? They are not cheaper, so "office PC on a chip" is not feasable, the IGP is not really that powerfull, so "multi-media HTPC on a chip" is also not feasable. For gaming it really does not matter what you use as long as you are playing >1680x1050 and you have max 2 years old CPU. For multimedia power users (render, encoding, etc) is not a good solution due to the number of cores...For hard-core overclockers this will only be a choice for Pi 1M, and maybe some PCMark 2k5, plus the porblem that only one MB manufacturer can solve the CB issue at this point. So in the end, who are the target buyers for this platform from Intel's point of view?
Don't get me wrong, I love prime at 4.7-5GHz on air, so I am not saying Clarkdale is bad or anything. It will have it's share of buyers for sure. But I want to understand Intel's point of view regarding this "move". I thought the beauty of the Nehalem architecture was it's flexibility, the possibility to add cores or threads, IMC or PCI-E controller, easily put 2 cpu's on one MB, etc. So why this move? Why getting out of that pattern and putting a 45nm G45 on steroids near the precious 32nm CPU???
