Quote Originally Posted by duploxxx View Post
well that's just the same way you fill each thread, with garbage comments
You should be warned for monumental stupidity.

the answer is very simple, look at power consumption at load of the c2d architecture from e6300-6400 and e6600-e6700-e6800 the series are the same, only different speed binding and yet you see a higher power consumption due to higher speed. That's way you don't see a higher bin from INTEL, X6800 is at teh tdp limit, until they create a new revision so they can drop the vcore a little or go to penryn.
Reality speaks otherwise : Intel has a 75w TDP on its C2D Xtreme.Since at 2.93 it burns 66w I wouldn't be surprised if they cram a 3.2GHz in the 75w TDP envelope.
However , with no competition why shoot yourself in the foot and not maximize yields ?

Also , the new E6850 3GHz C2D burns 59w under 2x Prime. 3.33+ Ghz in the 75w TDP ?

If you want to see which uarch is power limited look at the jump from 2.6 to 2.8GHz on k8.


And don't put your high marks on penryn at the moment, there is a reason that they only release it late this year and ES samples are no +3,0Gig. But you'll find out when the NDA lifts
That's why Intel demoed 3.33GHz 45nm Quad-Cores 2 months ago at IDF ?

6 months from now as they refine the process why not see a 3.66Ghz Quad-Core at launch ?