Intel to discontinue Core i7 920 & 940 CPUs

[Shintai]

Yea but they'll only be readily available for ~8-9 months before Sandy Bridge drops, making the upgrade before then pointless for any current i7 users. The slight boost to productivity is offset by the massive depreciation in value once Sandy Bridge drops.

Sandy bridge is about a year away. And then you have Ivy bridge another year away. And then you have...

See the point? Plus the majority dont upgrade their CPU only. But the entire platform.

[N19h7m4r3]

Sandy bridge is about a year away. And then you have Ivy bridge another year away. And then you have...

See the point? Plus the majority dont upgrade their CPU only. But the entire platform.

Have to agree with this.

I can't ever remember just upgrading my CPU.

It's the entire system or nothing, maybe at most I'll change the GPU or add another HDD.

I think that when the 6cores launch, people will buy. There's always a demand for more.

[Donnie27]

and you forget that everytime intel sells an i5 CPU they make even more money on P55 than they do with X58 as the P55 is just an extremely overpriced southbridge

Absolutely and the price difference I heard was $10, not $20. Though no as advanced (process wise), the last gen North Bridges had a lot more hardware. I totally understand iX processors costs more but I think Intel is just plain FOS on Chip-set pricing for X58 and P55=P but that just me.

[Chickenfeed]

I agree and between Nvidia being locked out, it leaves us even less choice ( and I'd argue that Nvidia could actually make a decent i5 motherboard ; their old 939 chipsets were quite nice; read no northbridge )

[SirKronan]

Have to agree with this.

I can't ever remember just upgrading my CPU.

It's the entire system or nothing, maybe at most I'll change the GPU or add another HDD.

I think that when the 6cores launch, people will buy. There's always a demand for more.

I think I remember going to quad in socket 775 from a Core 2 Duo ... Made a huge difference with a mere CPU upgrade. Kept the same motherboard and everything.

There will always be something new coming out every few months. When there are major changes on all fronts of a build, it warrants a total platform upgrade, in my opinion. For example, with i7 we got an Intel chipset that supported SLI (huge for some people!), we moved to DDR3, we moved the memory controller on to the processor and gave it triple channel support, as well as crazy high speed capability, we have i7 processors now that overclock as easy as pouring yourself a glass of milk (maybe even easier for some). There were so many changes to each aspect of the system this time that it totally warranted a platform upgrade if you were on an aging 65nm Core 2 Q/D. When the 6 core comes out, if DDR3 is still the newest "bestest," at triple channel, and there are no new changes to GPU support, why not pop in a new CPU if it's going to give you a real upgrade? If they can make it show a tangible benefit in performance (as Windows 7 is showing it might have the ability to utilize) be a competitive price, and overclock the same or better than current i7 processor, then why not?

Now on the other hand, if DDR4 is there, quad channel memory, maybe the ability to run an ATI and an nVidia card in a multi GPU setup, or perhaps multi GPU Larrabee??? That would change things. I don't mind a CPU upgrade if the cost/benefit ratio makes sense. But if I knew a major platform upgrade was just around the corner, I can understand waiting for that, too. I'm just sayin' sometimes a mere CPU upgrade makes sense, especially if you're on a platform as high end as x58 that cost you that much money to switch to.

[Donnie27]

I agree and between Nvidia being locked out, it leaves us even less choice ( and I'd argue that Nvidia could actually make a decent i5 motherboard ; their old 939 chipsets were quite nice; read no northbridge )

Then nVidia should have done like 97% of the rest of the industry and paid for a license. Only their cheapness is stopping them. Higher speed models are still a moot point while Q9xxx has ZERO problems not only running any app but also running two or three of them at a time (multitasking). AMD has to make faster processors later this and next year. For Socket 775, Intel doesn't. Socket 775 is faster and if you want something faster, then go with i7, i5 or etc... Again, I'm saying buying Q9550 is NOT a bad idea unless you're buying i7. Buying an AMD anything isn't better upgrade on their current platform.

Even if AMD ships a 6 core Desktop processor, you then become memory bandwidth limited as two channels will be split between 6 cores. I see AMD moving to 3 and then 4 channels for more bandwidth. Who here will still wan't their current board when that happens?

[stangracin3]

Then nVidia should have done like 97% of the rest of the industry and paid for a license. Only their cheapness is stopping them. Higher speed models are still a moot point while Q9xxx has ZERO problems not only running any app but also running two or three of them at a time (multitasking). AMD has to make faster processors later this and next year. For Socket 775, Intel doesn't. Socket 775 is faster and if you want something faster, then go with i7, i5 or etc... Again, I'm saying buying Q9550 is NOT a bad idea unless you're buying i7. Buying an AMD anything isn't better upgrade on their current platform.

Even if AMD ships a 6 core Desktop processor, you then become memory bandwidth limited as two channels will be split between 6 cores. I see AMD moving to 3 and then 4 channels for more bandwidth. Who here will still wan't their current board when that happens?

my amd 3 core has no problem multi tasking. crunching, gaming, and music at the same time is pretty damn good.

[Donnie27]

my amd 3 core has no problem multi tasking. crunching, gaming, and music at the same time is pretty damn good.

Didn't say it had any problems and it is a pretty good processor. The problem cropped up when others suggested it had a better Upgrade Path, when it DOESN'T.

[xVeinx]

There are two types of people on this forum: those that hang on to their hardware (even if only for WCG as a farm), and those that upgrade every month (ok, maybe there's someone in between there somewhere ). In either case, the upgrade path means little. If I buy an AM3 board, I can upgrade to a 6-core processor (maybe) sometime down the road. If I upgrade to a i7 board, I can upgrade to a 6-core processor down the road (maybe). Aside from some minor differences for extreme uses, your not going to upgrade your 920 to a 975, or your 945 to a 955. The performance difference simply doesn't warrant the cost. By the time the upgrade does become worth it, the processor most often requires either a new chipset or new power section on the board, etc. The 6-core processor possibilities are the only upgrade "path" of any value for either platform, and both have them coming up. It remains to be seen however if every board will be able to support them. At the end of the day, I don't think the upgrade path argument holds any water.

[Smartidiot89]

There are two types of people on this forum: those that hang on to their hardware (even if only for WCG as a farm), and those that upgrade every month (ok, maybe there's someone in between there somewhere ). In either case, the upgrade path means little. If I buy an AM3 board, I can upgrade to a 6-core processor (maybe) sometime down the road. If I upgrade to a i7 board, I can upgrade to a 6-core processor down the road (maybe). Aside from some minor differences for extreme uses, your not going to upgrade your 920 to a 975, or your 945 to a 955. The performance difference simply doesn't warrant the cost. By the time the upgrade does become worth it, the processor most often requires either a new chipset or new power section on the board, etc. The 6-core processor possibilities are the only upgrade "path" of any value for either platform, and both have them coming up. It remains to be seen however if every board will be able to support them. At the end of the day, I don't think the upgrade path argument holds any water.

QFT

So Core i7 920/950 being discontinued is something that really doesn't matter

[MomijiTMO]

Great posts on this page. I think we all have the upgrade bug to various degrees.

[SamHughe]

940 has become 950. They are sold for the same price (even though 950 is a faster cpu):



920 will not go away because it is a success but let's pretend one second that it will go away. Then, just go and buy a W3250 they are the same cpu (actually W3250 is better because it supports ECC memory in case you need it).



Stop being bunch of drama queens. There is nothing to cry about it. Nothing will change.

[Donnie27]

940 has become 950. They are sold for the same price (even though 950 is a faster cpu):

920 will not go away because it is a success but let's pretend one second that it will go away. Then, just go and buy a W3250 they are the same cpu (actually W3250 is better because it supports ECC memory in case you need it).

Stop being bunch of drama queens. There is nothing to cry about it. Nothing will change.

QMFT!

[LiquidReactor]

Is it just Intel trying to move a lot of i7 inventory before i5 comes around? Seems like a nice business trick; Intel "lol JK we're still going to be selling i7 until westmere" after million more are bought up in 2-3 months.

[PrometheusCon]

920 is the new q6600. ALL HAIL KENTSFIELD!

[saaya]

Plus the majority dont upgrade their CPU only. But the entire platform.

err cause they are forced to do so?

SamHughe, not only that, the xeons have slightly better turbo modes too, and they are binned better, so... even if the 920 wont go EOL soon, for overclockers it should be EOL as of now and they should buy xeons instead

[ripken204]

wow this thread is making me mad, i will have a P6T and ram soon..