45nm Peryn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[EdzAviator]

Just when I cancelled my order of Q6600 to wait for the upcoming Quad Peryn next year to replace my E4300...

The Quad Peryn is cancelled...!!!

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071218PD212.html

Any comment if this is true......????

Coz if this is true...then I'm not waiting for Peryn anymore...

I'll buy myself a Q6600 and wait for Nehalem or 45nm Phenom is the latter will perform better than current Phenom...

 

[bfdd]

It's not canceled did you even read the article? It was delayed not canceled.

 

[Ika]

It was to be expected.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I read somewhere else in the last couple days that the "780i" chipset-revision to 680i is still only dual-core Penryn-ready as far as the QX9650 is concerned.

I can imagine a dominant firm like Intel playing its products and pricing like a cat toys with a mouse, so I'm wondering if the yet-to-be-released Penryns are being tweaked in production to cut the 680i boards back into the action . . . .

. . . . Probably, wishful thinking. We'll see, I guess . . .

 

[lilbabimac]

Okay, that does it... January, I was willing to do - February or March?!? I'm patient but not THAT patient. Damn, that just pissed me off. Ah, well. I guess Q6600 it is...

 

[Yanagi]

More like at this stage AMD does not pose a serious threat to intels current lineup, hence no reason to release new things while they can still profit on the old.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Well, with all the flurry and flap about the Yorkfield F***-up per the nVidia chipsets, I can't dismiss the thought that Intel wants to tweak their Penryn-quads for compatibility before releasing them.

this could be complex, since some enthusiasts have complained to nVidia and some board-makers that the companies promised Penryn and quad-core compatibility, while the QX9650 doesn't work with the 680i boards. So whose fault is it? nVidia? or Intel?

See, if the both Conroe and Kentsfield processors worked fine on the 680i boards, it seems pretty "fishy" that only the Wolfdale dual-cores work with the same motherboards. Some of the "skinny" suggested that the Yorkfield was compatible, but it required "motherboard-level revisions." If that's the case, I can't see why it couldn't also be fixed by processor-level revisions.

 

[zsdersw]

Originally posted by: EdzAviator

Just when I cancelled my order of Q6600 to wait for the upcoming Quad Peryn next year to replace my E4300...

The Quad Peryn is cancelled...!!!

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071218PD212.html

Any comment if this is true......????

Coz if this is true...then I'm not waiting for Peryn anymore...

I'll buy myself a Q6600 and wait for Nehalem or 45nm Phenom is the latter will perform better than current Phenom...

Can't you get anything right? It's Penryn, not Peryn.

 

[Denithor]

EdzAviator is now confirmed as nothing but a TROLL!!!

Put him on your ignored list.

 

[tronicson]

intel have encountered some FSB problem - reproducable in lab conditions, not in all-day use... could lead to data loss...

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: tronicson
intel have encountered some FSB problem - reproducable in lab conditions, not in all-day use... could lead to data loss...

hmm u just registered to post that? I wonder who you could be...

 

[flashMemory]

Penryn is going to suck because of the low multi and high price gouging when it is released. You won't get high 4ghz like you think out of a q9450. So don't get hyped up. The multi is lower than the q6600 and the q6600 can rarely hit 4ghz. All of the 1066 extreme Q processors have managed 5ghz+ with unlock multi on LN. It is still the case with penryn. The bottleneck is in how good your motherboard can up its FSB and most can't do even close to 500FSB on a quad. Many can barely get over 480FSB stable on current P35 and x38 boards. Maybe intel x48 can be better for quads but the premiums you pay is not worth it and it will probably be all dd3 compliant so you still got to pay money and most likely it will be just a tad bit less than an extreme processor if you have got a good deal for it at the time..so you get FxxK either way by x48 and ddr3.

Also Penryn is not much faster clock for clock. It is around 5-7% and that is only because of the added cache and SSE4 and only in very very few programs that utilize it. which means in 99% of the time it is only around 1-2% faster than 65nm core 2. You still have to pay a lot regardless for a measly 2% boost in performance clock for clock in 99% of everything. If you render and encode video it is probably a good buy but everything else will remain nearly the same.

 

[j0j081]

wtf same with this guy ^

maybe a mod should check the ips these guys are posting from.