Penryn lineup ?

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: JackPack

Originally posted by: njdevilsfan87
Q9350 other than less power draw on 45nm doesn't look like much an improvement over the same priced current Q6600. It's 100MHz faster at stock, and even has 2MB less L2 - what's up with that? Quad with half the L2 disabled?

Q9300 is designed to compete with Phenom at sub-$200.

These prices are designed to be fluid since Phenom prices have not yet been revealed. Right now, Q9300 has a $266 placeholder, but soon, you'll see a Q9350 with 12 MB cache replacing it. Q9300 will be sub-$200.

It could be but that would depend on how competitive Phenom is. Though the Q9300 replacing the Q6600 allows Intel to get better yields, as they no longer need fully functional dies for Q9300, and 2.5GHZ should be pretty easy on 45nm.

What does this mean? Why wouldn't they need a fully functional die for a quad core processor?

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: JackPack

Originally posted by: njdevilsfan87
Q9350 other than less power draw on 45nm doesn't look like much an improvement over the same priced current Q6600. It's 100MHz faster at stock, and even has 2MB less L2 - what's up with that? Quad with half the L2 disabled?

Q9300 is designed to compete with Phenom at sub-$200.

These prices are designed to be fluid since Phenom prices have not yet been revealed. Right now, Q9300 has a $266 placeholder, but soon, you'll see a Q9350 with 12 MB cache replacing it. Q9300 will be sub-$200.

It could be but that would depend on how competitive Phenom is. Though the Q9300 replacing the Q6600 allows Intel to get better yields, as they no longer need fully functional dies for Q9300, and 2.5GHZ should be pretty easy on 45nm.

What does this mean? Why wouldn't they need a fully functional die for a quad core processor?

Like they can use partially defective dies with disabled blocks of cache for the Q9300. As well add to the fact that they are built on 2x107mm2 dies this gives them a better yield advantage. As well as the possibility of using native Wolfdale-3M cores down the road.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Ya, I need cpu's with monstrous multipliers. I could spend 250$ on a cpu I guess, but that's it. More is just overkill and out of my price range. But I guess that in Q1 2008 when more and more ddr3 comes out, that ddr2 1066mhz 2x1gb sticks will become pretty affordable as well. With that a 7 or 8 multiplier is enough to hit 3.7ghz or higher. Seeing as current p35 mobo's don't have any trouble hitting an fsb of 500, it shouldn't be to much of a problem.

When is Nehalem due btw? Because I'm not upgrading for at least a 9 months or so, I wonder where that is going to put me in the cycle of new hardware coming out.

I don't have much faith that DDR3 will be affordable by Q1 2008. In fact, I am not expecting it to be priced reasonably until the end of 2008. It took a very long time before DDR2 became real affordable. We would have paid 2-3 times more about 6 months ago for DDR2.

I believe Nehelem is scheduled for Q1 2009.

Nehalem is scheduled for H2 08 probably 4th qt. Nehalem c 32nm is is scheduled fot 09 release again probably 4th qt. Tick tock.

 

[MarcVenice]

I guess I need Barcelona/Phenom to kick some serious ass when they come out for us ordinary consumers. Or I need my x2 @ 2.6ghz to keep up with games for another year

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: Acanthus
It looks like intel decided a 9x multi is gonna cost us $550 :thumbsdown:

9x multi will cost us 1K now, just like it did before, with QX6850, we get a nice 8.5x though for $530. Intel isn't catering to overclockers anyway with the lower mainstream processors it's the stock performance that counts.

This isn't a major problem as with 450FSB you will still get 3.6GHZ on an 8x multiplier, which is fairly decent.

Err, Q6600 X3220?

A 45nm chip should OC higher on water.

Limiting the multiplier means the OC will be motherboard limited rather than cpu limited.

 

[Acanthus]

dp

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: Acanthus
It looks like intel decided a 9x multi is gonna cost us $550 :thumbsdown:

9x multi will cost us 1K now, just like it did before, with QX6850, we get a nice 8.5x though for $530. Intel isn't catering to overclockers anyway with the lower mainstream processors it's the stock performance that counts.

This isn't a major problem as with 450FSB you will still get 3.6GHZ on an 8x multiplier, which is fairly decent.

Err, Q6600 X3220?

A 45nm chip should OC higher on water.

Limiting the multiplier means the OC will be motherboard limited rather than cpu limited.

Hmmm, I thought you were referring to 45nm SKU's if your talking about 65nm SKU's we already have x10 Multi at 530USD with the X3230 right? To some degree, but I think the best motherboards are capable of 500FSB so your looking at 4GHZ Quad's which looks pretty high even for the 45nm node.