Penryn lineup ?

[Zenoth]

Sorry if it has been posted already but:

http://www.hkepc.com/?id=171

Quite interesting, just look at the price of that Q9450 ! Very nice !

 

[Nemesis 1]

Intel 45nm DT CPU Pricing ( 1Ku ) Q1, 2008

Model
Speed
L2 Cache
FSB
11-Nov
Jan 2008

Quad Core

QX9650
3GHz
12MB
1333MHz
$999
-

Q9550
2.83GHz
12MB
1333MHz
-
$530

Q9450
2.66GHz
12MB
1333MHz
-
$316

Q9300
2.50GHz
6MB
1333MHz
-
$266

Dual Core

E8500
3.16GHz
6MB
1333MHz
-
$266

E8400
3.00GHz
6MB
1333MHz

$183

E8300
2.83GHz
6MB
1333MHz
-
-

E8200
2.66GHz
6MB
1333MHz

$163

Source : MB Manufacturers , Complied by HKEPC Hardware ,Sept2007

Nice prices Man Amd is going to have to give their K10's away I wonder what Intel will price the 65nm cpu's @

 

[Ika]

Wasn't there supposed to be a Xeon quad priced sub-$200? Shouldn't there be some sort of desktop equivalent? and I was looking forward to really cheap quads.

 

[Nemesis 1]

You should beable to pick up a 1.8 K10 quad cheap.

If A 2.5 Penryn goes for $266. 1.8 K10 should sell for around $150.

 

[bryanW1995]

seriously, nemesis, stop reading my mind. This is very scary, ...must...fight...intel...fanboyism...instinct...

 

[three4seven]

excuse my n00bness.. but am I going to regret purchasing a q6600 g0 once penryn comes out?

Is there going to be a big performance difference (since it is not so far away)?

once again.. pardon my ignorance on the topic of penryn's vs kentsfield...

 

[Cheex]

I don't think you'll regret it. Just enjoy it. I think you'll be fine until Nehalem.

 

[bfdd]

Well looks like I'll be selling my cousin my cpu to my cousin because that E8400 for 183 looks SWEET. 3ghz probably has quite the overhead too for overclocking.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: three4seven
excuse my n00bness.. but am I going to regret purchasing a q6600 g0 once penryn comes out?

Is there going to be a big performance difference (since it is not so far away)?

once again.. pardon my ignorance on the topic of penryn's vs kentsfield...

yes, you will definitely regret it. you should give you g0 quad to me when penryn comes out to punish yourself

 

[Nemesis 1]

DAM thats what I was Thinking. We must quit meeting like this.

 

[ArchAngel777]

I believe buying a Q6600 right now is a pretty wise decision... Well, as wise as one can get when being an enthusiest. But, anyway, if you can get a G0 and clock it at 3.6Ghz (Ok, even if 3.6 is rare) you would be considered top of the line for probably the next year as I don't believe even Penryn will launch much faster than QC @ 3.33Ghz in 2008. So, you would be about top of the line for the next year or so, maybe longer, and then it would be another year after that where you could start to be on par with current mainstream CPUs of 2009. Then another year before you would start to lag behind the mainstream CPU around 2010. This is just speculation, but judging how it has been going, this seems a pretty decent prediction.

 

[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? But I would expect Penryn to increase the average quad overclock from 3.2GHz on air to 3.5GHz - that is an improvement... but I'm glad I bought a Q6600 almost 2 months ago now.

 

[voodoo7817]

Originally posted by: njdevilsfan87
I would expect Penryn to increase the average quad overclock from 3.2GHz on air to 3.5GHz - that is an improvement...

Can anyone expand on this? Is it just because of lower temps? I am very new to the overclocking world and I would like to know more about the overclocking potential of the Quad Penryns. Will they truly overclock better than the G0? I have been working on a new build and am considering buying a G0, but I can hold off on a Quad if Penryn is at least as good an overclocker. If the Penryn is the same or better I would probably buy a 2140 in the meantime and overclock it. In a year or so I would migrate some of these current parts to a HTPC and get a Penryn.

 

[bryanW1995]

lower temps are a big reason, also intel has had a long time working on the c2d lineup. Penryn is really just an update to c2d on a smaller manufacturing process, so it is reasonable to assume that they will continue to get better at making them.

buying the e2140 as a stopgap is a great move imho. With the crazy heat that even a G0 quad pumps out right now on 65nm, you're probably going to be better off waiting for penryn. get the mobo that you'll want for the htpc now and just leave the e2140 in it when you get the penryn. x38 and x48 are both scheduled to be out in the next few months, those are the mobos to get for penryn.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: voodoo7817

Originally posted by: njdevilsfan87
I would expect Penryn to increase the average quad overclock from 3.2GHz on air to 3.5GHz - that is an improvement...

Can anyone expand on this? Is it just because of lower temps? I am very new to the overclocking world and I would like to know more about the overclocking potential of the Quad Penryns. Will they truly overclock better than the G0? I have been working on a new build and am considering buying a G0, but I can hold off on a Quad if Penryn is at least as good an overclocker. If the Penryn is the same or better I would probably buy a 2140 in the meantime and overclock it. In a year or so I would migrate some of these current parts to a HTPC and get a Penryn.

Well, the die shrink generally allows for lower voltage, increase in clock speed. The problem with the Penryn isn't going to be the ability to clock high, but rather the low multiplier they will have for the affordable ones. So, if the multi was unlocked, you would probably see their $266 Q1 release CPU hit speeds in excess of 4Ghz on air. But, since the multiplier is set at 7.5, it will require an insane FSB to hit that speed. I am not sure if the P35 boards are going to be able to hit 540 X 7.5. I am not even sure if they will hit 500 X 7.5 and even if they do, they will not be clocked significantly higher than an equivelent Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz. Since Penryn is only about 5-10% faster in most applications clock for clock, then we are not talking about much of an improvement for a near 4-6 month wait... As for tempature, no one really knows how much cooler than 45nm will run... It might not be much of an improvement at first until they perfect the 45nm process. It could end up being a similar move like a B3 to a G0.

 

[bryanW1995]

AT compared a 2.33 ghz penryn dual core vs an e6550 here: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3069&p=1

total system power usage at load was down 10 %. that is a huge amount with just changing the cpu and nothing else, much greater than going from b3 to g0 was. I wouldn't go any lower than 8x multiplier if you want a good oc for penryn, even with that you'll need 500 fsb to get to 4 ghz.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
AT compared a 2.33 ghz penryn dual core vs an e6550 here: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3069&p=1

total system power usage at load was down 10 %. that is a huge amount with just changing the cpu and nothing else, much greater than going from b3 to g0 was. I wouldn't go any lower than 8x multiplier if you want a good oc for penryn, even with that you'll need 500 fsb to get to 4 ghz.

Good point... So it looks like it could be as much as a ~25% reduction in power requirements... Still, I don't think anyone except the hardcore enthusiests (sadly, I am no longer a part of this crowd) would have reason to upgrade to Penryn from the Q6600. If mine goes well (I hope it does) I probably will not upgrade my CPU+Mobo+Ram for the next three years. Video card, of course, probably once a year on that one.

 

[bryanW1995]

yeah, that was the main reason that I got e6750; it gives me an excuse to cheaply upgrade to penryn next year, plus I don't have to deal with 80f temps in computer room btwn now and then.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: voodoo7817

Originally posted by: njdevilsfan87
I would expect Penryn to increase the average quad overclock from 3.2GHz on air to 3.5GHz - that is an improvement...

Can anyone expand on this? Is it just because of lower temps? I am very new to the overclocking world and I would like to know more about the overclocking potential of the Quad Penryns. Will they truly overclock better than the G0? I have been working on a new build and am considering buying a G0, but I can hold off on a Quad if Penryn is at least as good an overclocker. If the Penryn is the same or better I would probably buy a 2140 in the meantime and overclock it. In a year or so I would migrate some of these current parts to a HTPC and get a Penryn.

Well, the die shrink generally allows for lower voltage, increase in clock speed. The problem with the Penryn isn't going to be the ability to clock high, but rather the low multiplier they will have for the affordable ones. So, if the multi was unlocked, you would probably see their $266 Q1 release CPU hit speeds in excess of 4Ghz on air. But, since the multiplier is set at 7.5, it will require an insane FSB to hit that speed. I am not sure if the P35 boards are going to be able to hit 540 X 7.5. I am not even sure if they will hit 500 X 7.5 and even if they do, they will not be clocked significantly higher than an equivelent Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz. Since Penryn is only about 5-10% faster in most applications clock for clock, then we are not talking about much of an improvement for a near 4-6 month wait... As for tempature, no one really knows how much cooler than 45nm will run... It might not be much of an improvement at first until they perfect the 45nm process. It could end up being a similar move like a B3 to a G0.

That's why I think the E8400 is going to be a great buy. 8.5 multiplier omfgz 500fsb on that beast is 4.25ghz! That would be a BEAST of a dual core for 183 bucks? Jesus I want one so bad I'm salvating even if you can only hit 450fsb that's 3.825ghz! I wonder if these are going to be achievable on air cooling. 10% less power should equate to 10% less heat right?

 

[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.

 

[Acanthus]

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

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[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.