bit-tech.net

Confirmed: Core i7 920, 940, 950 to go "soon"

Confirmed: Core i7 920, 940, 950 to go "soon"

We've confirmed that most of Intel's Core i7 range will go to be replaced by Lynnfield (above).

COMPUTEX 2009: Despite telling us face to face yesterday that its Core i7 920 and 950 CPU's will be around for a little while yet, bit-tech has exclusively seen roadmaps and been given multiple confirmations that every-single-one of the X58 motherboard manufacturers is expecting: 920, 940, 950 and 965 will be end-of-life by early next year.

Only the 975 Extreme Edition and the future 6-core LGA1366 CPUs will exist on this socket, with Lynnfield engulfing the entire middle field (we're hesitant to use the word "mainstream").

LGA1366 and X58 motherboards will be thinned out in the next refresh in Q3/4 with the launch of Lynnfield on Sept. 1st, although no one had an exact date for the phasing out of these CPU products.

Intel says one thing then does another? Discuss in the forums.

80 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Xtrafresh 5th June 2009, 14:31 Quote
this is starting to be more confusing then my girlfriend/ex/girlfriend/ex
Skiddywinks 5th June 2009, 14:32 Quote
Christ. Make up your minds Intel!

This constant to-ing and fro-ing is not doing any good to the consumer.
tejas 5th June 2009, 14:50 Quote
Lol this is hilarious. All the dick swinging Core i7 owners will be shafted by Lynnfield and P55!

I have to say that Lynnfield and P55 looks very impressive and is going to give AMD a good run for its money... I wish AMD would hurry up and get an SLI chipset licence from Nvidia. AMD 790FX/GX + SLI = drool

I want another GTX285 for my Phenom!! (rant over)

Intel should have not even bothered with Core i7 for desktop and just used it for Nehalem EP. Lynnfield is da shiz tho

Oh deary me
Hugo 5th June 2009, 14:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich
Intel says one thing then does another?
They've never done that before :)

It makes a certain kind of sense to price X58 - the arguably more desirable platform - out of most people's reach, I think.
Xtrafresh 5th June 2009, 14:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoB
They've never done that before :)

It makes a certain kind of sense to price X58 - the arguably more desirable platform - out of most people's reach, I think.
Not really. I think all this has nothing to do with consumers, just with running AMD completely into the ground. The sole task of the 920 it seems was to pre-empt the Phenom II until lynnfield arrives. AMD almost came up for air there
Pookeyhead 5th June 2009, 14:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tejas
Lol this is hilarious. All the dick swinging Core i7 owners will be shafted by Lynnfield and P55!


No I wont. .. look at it swing baby!


Anyway.... Why are Intel being so tight lipped about stuff... and being sneaky. Based on what's been said, and then leaked so far, I wouldn't make ANY assumptions about lynnfield.
DragunovHUN 5th June 2009, 15:02 Quote
Goddangit Intel, make your minds up already!
Jenny_Y8S 5th June 2009, 15:26 Quote
Oh man, so that means in another six months my i7 rig will definately be "old".

Bummer.

I should have waited for something better, all this time I've been using an amazing, quick, stable PC. I should have kept my old rig for another year and put up with the crashes, lockups and crappy framerates for another year.

I so regret buying this wonderful PC, noone told me that its chip would be discontinued! Ok so every other chip ever made has had a finite shelf life, but I thought it was "different" this time, I thought we'd be together for ever.

Sniff...

Damn you Intel... damn you to hell
GFC 5th June 2009, 15:29 Quote
That just makes me wonder, if i want to get nehalem - i might as well do it this year or i'll be screwed..
technogiant 5th June 2009, 15:39 Quote
why on earth would they develop a platform only to then severly restrict the customer base on it.......just makes no sense......anyway from what I've read previously the third memory channel doesn't make a any difference to most desktop / game applications.
sear 5th June 2009, 15:39 Quote
One of my bets is that they need to rework the Core i7 in order to get more performance out of it. It seems Core i5 may perform better than expected (and apparently overclocks like crazy), so Intel might be coming out with something even better for the enthusiast/workstation segment... but of course, also more expensive. Core i7 920 is the best price/performance processor you can currently get, and much like the Radeon 9500 Pro years ago, Intel might be afraid that they won't be able to distinguish Core i5 while still making a profit.
oasked 5th June 2009, 15:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenny_Y8S
Oh man, so that means in another six months my i7 rig will definately be "old".

Bummer.

I should have waited for something better, all this time I've been using an amazing, quick, stable PC. I should have kept my old rig for another year and put up with the crashes, lockups and crappy framerates for another year.

I so regret buying this wonderful PC, noone told me that its chip would be discontinued! Ok so every other chip ever made has had a finite shelf life, but I thought it was "different" this time, I thought we'd be together for ever.

Sniff...

Damn you Intel... damn you to hell

Why are you upset? Just because i5 is coming (which we all knew about months ago) doesn't mean that your system is old. Your computer is still faster than most i5 setups will ever be and as a result is pretty damned future-proof.

If you wanted to upgrade you would have to upgrade motherboard and CPU anyway, so what's changed?

I for one am happy with my i7 setup. I get great performance and I got it 1 year earlier than Lynnfield. :D
Tyrmot 5th June 2009, 16:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by oasked
Why are you upset?

I do believe there was a touch of sarcasm in Jenny's post actually
brave758 5th June 2009, 16:21 Quote
I'm still tempted by a core i 7 system i don't think it will be that bad a investment. It's a server platform so if they do cut the regular core i7 chips there's always the xeons to put in there(even though they are hard to find). You'll get full crossfire/sli performance for now and a good few years to come( i hope), tri channel mem opposed to dual on the P55, and i have got my eye on the 6 core chip so why not start now with a 920 and start saving for the 6 core one now??
oasked 5th June 2009, 16:33 Quote
Doh. I should read people's post properly. :p
Skiddywinks 5th June 2009, 16:40 Quote
Oh my God; that was amazing, oasked. I truly lmaoed.
lewchenko 5th June 2009, 16:40 Quote
wow...

my old P35 motherboard (socket 775 I think) has lasted a good term... taking an e6750 initially and then being upgraded to a Q9550. I would not be happy if I had bought an i7 board only to find it has a non existant upgrade path..

In my wife's machine I also upgraded hers from an AMD X2 4600 to an AMD X2 7750... so yeah.. upgrades are important I think after 2-3 years to keep the system going a bit longer if money is tight.
thehippoz 5th June 2009, 16:51 Quote
Intel PR: I'm Rick James B*tch
bogie170 5th June 2009, 16:59 Quote
Still nothing wrong with the Core2Quads. Fast enough to do any task that an i7 can do. No plans for me to upgrade for a while yet.
thehippoz 5th June 2009, 17:03 Quote
yeah boogie.. actually for guys who bought the e6600 and q6600 way back on release- was the best investment over the years.. overclocked, they still do everything you need

intel got rid of the e6600 quick- it was a little too good at ocing XD guys were hitting 4 gig on that chip before the whole 4 gig club even existed
Zut 5th June 2009, 17:19 Quote
I are confused.

Doe this mean the Core i5 will be better than Core i7, or will there be some new Lynnfield based i7s???
Nicb 5th June 2009, 17:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead
No I wont. .. look at it swing baby!
:)

@ thehippoz, Yeah your right, I'm so happy I have the Q6600 Go, it's the first CPU I have felt good having late in the making. Intel seems to discontinue models that are "TO GOOD" ooopppsss

I'm glad that I have developed patience in my fanatical attitude toward this hobby. Proud to be a mid range purchaser. :D
greensabbath 5th June 2009, 17:21 Quote
Sooooo, will the next cpus go back to 775? or will there be an entire new set of hardware to buy?
Pookeyhead 5th June 2009, 18:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenny_Y8S
Oh man, so that means in another six months my i7 rig will definately be "old".

Bummer.

I should have waited for something better, all this time I've been using an amazing, quick, stable PC. I should have kept my old rig for another year and put up with the crashes, lockups and crappy framerates for another year.

I so regret buying this wonderful PC, noone told me that its chip would be discontinued! Ok so every other chip ever made has had a finite shelf life, but I thought it was "different" this time, I thought we'd be together for ever.

Sniff...

Damn you Intel... damn you to hell


LOL... +rep for you. Well said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zut
I are confused.

Doe this mean the Core i5 will be better than Core i7, or will there be some new Lynnfield based i7s???

No.. not better than i7.

From what I can tell, it's a cut down i7 with dual channel, and no QPI onboard. Good performer.. about a match for AMD's flagship Phenom II X4 955. Early reports suggest it's a good clocker too.... but so is the i7.

I'm still glad I bought mine when I did.
I-E-D 5th June 2009, 18:45 Quote
Bloody hell, this is just getting gay. No point making my i7 system in 5 days then. I feel cheated, not about the processor, about having to wait. The i5's have to be waaay better for the same price, otherwise intel has lost loads of friends.

Why is the i5 the i5, instead of the i9, because 5 comes before 7???
Pookeyhead 5th June 2009, 18:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-E-D

Why is the i5 the i5, instead of the i9, because 5 comes before 7???

A reflection of it's inferiority of course :)


I'd still buy a i7.
Goty 5th June 2009, 18:57 Quote
I'm not too upset about this, my 920 and DX58SO were free! I'll still be in the green, relatively speaking, if I upgrade to a six-core LGA 1366 CPU in the future. =P
Pookeyhead 5th June 2009, 19:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goty
I'm not too upset about this, my 920 and DX58SO were free! I'll still be in the green, relatively speaking, if I upgrade to a six-core LGA 1366 CPU in the future. =P

People forget this, and talk about i7 owners not having any upgrade path. I beg to differ. Fact is though... I don't see why you'd want to upgrade for the foreseeable future if you own a i7.

Storm in a teacup.

It IS still annoying the way Intel just keep messing everyone about. I'd hate to be buying a rig now... as there are so many what ifs... but I'm fairly certain I'd still buy a i7 if I was buying today.
antaresIII 5th June 2009, 19:06 Quote
For a lot of home PC systems the only question regarding the power of CPU will become: "a bottleneck?" i7 920 is one with dual gtx295 cards. The quad (2x2) g300 will be more powerful than twelve 4890. And we should put this on a i5 platform that will not even support a 2per x16? (SLI G300)
as far I saw the i5 integrated construction blocks even Nvidia future motherboards. Some Larabee extorsion?
i7lova 5th June 2009, 19:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by antaresIII
For a lot of home PC systems the only question regarding the power of CPU will become: "a bottleneck?" i7 920 is one with dual gtx295 cards. The quad (2x2) g300 will be more powerful than twelve 4890. And we should put this on a i5 platform that will not even support a 2per x16? (SLI G300)
as far I saw the i5 integrated construction blocks even Nvidia future motherboards. Some Larabee extorsion?

I don't understand how it can be a "bottleneck" Right now there really isn't a faster processor (per say) out there. So either way. and are you saying its a bottleneck at stock speeds? because it is easily overclocke d above and beyond that. mine is sitting at 3.2ghz right now with minimal effort I'll prolly push it to 3.6 or 3.8 sometime in the future but right now I have no need to. Hell i could have just left it alone and been perfectly fine!
perplekks45 5th June 2009, 19:42 Quote
Did I just get that right? 4 x G300 = 12 x R790? That means G300 has 3 times the computing power of R790? Where'd you get that from? nVidia slides?

Anyways, for me it doesn't really matter what Intel do. My E6600 @ 3.6 GHz still rocks almost everything I throw at it. The only thing where I'd like to have some more grunt would be video encoding but I do that once every 1-2 weeks, so...

I'll just wait for the dust to settle then make up my mind what CPU is the way to go for me. i5, i7, i9 or AMD's 9xx BEs? Who knows [right now]?
Cupboard 5th June 2009, 20:47 Quote
Anyone got an "old" i7 they want to get rid of? You know how to get hold of me :P

I don't really see the issue with this - they needed something to compete with Phenom and draw people in to the i7 platform then when they have got something else to compete in the segment they drop the low end parts to avoid confusion.

It is a bit annoying but no more, the thing that gets me the most is that i5 and i7 aren't compatible.
antaresIII 5th June 2009, 21:39 Quote
The increase in framerates when overclocking a midrange i7 with quad GPU is such that it suggests a begining of CPU limiting. With much more demanding GPU?
Anyway, what I wanted to point out is that Intel said that i5 platform will be so 'Atom' that it will suffice a x8 slot (max two).
Now the customers should forget that the banal Core2 had full dual x16 for a friendly price. Intel is namely going forward with a x8 slot.
antaresIII 5th June 2009, 21:55 Quote
Whell, considering that the new 40nm from TMSC waters in such extent that they could begin the production of cooking hobs with their silicium slices, Nvidia had to drastically lover the clocks. The result is said to be a 2.6 factor compared to 275. With improved 40nm it could reach quite more. With 28nm there will be a revolution. Ati will roll out just a tweaked 4870 with 5870; some 8 months later there will be a blast with radeon 6000 based on 28nm from Globalfoundries.
As it seems we'll soon render with 15TF.
perplekks45 5th June 2009, 22:34 Quote
And can you show us any sources or any proof for your [maybe] pretty wild guesses?
Do you, by any chance, work for Globalfoundries? :p

Oh, and there is this little "Edit" button... please use it. ;)
docodine 6th June 2009, 03:58 Quote
I'm very much hoping that Intel will realize how much people hate how often they change the CPU socket.

Why won't they do what they did with 775, and have everything from a low end Celeron to the C2E Q9770 work on the same chipsets.

775 to 1366 to 1156 in what, a year and a half? Really really lame, Intel..
Infection 6th June 2009, 04:28 Quote
Next thing you know they'll start renaming thin---- Oh wait that's what nVidia does. I suppose I'll just have to stick with what I got.
antaresIII 6th June 2009, 05:42 Quote
Considering that intel negated the i5 name we will probably see something like 'i7 second generation'; with i5 name people would just expect something cheaper and scaled down. Such image would be (financialy) bad for such a premium product.
Horizon 6th June 2009, 05:45 Quote
Acutally, this has been an open secret for quite awhile. It was sometime shortly after Core i5 was announced that leaks started take i7 was gonna be kicked to the curb.
antaresIII 6th June 2009, 07:02 Quote
There are two possibilities; first would be making room for Larabee, second a plan to make money on 'gamers'. If you wish full SLI or CrossF. than buy a 'gaming' proc. with prices starting from 300£. Did we mention that you need a x58 chipset that is tailored priced for refined customers? The difference between non-gaming and gaming line? Well, the later has a different on board graphic controller for extra powerful dual x16. And yes, the performance is at stock the same, however the gaming chips are hand picked from the wafer to guarantee the best overclocking potential; (warranty void if overclocked). Thank you for 200£ premium. Thank you God for AMD as 'competitor'.
Evildead666 6th June 2009, 10:27 Quote
Yup, i7 is really Skulltrail in drag....
That is the "Extreme" setup for bragging rights, and now the CPU's are gonna be extremely priced also.
When the only 1366 chips left are $600+ the upgrade path will be hell...

I'd say intel is giving away market share to AMD, willingly.
maybe they have too much work ...?
technogiant 6th June 2009, 11:11 Quote
One of the major things pushing people away from pc gaming is the cost of the hardware...intel have just further increased the height of that barrier and put another nail in the pc gaming coffin....having said that as most games are made with the low powered consoles in mind then mid range pc's will play most easily enough....many will not bother with their extreme range and intel have shot themselves in the foot.
[USRF]Obiwan 6th June 2009, 11:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead


Storm in a teacup.

It IS still annoying the way Intel just keep messing everyone about. I'd hate to be buying a rig now... as there are so many what ifs... but I'm fairly certain I'd still buy a i7 if I was buying today.

Until you see the price of the 6core processor. By then everyone owning a i7 system wants it because there is nothing else to get. So Intel can ask whatever they want, probably 1200(ish)


another cup of tea?
perplekks45 6th June 2009, 12:08 Quote
Intel hardly ever priced their top desktop CPU over $1k. I don't think they'll change that. $999 seems to be the "sweet spot".
Skiddywinks 6th June 2009, 17:51 Quote
Maybe for loterry winners.
[PUNK] crompers 6th June 2009, 18:41 Quote
tbh i struggle to understand why anyone with a quad C2D system would need more performance? if you're upgrading from athlon or P4 fair enough but the actual real world gains of upgrading C2D quad (which requires a major overhaul) are surely hardly noticeable.

i'll save my pennies and buy a decent SSD in a year or so, my system will last at least another 2 or 3
antaresIII 6th June 2009, 19:35 Quote
I'm also eyeing a nice SSD; they say there will be a major frontwide price drop till the end of year.
The SLI debacle made me look towards a i7-x58 system; it seems that Nvidia will have to put out some competitive motherboard solution or Intel play will shoot down their fat g300 geese.
perplekks45 6th June 2009, 19:47 Quote
And why exactly would Intel let them do that? Building a chipset for i7, that is?
They have Larry coming, they really don't need to help the competition.
Timmy_the_tortoise 6th June 2009, 21:24 Quote
Meh... I expect my Q6600 will last me a good couple of years yet.
antaresIII 6th June 2009, 21:25 Quote
Look, the i7 piece of pie did amount to 1%; i7 is dead with extreme piece only; who is going to invest in dedicated motherboards?
The question is i5 and on processor limit for only one x16, as I wrote before.
Nvidia will apparently get what it deserves for years of jokes on customer expenses. I can't belive however in a proc. lineup without full dual x16; Intel is brewing something.
bagman 6th June 2009, 21:58 Quote
boy are intel going to lose money, the 950 has only just come out so they have spent lots of money develping the 950 just to be released for a few weeks before they are going to stop production of it, just dosen't make any sense :?
perplekks45 7th June 2009, 00:18 Quote
How often do people have to mention it? You DON'T need PCI-E x16 yet! No [desktop] graphics card on the planet uses the full bandwidth! There is NOT ONE card that actually uses the full x8 as far as I know.
Goty 7th June 2009, 04:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bagman
boy are intel going to lose money, the 950 has only just come out so they have spent lots of money develping the 950 just to be released for a few weeks before they are going to stop production of it, just dosen't make any sense :?

What development did they have to do to change the name in the microcode and set the multiplier a few steps higher? Doesn't seem like much to me.
ssj12 7th June 2009, 04:58 Quote
6-cores at 32nm will be delicious.
antaresIII 7th June 2009, 07:50 Quote
Till 6 cores are ready the 40nm gpu production will (have to) solve all problems. With 40nm running you can reach the power of 12 gtx260 in quad g300(2x2) setup; just a virtualization layer and 6core something is obsolete. With 28nm in 2011 the gpu power can easily reach the equ. of 30 gtx260.
The cpu would become just a second bios like chip; together with windows since the games and applications would compatibility issue free use hardware through virtualization layer.

Intel is primarly concerned how to hold the whole world hostage also in the years to come with their licence protected x86 architecture; Larabee idea. It is not important to them that the x86 belongs in a technical museum. Why construct a gasoline car if you can sell a Ferrari with hexa core exclusive licenced coal powered engine?
Matticus 7th June 2009, 14:24 Quote
This is ridiculous. I am buying AMD next time, as a protest purchase :p
perplekks45 7th June 2009, 15:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by antaresIII
Till 6 cores are ready the 40nm gpu production will (have to) solve all problems. With 40nm running you can reach the power of 12 gtx260 in quad g300(2x2) setup; just a virtualization layer and 6core something is obsolete. With 28nm in 2011 the gpu power can easily reach the equ. of 30 gtx260.
The cpu would become just a second bios like chip; together with windows since the games and applications would compatibility issue free use hardware through virtualization layer.

Intel is primarly concerned how to hold the whole world hostage also in the years to come with their licence protected x86 architecture; Larabee idea. It is not important to them that the x86 belongs in a technical museum. Why construct a gasoline car if you can sell a Ferrari with hexa core exclusive licenced coal powered engine?
I love your posts... They seem to be taken out of internal papers from nVidia. :(
There are no proofs, no sources, lots of blabla and some nice fiction.

As long as you don't back up your statements I'll just call MAJOR BS.
Turbotab 7th June 2009, 15:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
How often do people have to mention it? You DON'T need PCI-E x16 yet! No [desktop] graphics card on the planet uses the full bandwidth! There is NOT ONE card that actually uses the full x8 as far as I know.

Not in single card config, but in SLI/Crossfire, it can make a difference in the latest games.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/intel_p45_vs_x48_crossfire_performance/index7.html
perplekks45 7th June 2009, 17:14 Quote
I stand corrected.
antaresIII 7th June 2009, 18:34 Quote
You meant that you are in dire needs of a correction facility?
Jules Verne was seen as a writer of fiction; fiction transformed in vision and vision in product. Anyway, I was accused of working for Globalfoundries just two days ago. Maybe you and your likes should hold a conference to solve such perilous questions.
Hey, maybe I'm trying to get Nvidia over?
naokaji 7th June 2009, 18:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by antaresIII

Intel is primarly concerned how to hold the whole world hostage also in the years to come with their licence protected x86 architecture; Larabee idea. It is not important to them that the x86 belongs in a technical museum. Why construct a gasoline car if you can sell a Ferrari with hexa core exclusive licenced coal powered engine?

Wrong, why?

Did you notice the sh** MS got in when not every 10 year old printer had drivers for Vista?
There is simply no way x86 will go away, consumers (but even more important big companies who often run proprietary software) will not accept a lack of backward compability.
perplekks45 7th June 2009, 19:22 Quote
Jules Verne was a great writer who saw a lot of things coming before most of the people of his day & age, that's true.

I still don't see any proof. Oh, and if you happen to be right [I don't say it can't happen] I WILL apologize but for now I can't really see where you got your information from and I don't believe you. :p

What was that part about a correction facility? Just because I say I don't believe things like that without proof. :|
earlydoors 7th June 2009, 23:05 Quote
Interesting thread

Hypothetical question to all and sundry -

If you were upgrading now from (say) a single-core P4 2.8Ghz based system (or equivalent), which upgrade route would you take? Assume your budget is £1000 for a gaming/general use PC.

1) Buy a Core i7/X58 based system
2) Buy a Phenom II based system
3) Wait for Core i5
4) Buy a Core 2 Duo/Quad
Goty 7th June 2009, 23:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by earlydoors
Interesting thread

Hypothetical question to all and sundry -

If you were upgrading now from (say) a single-core P4 2.8Ghz based system (or equivalent), which upgrade route would you take? Assume your budget is £1000 for a gaming/general use PC.

1) Buy a Core i7/X58 based system
2) Buy a Phenom II based system
3) Wait for Core i5
4) Buy a Core 2 Duo/Quad

I'm not up on prices across the pond, but I'd say wait for i5. It's going to match i7 in performance (or close enough as to not matter) and should end up being cheaper for the performance. That being said, there's really not a bad choice as things go right now as long as you don't buy a socket 775 processor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matticus
This is ridiculous. I am buying AMD next time, as a protest purchase :p

I was going to do the same thing, but my three AMD PCs at home now suddenly all have i7s in them =/
[PUNK] crompers 8th June 2009, 00:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by earlydoors
Interesting thread

Hypothetical question to all and sundry -

If you were upgrading now from (say) a single-core P4 2.8Ghz based system (or equivalent), which upgrade route would you take? Assume your budget is £1000 for a gaming/general use PC.

1) Buy a Core i7/X58 based system
2) Buy a Phenom II based system
3) Wait for Core i5
4) Buy a Core 2 Duo/Quad

for £1000 id get:

P45 mobo (maybe the biostar)
Q9550
4gb of something good
blow the rest on a GPU

this set up would keep you gaming longer than i7 with an appropriately cheaper GPU in my opinion. im sure many would disagree however.............
Goty 8th June 2009, 01:38 Quote
How would a socket 775 system keep him gaming longer than an i7 system? The i7 would be faster in no uncertain terms and socket 1366 will have faster processors released on it after 2009, unlike 775.
[PUNK] crompers 8th June 2009, 14:20 Quote
but gaming performance is vastly GPU dependent. the gains you would see spending the rest of that £1000 on an i7 mobo, chip and DDR3 rather than putting the money into a faster GPU are minimal.

if you are talking in terms of "futureproofing" then i think this i5/lynnefield debacle clearly shows that no upgrade path is certain.
antaresIII 8th June 2009, 19:17 Quote
Today's rumors say that the i5 chips will hear on i7 name. "Give me your (bank account) number baby!
nuclear 9th June 2009, 15:58 Quote
if i might add my simple guess from what i read
Since the i5 is running at a performance so close to the i7, they will want to differenciate the platform a bit more
now they could simply replace the 920,950 and 975 with 6-core equivalent (well they will keep the 975 since it's an extreme, like they did with the x6800 that was available for a time after the intro of the quad cores)
that way, the tripple memory channel is better used since you have more cores running and it would be a bigger difference between i5 and i7. They might charge a bit more but not really, and they will be able to validate the qpi and memory ctrl before pushing it in the xeon 55xx dual socket platform like they did with i7 and x58 (which was renamed to 5520 for the xeon)

/edit
To add a bit more info, the current line-up of xeon is only based on the D0 stepping which was released around middle of may.
So they got people buying the i7 to debug and check the entire c0 stepping.
if you go check the features of the x5570, x5560 and x5550, they have a turbo mode of 2-2-3-3 for 4-3-2-1 core active instead of the 1-1-1-2
My guess is they'll be doing the same thing with the 6-core line-up
shindre33 10th June 2009, 19:18 Quote
NEED HELP PLS......

im thinking of buying a new PC right now.. i will be using it for gaming and editing HD videos..

the problem is i dont have a clue of what to buy.. all i know is that my budget is limited, around
700USdollars (500 in euros, i guess). and that these are all what i want.

- a good processor for gaming and editing HD videos
- a good video card that cud well handle gaming and HD video editing
- at least 4GB of memory
- at least 1TB of harddrive
- a blu-ray disk drive and;
- a good motherboard that cud accommodate all of them and perhaps give way for upgrades

i hope someone cud help... thanks in advance..
perplekks45 10th June 2009, 19:30 Quote
Off the top of my head I'd say take a quick look at the monthly guides here on BT to get an idea, then open a thread in the hardware section of the forums. ;)

Oh, and welcome to the forums. :)

The most important 2 buttons are "edit" and the reputation one. ;)
shindre33 10th June 2009, 19:52 Quote
wow.. i just did what uv said and im more lost than ever.. :(

truth is i dont fully understand what the best specs are for the hardwares i want..
another is that i dont know if they wud fit my budget.. this is harder than ive anticipated..

thanks for the welcome though and the willingness to help..:p
naokaji 10th June 2009, 23:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by shindre33
NEED HELP PLS......

im thinking of buying a new PC right now.. i will be using it for gaming and editing HD videos..

the problem is i dont have a clue of what to buy.. all i know is that my budget is limited, around
700USdollars (500 in euros, i guess). and that these are all what i want.

- a good processor for gaming and editing HD videos
- a good video card that cud well handle gaming and HD video editing
- at least 4GB of memory
- at least 1TB of harddrive
- a blu-ray disk drive and;
- a good motherboard that cud accommodate all of them and perhaps give way for upgrades

i hope someone cud help... thanks in advance..

Your best bet would be this and throwing in a quad core instead of the dual core, with a Q9550, a bit beefier psu and a 1TB HDD you should end up at about 700$.
perplekks45 11th June 2009, 00:47 Quote
Yeah, that should be alright, but if you really need that BluRay drive you might struggle with your $700 budget.

Depending on the resolution you want to play your games at you might want to reconsider the graphics card but that would be out of budget I guess. And the 4770 seems to be quite a performer for the price.
shindre33 11th June 2009, 10:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by naokaji
Quote:
Originally Posted by shindre33
NEED HELP PLS......

im thinking of buying a new PC right now.. i will be using it for gaming and editing HD videos..

the problem is i dont have a clue of what to buy.. all i know is that my budget is limited, around
700USdollars (500 in euros, i guess). and that these are all what i want.

- a good processor for gaming and editing HD videos
- a good video card that cud well handle gaming and HD video editing
- at least 4GB of memory
- at least 1TB of harddrive
- a blu-ray disk drive and;
- a good motherboard that cud accommodate all of them and perhaps give way for upgrades

i hope someone cud help... thanks in advance..

Your best bet would be this and throwing in a quad core instead of the dual core, with a Q9550, a bit beefier psu and a 1TB HDD you should end up at about 700$.

the june buyer's guide is very helpful.. thanks to naokaji.. :)

but i should lay off my fantasy of having a blu-ray drive for a while with the kind of budget that i have..

i have a couple of questions:

1) why Intel Q9550 as processor? is it the best one for the june buyer's guide setup?
2) what exactly would you recommend for a bit beefier PSU?

sori, really have no idea...
MstrMstr 22nd June 2009, 21:13 Quote
Bought my company units based with the ASUS p6t deluxe v-2, Water cooled i7 920 OC to only 3.6. I needed a unit that can kill with graphics.

I will not be needing or buying again until 2013.. four years.

Regardless of the whims of Intel and other makers- I can no longer justify the constant buying. :|
blacksavage 2nd October 2009, 01:30 Quote
So six core Core i9 is only an 1366 part.

Does this mean that the best an 1156 platform can get is a quad core? If it was so then 1156 as a platform is not all that tempting because it's upgrade path is incredibly limited
It's like telling consumers: if you want six core then go get a 1366 motherboard with triple channel memory, much like it was before 2003: you want 64-bit then go get Itanium
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 21st July 2010, 07:48 Quote
I plan on defecting to Intel this August when the Core i7 950 drops to $300 and I'm sure the Core i7 950 overclocked to 4ghz will be better than anything AMD will produce for like 2 more years. Does anyone disagree if so let me know as I'm not gonna shell out $600 for Intel's new design this fall.
NethLyn 12th November 2010, 11:31 Quote
Dunno really, Intel have been killing off processors by the end of January since the time of MMX, so that's 12 years now.

I don't recall them saying one thing to the press and something else to board makers though, that's new to me anyway. It doesn't help with trying to choose a laptop, first it was Core 2 and Pentium for performance and power balance respectively, then i5 and i3, so now will they move i5 and i3 around at the same time as killing all these i7s?

[EDIT]Apologies for bump, but it was in the story list with the review of the new one!
GravitySmacked 13th November 2010, 21:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by docodine
I'm very much hoping that Intel will realize how much people hate how often they change the CPU socket.

Why won't they do what they did with 775, and have everything from a low end Celeron to the C2E Q9770 work on the same chipsets.

775 to 1366 to 1156 in what, a year and a half? Really really lame, Intel..

Can't help but agree. Sometimes they seem to do it just to force a mobo upgrade.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums