The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

By the looks of things i7 chips will have a higher TDP than the Yorkfields as well...

 

However, it it turns out that not only will Nehalem be offering 6 and 8 cores but it also overclocks as well then just call me fickle. LOL

 

Heh, unless I start ripping High def I'll probably pass on the Octa-core for now haha - look at the debates we've had with duals vs quads!

 

Wouldn't that make an 8 core CPU the ultimate consensus chip since is effectively "dual quads."

 

Haha, yes it would... The mind boggles at the 3dmark score you'd get though!

 

Sophocles,

It's funny but it sounds like the old higher clock speed thing with Intel all over again! Only this time they have the horses to go along with the clock speed, where before with the D series all they had was a dead Dog with a nervous Twitch! ROFLMAO!! I just hope that Intel isn't peeing on their shoes again! They're famous for that! LOL!!

Happy Computering,
Russ

 

I certainly hope so, with Netburst reinstated, it's too reminiscent of the Pentium Ds... High clocks, high heat, Intel are worrying me. Still, this time round, AMD have already made the Pentium D! lol

 

bascially before they said the Vcore and VRAM are linked, which would stop the Vcore at about 1.5 ish and the ram would only clock to about 1333

now its unlinked, so wehey.

next you lot are concerned at the OCability?

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9490&Itemid=1

 

Spam

I wouldn't get too excited about anything that fudzilla is posting. They don't quote their sources and they just don't strike me as an Intel insider group. Now if Anandtech was the source I would give it credence. Of course the memory and controller are unlinked. One is on the chip and the other is on the board which leaves the option open to the board manufacturer, but I wouldn't count on Intel boards giving any leeway.

I really am hoping that Nehalem have some stuff under the hood because dealing with large and high definition graphics files are show stoppers. I want my stuff ready in an hour maybe even two but not 16.;D

 

firstly its i7, and they ate the 920 (2.66) 940(2.93) 965(3.2 extreme), not nehalem.

and secondly, its been a long long time since fudzilla posted horrible roumers. they do post reliable stuff. and anandtech dont normally and a news section unless you count dailytech.

fudzilla, IMO are becoming quite reputable. they were brilliant dureing the build up to the GT200 and R700 gfx cards. predicted quite a bit stuff true, esp the big thing of 800SP instead of 480, which most other sites were saying.

 

Sophocles,

My feelings exactly! I've been reading some of their stuff and for people supposedly "In the Know" they do an awful lot of correcting themselves from post to post! They're posts are begining to sound an awful lot like mostly Un-educated Guess Work! They seem to throw things out there and then make corrections based on other forums work. If they were in the mix with Intel as a real source, they wouldn't be doing that! It's also bothersome that they never supply links to back up what they say!

If spamual wants to stretch thinks a bit farther I could lay claim to being the first person, Anywhere to report a 3 core AMD! Or HD graphics on board that are designed to work in conjunction with the chipset for better HD3200 and up Graphics!

I think 1t was about 3 years ago for the 3 core, wasn't it?. The three core is here and so are the graphics! I missed badly on the Purpose of the third core, but there's still a 3 core for sale today! With the graphics, They've even exceeded my own expectations. Foxconn has a $235 MB called the destroyer, which is an SLI board with OBG! nVidia GeForce 8 series on board! Or Asus with the $145 AMD 790GX with Ati HD3300 Graphics!

The first part of this information was garnered straight from the source, as I'm sure you remember. I overheard a conversation between two AMD execs on the train going to work! Needless to say, I kept my mouth shut and my ears wide open. I didn't ask any questions, either! LOL!! The graphics were a guess based on my experience with the on board nVidia 6100 graphics. They were a stunning leap from any other OBG ever seen before! I just reasoned that if nVidia was doing that good a graphics on a cheap MB, then there's got to be more of the same coming on the higher mid priced motherboards!

My whole point is my track record is much better than Fudzilla's and I've had one real good source! So I'll give my track record 75%! I think that's fair since I only missed the purpose of the third core! My guessing seems better than their facts! I think they make it up as they go along as they are always a bit behind Tom's, Anandtec and even Cnet! For that reason I think Fudzilla is more BS than actual facts!

Happy Computering,
Russ

 

Bombshell:


"I'll believe it when I see it"

 

Believe what?

Russ

 

Pretty much everything about the nehalems... overclockability, BIOS options, heat output, and so on and so forth.

 

let me add in on this with my limited knowledge.

Spam. im with you on the E8600 100%, BUT

the bench's you showed is like compareing apples to oranges..a 45nm c2d vs 65nm c2q if they really wanted to compare duals VS quads, wouldnt in been wise to get a E8600 vs Q9650? top of the line in both classes. and both 45nm.

i think theE8600 is a awsome chip but to be the best you gotta challenge the best. and it is just common sense 4 is better than 2(well in most cases). in that test there i dont think its fare to test a new 45nm against a 2 year old 65nm cpu granted the Q66/6700 is still a sweet chip it is older and not the same technology

after seeing Sophs Q9650 post the numbers it has,and me doing the encoding and such that will use all 4 cores(with HC Encoder) it is makeing more logic to go with a quad....look at it this way. you get a Q9650 you are really getting 2 E8600's...lol

thats just how i see it. i know its nothing technical just my way of looking at it. but id still take a E8600 right now with no questions asked. cause the Q9650 is to costly for me ...lol

 

Core for Core the E8600 will be about 35-40% faster than the E8600 I reckon. The Q9650 however, will be only about 5% behind, 10 at the absolute most. Once overclocked, the E8600 will probably safely top out about 4.3, and as we've seen from Soph, the Q9650 is good for at least 4Ghz. Based on this, there's no ruddy difference, if you get the best quad core, it's just as good as the dual core for dual core, and with the same monstrous gains where quads are supported. Man, I want one! haha. Thinking about it, the cost for the chip isn't unreasonable either, as it's damn near exactly double what the E8600 costs, which is essentially what you're buying two of. The Q6600 is approximately double the price of a 2MB chip that will max out in the lower-middle 3Ghz zones, maybe a little bit more since the price increases since they haven't affected the budget dual core chips much...

 

Well said RedRob. For the money and the needs as of right now with most applications and games the E8600 is a good chip if not great but if looking at some sort of "future proofing" the Q9650 is the way I would go. NOT knowing the fate of i7 as of yet it seems that the market will drive down the E8000 series and Q9000 series chips and I'm personally "in" if it can happen financially.

...gm

 

sammorris,

I'm inclined to agree with you. It's sort of scary as Intel is saying a 30% increase in performance, clock for clock, but no one will consider it a success unless it's the best overclocker ever! So much has been guessed at, speculated on and written about it, with some recent tests using some "Not Quite Ready for Prime Time" motherboards have shown some wrinkles that need to be ironed out in the hardware. You can bet that bugs in the X58 will be cured and motherboards plentiful before Core i7 makes it's debut. If the motherboards aren't ready, Core i7 waits! Intel very badly wants to continue their string of successes with the Core2 and the Core2 Quads!

I'm also pretty sure they will wait until interest slackens in the sales of it's current duals and Quads. With Intel pricing the lowest cost Core i7 at $234/1000, prices should fall pretty good, even on the current $1450 one! My best guess is that the Q9650 will be affordable for a lot of us who plan to skip i7, Chapter I! I would guess somewhere around the low $200 range I can see some fun times coming for a lot of us, already! LOL!!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

Put it this way - disregarding the fact that my Q6600 is more than adequate for a moment, I have the means to just plop a Q9650 into my system at the momen, barring the cost. For Nehalem to be of any benefit to me, a new board, RAM and processor combined need to give the same benefit as a Q9650 for the same price... I am somewhat doubtful. Assuming an i7 board costs roughly similar to the board I got for 775, maybe a bit more, that would leave £250 left for the RAM and CPU. 4GB of DDR3 is what, £120? We're left with £130 for a CPU of equal performance to a Q9650. Hmm.

The 920 chip looks like it will hit the UK at £200.


Is there a cheaper i7 I didn't find? I See $284 for the 920, not $234...

 

sammorris,

The longer the motherboards take to get the kinks worked out, the lower those prices will get. I doubt the 920 (???) will even continue in production! I think the Q9550 with the new stepping will be the low end of the existing quads after looking over pricing for a while. The Q9550 is only $10 more right now than the Q9450. And the Q9650 is $220 more, so I look for the Q9550 and the Q9650 to stay in production the longest! I'm also going to re-think my price guess and say $199/$249 for each when Core i7 hits!

Happy Computering,
Russ