TheResidentEvil
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2009
- Messages
- 1,943
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Leaked Intel Roadmap specs core i5
- Thread starter TheResidentEvil
- Start date
wonder how new i7s will perform compared to current 920
I wonder how high they'll clock
It never ceases to amaze me how much Intel underclocks their processors since the core2's. When you can hit 3.8GHz on a 920 without so much as touching voltage, you know you've got one serious chip.
Battl3fr0nt
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 186
this is why, I am not to happy with intel right now.. The C2Q is still there best CPU to date.. So much people went from a Core 2 Quad to the i7 and gained so much as nothing... I am going to upgrade to a Q9550 in a few week's just cuz I have had this C2D for such a long time and the fact that it keeps up with i7's is sad.. I had plans for a new build but I am going to wait it out for sure.. It is just getting stupid with this whole i3,i5,i7 and i9 bs.. let's just hope the new i7's are not going to be the same as they are now.. C2Q's with HT..
Speak for yourself, I upgraded and gained an ton of more performance.
And calling the i7 for a "C2Q's with HT" is ignorant at best
i7s are a bit faster clock for clock. I don't recall nearly as many people running 4.5Ghz on the quads, but I didn't keep up with the quad over clocking that much either.
The i7 architecture is way more than just a C2Q with HT, especially in heavy computation tasks.
I would agree that there is nothing special about an i7 system compared to a C2Q or PhII if you just play games, I would almost say it's a waste to spend the money on one for a game machine, but for heavy work load an i7 system has no match at this point. I have three machines crunching for WCG 24/7 right now and I am pondering trying to sell them off and replace them with just a single i7 920 (hopefully D0) rig that I bet would outperform them by a very healthy margin, and cost me less per month in electricity.
I would agree that there is nothing special about an i7 system compared to a C2Q or PhII if you just play games, I would almost say it's a waste to spend the money on one for a game machine, but for heavy work load an i7 system has no match at this point. I have three machines crunching for WCG 24/7 right now and I am pondering trying to sell them off and replace them with just a single i7 920 (hopefully D0) rig that I bet would outperform them by a very healthy margin, and cost me less per month in electricity.
Oh what I wouldn't give for an i7 at work... CFD would be so much faster than this single core 3.4Ghz Xeon.
Oh what I wouldn't give for an i7 at work... CFD would be so much faster than this single core 3.4Ghz Xeon.
I'm just happy that I don't have my old P4 @ 2.2Ghz with 1Gig of ram lol. I JUST got my station upgraded to a Q6600 with 8Gig of ram a few weeks ago after 2 years of running my old system. I understand a new machine costs money but so does the guy sitting behind it. Me sitting there while my computer "thinks" = lost money.
For anyone not stressing their cpu, you have a point that the upgrade isnt worth it. For someone who is running an app that keeps cpu at over 80% load at all times, the i7 is going to be a significant boost in computational power. But it seems like you are mad at intel for pushing another quad core when the c2q were quads. The fact of the matter is, there were plenty of people without a c2q that were looking to upgrade, and waited for the i7. It makes sense, if you look at it from the large picture, not just the "i have a c2q, why would i upgrade" Also, for anyone who likes to see ridiculous overclocks... 920 d0 is your chip. Got mine sitting at 3.8ghz at about 43C idle, 75 load. When you look at the gains in computational power, the fact that it was made for a workstation, not gaming, and the sheer overclocking potential, its not going to fit everyone, but its a killer chip for those who are in the market for something like it.
EDIT: How are you pushing 8ghz+ out of your c2d so it can keep with i7s?
There are some big differences between the i7 and Core 2 architectures, and i7 chips are actually quite a bit faster than Core 2s clock for clock. For CPU-intensive tasks, i7 CPUs are considerably better than older C2Qs.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
For those who said that i7 is significantly faster than C2Q, how many % faster is the core i7 compared to C2Q, clock for clock?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intel-core-i7_10.html#sect0
Both HT and Turbo mode were disabled for that testing as well. Read the rest of the article for normal testing.
It isn't reflected on that roadmap, but the Q1 2010 Lynnfields probably reflect the move from a 45nm to 32nm process. Note, the change in naming convention, where an S is added to the end of the part name. Note also, how the power consumption of the Lynnfield's changes. This says smaller (32nm) process to me.
There is conflicting information out there. Some say that there will be a 32nm die-shrink Lynnfield, but that it will be a mobile part. The above roadmap, with the lower power consumption could certainly reflect that. Other sources are saying that the 32nm die-shrink of Lynnfield will be called Westmere, in which case we shouldn't expect a 32nm desktop Nehalem.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/15/leaked-intel-roadmap-specs-upcoming-core-i5-and-i7-lynnfield-c/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)
Excuse me?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_...)#32_nm_processor_architecture_.22Westmere.22
I hope you didn't just call my i920 and X58 for a non-desktop?
You're excused. No one was referring to you.
Nothing, probably. AMD's next architecture will be Bulldozer which is expected at some point in 2011, and by that time Intel will probably have Sandy Bridge out, which is their post-Nehalem architecture. So unless Bulldozer is really a killer chip, AMD will still be at least a generation behind Intel.
Well, we can expect 32nm AMD production in early 2011. Since the chances of AMD launching BD at 32nm, I doubt BD will launch in early 2011. If AMD waits until the end of 2011, it'll be fighting Ivy Bridge at 22nm. Good luck AMD.
It's his M.O...come in, stir the pot, run of...happens all the time.
Christ your info sucks.
32nm IS the westmere tick.
s means low power, NOT westmere. Much like the 65W C2Qs, Q8400s, Q9550s, etc. The will show up once Intel has done a couple respins and yields of the low power chips are high enough.
theres no 32nm quads on the roadmap at all. Possible, yes. On the roadmaps, no.
the duals (clarkdale/arrandale) and the 6-core (gulftown) are the only known 32nm parts at this time.
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,878
because as we have all seen, not all chips will run stable at those speeds, they need to sell the chips at a speed they know it will run at, using a stock cooler and considering the environments some people have their cmputers in (under desks, closed cupboards and so on)
Alot of factors go into the speeds they release items at.
I find that trolls usually do when presented with real evidence.
Yeah, I probably overstated the information I was going off of, and I welcome the correction. I don't want to be spreading mis-information.
Can you put some effort into not being such a dick though? Thank you.