• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

i7 990X (ETA?)

Intel are known to leak information deliberately, call it free publicity if you will but it works & keeps them as the market leader.

I'm just wondering, are Overclockers an Intel Premier Partner? Hope so cos that means they will receive the latest tech first.
 
chippy08 said:
I suppose we ill be overcharged not like the americans that can buy a i7 930 for $199 about £128 in our money.
Click to expand...

that's a special deal, doesn't really count

normally it's $289.99 which is £186.72 and is slightly more than the UK price ex. VAT so it's actually cheaper here
 
MooMoo444 said:
If you break intels NDA then they would just like, not supply any hardware to you anymore.

Which would be a bit of a blow.
Click to expand...

Well to wake up an old thread, a company has recently done just that. A mobo manufacturer called ECS accidentally confirmed the existence of the i7 990x before Intel could. Custom PC says ECS website revealed that the LGA1366 990x will run at 3.46GHz with a power zapping TDP of 135W. Uses the same B1 stepping, 12MB L3 cache as the 980x which means Intel's just upped the clocks to cash in.

I don't know why anyone is bothering with the 990x into 2011, considering when this thread started. Save your cash and get the 2600k.
 
isn't there more cores on the 990x?

and when is this 990x coming out as its an old socket chip and there's no point waiting for it
 
coughs said:
isn't there more cores on the 990x?

and when is this 990x coming out as its an old socket chip and there's no point waiting for it
Click to expand...

There are six cores - so the same as the 980X, the main difference is the higher stock clockspeed (3.46GHz) and higher power usage (135W). As mentioned above, it seems like it will be using the same stepping as the 980X - so it really isn't much of a departure, especially when you consider that the 980X has an unlocked multiplier anyway and its using the "old" nahalem-based westmere architecture.

You are quite right - there is no point waiting for it. Either get a sandy bridge CPU now - or if you truly need (and will make use of) a Gulftown hex core (which can be faster than a sandy bridge i7 in certain tasks) then just go for a 980X - its is effectively the same chip as the 990X.
 
Or wait for lga 2011 Sandybridge. They are reported to be 6 or 8 core processors or even 12 core for that matter. Now this will beat i7 990x easily;).
 
WingZero30 said:
Or wait for lga 2011 Sandybridge. They are reported to be 6 or 8 core processors or even 12 core for that matter. Now this will beat i7 990x easily;).
Click to expand...

You will be waiting until the very end of 2011 at best for Ivy Bridge, but I did read some time ago that the end user will be waiting until 2012 as large business will be first to try it out with server editions. The future is certainly looking bright but I have to warn you that these are going to cost a lot more than the very reasonable Sandy Bridge. Both the 2500k and 2600k @4.6GHz can top even the 980x - bar Cinebench 11.5 because 980x makes use of the extra cores.

As we always say, don't waste time waiting for the latest and greatest to arrive and just get the best currently available for your budget. I would say the 2500K on price/performance is very hard to match.

My plan ahead is waiting for my 2600k-based components to arrive from Ocuk soon and keeping it going for a couple years until we have a 8-cores/16-threads option. For the moment with i7 2600k, 4-cores/8-threads is perfect.
 
The only good thing about the i7 990X is that it might push the i7 970 down to a more reasonable price (maybe similar to the price of i7-2600K).
 
Well they're pretty similar performance-wise, with the 970 probably being better at video encoding even though the i7-2600K can be clocked 500-600 MHz higher. The main thing is that it wouldn't require a new motherboard for someone with LGA1366 already.

Some people might be interested, you never know.
 
People like me will be interested :) I would rather opt for raw power at default clocks for my main workstations since reliability is paramount, even if it comes at a big jump in cost. I do have an overclocked 920 though, but in general I wouldn't even think about clocking a chip that costs more than £250 or so.
 
mothermachine said:
People like me will be interested :) I would rather opt for raw power at default clocks for my main workstations since reliability is paramount, even if it comes at a big jump in cost. I do have an overclocked 920 though, but in general I wouldn't even think about clocking a chip that costs more than £250 or so.
Click to expand...

Why not, if your worried about damaging the cpu only overclock until you got to adjust voltages thats as far as i go. Hence why my overclock is only 300Mhz higher:D
 
bakes0310 said:
Why not, if your worried about damaging the cpu only overclock until you got to adjust voltages thats as far as i go. Hence why my overclock is only 300Mhz higher:D
Click to expand...

nah i'm a clocking noob :) wouldn't want to risk damaging a chip that valuable. my work depends on my machines being totally stable 24/7. not worth the risk. for me anyway.
 
I hope this precipitates more 5xxx range Xeons... That would drop the price of a dual cpu Sr-2 setup... Though it all seems like a terrible waste with more new skts from intel on the horizon. I hate this strat by intel of burning through skts.

At least this gives love to the 1366 owners out there who want a 6core upgrade. May make the lower end gulftown (970?) cheap alternative to a sandy bridge system re-buy. I am not pulling the trigger on anything until AM3+ and Buddozer arrives. I hope to god the black editions can reach 5Ghz+
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom