• 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.

Gulftown 6-core is officially named "Core i7 980X"

Vir

Vir

Vir

Associate
Joined
21 Oct 2002
Posts
1,860
Location
Netherlands
Intel to stick with i7 naming for its 32nm high-end

For the past few months, Intel has been reluctant to supply its enthusiast and enterprise markets with a naming scheme for the upcoming Westmere-based 32nm six-core chips (codenamed “Gulftown”) that it has planned for its high-end processor segment in 2010.

Many journalists, analysts and consumers have been speculating the possibility that the company would retreat from the “Core i7” naming scheme for two particular reasons. Due to the nature of 32nm manufacturing process exhibiting fabrication improvements over 45nm, it was initially anticipated that Gulftown chips were to be labeled under the “Core i9”identifier. The second and perhaps more reasonable theory assumed that the products would be labeled “Core i9” because they carry a higher core count than the current high-end offerings (see: “Core i7 + 2” analogy) and an increased 12MB cache design. In addition, they feature inclusion of the new Advanced Encryption Standard (AES-NI) instruction set and a sustained 130W TDP, allowing for an incredible 21.7W per core with exceptional overclockability.

Today, all popularly prevailing rumors of the six-core behemoth’s naming strategy can be disregarded, and we are now pleased to present the official details without making any more assumptions. In fact, we wrote in September that the only retail fact we were able to confirm were images of the stock heatsink that Intel will include with its new flagship, brute-force solution to Moore’s Law. Nevertheless, it should be noted that we apologetically regret the fact that we inappropriately labeled the processor as belonging to the “Core i9” family. Sources within Intel’s product marketing sector have stated that the company intends to continue its current trend of using “Core i7” as its high-end product identifier, and we suspect this will not change over the course of the next year, at least not until the 22nm Sandy Bridge microarchitecture arrives.

Without further ado, the official name of Intel’s flagship 32nm desktop chip is Core i7 Extreme 980X. News of the confirmation comes from Chinese-based site PCOnline.com.cn which claims to have an official revised Intel roadmap in its hands. Judging by the image, the roadmap does seem valid and official with an “Intel Core i7” logo slapped above the X58 architecture layout image. On another note, the site states that the new flagship desktop chip will run at 3.33GHz, which basically makes it a Core i7 Extreme 975 with all the quirks of the 32nm Westmere family architecture and two additional cores.
Click to expand...

corei7_980x_slide.jpg

corei7_desktop_roadmap_2010.jpg


As an Extreme Edition chip, the Core i7 Extreme 980X 3.33GHz will likely be priced at $999. This is not unexpected in any way, as Intel has stated many times over that it intends to reserve the X58 chipset and more broadly, the LGA 1366 platform, for its flagship high-end processors. In other words, it could likely mean that the socket will migrate toward being catered for the reality of “Extreme Edition-only,” but this assumption has yet to be confirmed.

With the advent of six cores in the desktop space and significantly improved headroom for overclocking with the 32nm manufacturing process, it has been difficult trying to get our heads around the idea of quantifying real-world performance improvements with the Core i7 980X. In fact, coming up with a list of multi-core intensive games in the 21st century that can utilize more than two cores is a scientific achievement in itself. We were thinking something along the lines of “Intel Core i7-980X Optimized for Nintendo 64 emulation.” but even an application like that would make the chip stagger along without a mild overclock.

All sarcasm aside, we wanted to leave our enthusiast die hardreaders with a new speculative theory to get excited about. Despite the statements that the Core i7 Extreme 980X chip based on 32nm Gulftown has been delayed until Q2 2010, several sites have stated that the flagship desktop processor will be launching in March 2010, otherwise known as late Q1 2010. In brief perspective, we can conclude that Nehalem-based Core i7 processors lived a long and successful life, as the Core i7 Extreme 965 will have lived sixteen months from November 2008 to March 2010 should this release date theory receive confirmation.
Click to expand...

Source: http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16828/1/
 
930 is going to be a regigged 920. no word on stepping or anything else yet though.
Clock speed is supposed to be around 2.8Ghz per core.

Same with the 960 taking over the 950.
 
Not really impressed and its delayed now till march time-frame for intels 6core release....

Wish they extended there Core i5 lineup and dropped it too 32nm and make it even cheaper ;)

Hopefully AMDs 6core will be out before and proove good from a price point view.
 
HighlandeR said:
Not really impressed and its delayed now till march time-frame for intels 6core release....

Wish they extended there Core i5 lineup and dropped it too 32nm and make it even cheaper ;)

Hopefully AMDs 6core will be out before and proove good from a price point view.
Click to expand...

At a price point of view, AMDs 6core will most certainly be a lot cheaper than Intels 6core release but then again, it will be a lot slower too.
 
Alledged to come from Computer News, list of proposed Xeons for March 2010:

Xeon w3680 - > six core, 3.33 GHz, 12 mb cache, TDP = 130 W;
Xeon x5670 - > six core, 2.93 GHz, 12 mb cache, TDP = 95 W;
Xeon x5660 - > six core, 2.80 GHz, 12 mb cache, TDP = 95 W;
Xeon x5650 - > six core, 2.66 GHz, 12 mb cache, TDP = 95 W;
Xeon l5640 - > six core, 2.26 GHz, 12 mb cache, TDP = 60 W.

The last one looks a bit special, slow clock but only 10 watts per core........
 
Thanks for the info Malcolm!

What I'm wondering though... between the x56xx and the w3680, is the only difference the clockspeed? Or are the x56xx 45nm or no hyperthreading? Do you know this? Cause if that's the case I might be interested in a x5650 for my next project
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom