• 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"

99% of people who have a i7 setup have a 920 i would guess, Intel arn't offering a cost effective upgrade for these people, if the 930 was on 32nm process that would be something to aspire too a lot of people will just be sticking with thier overclocked 920's.
 
99% of people who have a i7 setup have a 920 i would guess, Intel arn't offering a cost effective upgrade for these people, if the 930 was on 32nm process that would be something to aspire too a lot of people will just be sticking with thier overclocked 920's.
 
Who the crap decides what to name each CPU? It just makes no sense at all. Presumably the "X" means extreme but the 965/975 don't have an X. Also, when they release slower, locked versions, what will they call them? i7 976-979?

They should have used something that makes sense like iX ABC where the X determines big differences like the socket and hyper-threading (e.g. 3 = 1156, no HT; 5 = 1156 with HT; 7 = 1366, no HT; 9 = 1366 with HT), A determines the number of cores and BC determines the intermediate level (e.g. an i9 645 would be faster than an i9 640). An i7 1220 would therefore be the budget socket 1366 CPU with 12 cores but no HT.

I guess they just really want to use high numbers (9xx) just like AMD/ATI :rolleyes:. I wonder what they're reserving i9 for...
 
Last edited:
malcolm said:
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........
Click to expand...

I dont want to pay $999 aka £700+ for a cpu, £400 is the max i could strech.

So these x5650-x5660 looks very tasty, do they work with normal x58 mobo?

I don't think it would be too long before other six core CPU filter down on the x58 platform.
 
Ironic that we seem to be getting cores at a faster rate than the ability to find things to use them.
 
I'm upgrading to i7 x58 platform this christmas primarily because of the heavy HD Video and photediting work ahead of me for 2010. If i were a gamer i would just stick with an i5 or AMD platform.

The typical hardware fan usually uses the computer for gaming and or other multimedia applications that to be honest the current i7 handles with ease.
 
PS: I am a gamer but the i7 is just plain overkill for todays games. But then, it's preparing for the future applications and games you may say. By then, there will be new(er) technology out and you will want to change your MB, RAM & CPU anway :)
 
I'm glad the 930 is 45nm, makes it a lot easier to postpone upgrading.

The six core xeon chips are very interesting indeed. Seem to remember Asus planning a dual socket 1366 atx board, wonder if it exists yet. The Z8NA-D6, not out yet as far as I can tell. However, upgrade cpu to one of the above xeons, wait a while, then change board to this one with a second cpu. Who says X58 has no upgrade path
 
Last edited:
JonJ678 said:
I'm glad the 930 is 45nm, makes it a lot easier to postpone upgrading.

The six core xeon chips are very interesting indeed. Seem to remember Asus planning a dual socket 1366 atx board, wonder if it exists yet
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with you. If it was 32nm I think I would have upgraded....

Anyway my current setup is fast enough at the moment, just feel the need to upgrade ffs :D

Think I'll first upgrade my PSU and HD's then :D
 
Software these days are so far behind hardware development, there is no point having 6 or more cores when applications can't use them - unless you are talking about the pro environments.
 
The i7 is great because it over clocks well and goes like **** off a sholve, not because it has multiple cores.

As I posted earlier I totally agree about the software aspect, the simple reality is that multi core programming isn't easy thus you don't see much benefit from it at the moment.
 
the 980x will have multiple cores and clock well

32nm means it should push further and run cooler

this is all speculation of course
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom