• 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.

Intel 45nm mainstream quad core comes in March

bradeh

bradeh

bradeh

Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
122
Just saw this posted on Fudzilla,

According to industry sources, Intel Quad core 45nm will show up its face only in March. Even then Intel will be able to ship it in limited quantities and of course, we are talking about the desktop chips. Intel is currently shipping a limited quantities of Xeon based 45nm quad cores and a high end 9650 3.0GHz quad core part.

The current plan is to fill the gap with 65nanometre chips and survive until the 45nm Yorkfield mainstream quad cores comes in game. Intel plans a limited availability of 45nm Yorkfields in March, but this will be enough to claim to investors that they started shipping them in Q1.

With AMD who doesn’t really have the parts to compete makes Intel comfortable and gives a giant some time to rest.
Click to expand...
 
What motherboards will they need?

This PC upgrading malarky is very annoying - whenever I go to buy something it always seems to be just before some major release is announced!!!
 
nothing they are a big disapointment overclocking wise... low multipliers will make them no better than a Q6600 in most cases I really cant see the point upgrading atm
 
buy a Q6600...

most motherboards will do 450 FSB on a *8 multi yorkfield (I believe thats the equivilant or 1 step higher than the Q6600 that its replacing) you will get 3.6ghz.. and thats assumming you board will run a quad at 450 FSB and that your RAM will be ok at 900mhz.. even with the extra performance you will get clock for clock I cant see it being worth the extra cash tbh..
 
Pneumonic said:
buy a Q6600...

most motherboards will do 450 FSB on a *8 multi yorkfield (I believe thats the equivilant or 1 step higher than the Q6600 that its replacing) you will get 3.6ghz.. and thats assumming you board will run a quad at 450 FSB and that your RAM will be ok at 900mhz.. even with the extra performance you will get clock for clock I cant see it being worth the extra cash tbh..
Click to expand...

Do you know the CPU cutoff in games? Like having a 8400 @ 4GHz+ against a Q6600 at 3.6/8?

What would be better?
 
So I could potentially have to wait a further 3 months for this chip as stock will be so low :(

Think I should get a Q6600 G0 and be done with it.
 
Perfect_Chaos said:
I would do that, but people here seem to think that the q6600 wont be of much resale value compared to the wolfdale
Click to expand...

Hmm guess I never really thought about resale, this pc must be getting on for 3 years old (athlon xp 2500 @ 3200, 1 GB, X800 XT PE all under a single water cooled loop, DD maze 4 blocks and a 120.2). Its beginning to go wrong and is too slow for games.

Either way its going to cost ~£1100 to get everything new and start afresh, however there is so much change and flux that I'm bamboozled by what to get, do I get a Q6600 and a P35 or X38 (mainly thinking here for the pci e 2.0 and newer tech).

I'm still of the school of thought that a quad will become more useful over the next 6 months as more applications are coded for multicore cpus.
 
jbloggs said:
This is quite an interesting thread......I know the Q9450 is an ES, but still gives a clear idea of the limitation of an 8 multiplier. :)
Click to expand...

Yes but what you have to remember is that clock for clock the 45nm quads

are faster than the 65nm parts.

So a 3.6ghz Q9450 is like having a 4ghz Q6600 under the hood.

Something that people rarely had 24/7 due to cooling etc..

I ran my Q6600 at 3.8ghz 24/7 and will glady have a Q9450 running at 3.6ghz

as I still have a faster cooler running PC that uses less power and has a new

instruction set.
 
Well I've just moved from a Quad to a Dual and am quite disappointed at the performance of this dual core. I've had similarly clocked C2D processors before...but my GPU was always the limiting factor...now that it's not the performance of the dual (or lack thereof) is quite noticeable in games that take advantage of quads.

poop on duals
 
Its good its on its way at least....I for one dont overclock and could do with the lower temps maybe I can whack on a noctuna 120mm 7volted case fan finaly ;)
 
Pneumonic said:
buy a Q6600...

most motherboards will do 450 FSB on a *8 multi yorkfield (I believe thats the equivilant or 1 step higher than the Q6600 that its replacing) you will get 3.6ghz.. and thats assumming you board will run a quad at 450 FSB and that your RAM will be ok at 900mhz.. even with the extra performance you will get clock for clock I cant see it being worth the extra cash tbh..
Click to expand...

a 3.6ghz-ish yorkfield is the same as a 4ghz-ish q6600, which not many people ran constantly, and the yorkfield would run cooler + use less power.
 
well from what I have read its 5-10% performance increase per clock which would put it at around 3.7/3.8 not 4ghz.. my point is that the max most people will get out of a *7.5 multi yorkfield which is the eqivialnt to the Q6600 is 450*7.5 = 3375mhz.. tbh that isnt worth the upgrade if you have a 3.6ghz Q6600.. if you want an 8 or 8.5 multiplier then you are going to be spending a lot more cash..

I am not saying these aren't nice cool running CPUs that use less power and will clock nicely.. just that they are disapointing in regards to multi and that if you have a good Q6600 G0 then it isnt worth the upgrade
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom