• 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 says 3.2GHz is enough for 2008 (no competition = no innovation)

something_totally_different

something_totally_different

something_totally_different

Associate
Joined
10 Oct 2007
Posts
1,165
Location
in the arse of england.
We learned that Intel doesn’t plan to release a CPU faster than Quad core 9770 3.2GHz by Q4 2008. Intel is well known for changing its own plans way too often, but the company simply thinks that it doesn’t have to.

This CPU can be overclocked to 4GHz on air so Intel still has a lot of headroom; but It won’t be pushing and competing by itself until AMD gets its act together.

In Q4 Intel is supposed to launch the Nehalem, its new native 45nm quad core with eight threads that will replace the core architecture, but if AMD doesn’t make a really competitive part to Core 2 Extreme 9770, Intel will stick with the 3.2GHz speed.

At least as of the early days of January, it looks like Intel will have quite an easy year, but AMD will be pushing back with products such as black Edition unlocked CPUs.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5037&Itemid=1



bah humbug. you see, this is why BOTH companies need to do well.
 
9770 to 4Ghz on air which some Q6600 G0's can do right? not all.

Nothing special coming out, they are right though faster isnt needed for anything at the moment. This year it seems its just best to get the cheapest and most overclockable cpu possible.
 
so it seem that Intel aren`t threatened by anything AMD has to offer soon, and are therefore going to take a break from releasing all those fast CPU chips, and make do with what they have released already, because of no competition at the moment.

I only hope there will be some competition on 2009, or?
 
Last edited:
I guess this is where AMD do a sneaky and strike back with a good cpu? and the cycle continues again... i hope ne way, its the only way we are going to get good value for money.
 
Sylver123 said:
and intel`s CPU prices may rise because of this too?
Click to expand...

Rise? they are already high enough as it is.

Who is going to pay 600-700 quid just for a CPU that can clock maybe 100-200mhz quicker than a cpu for like £100-200? hardly anybody.

Basically since the E6600 & Q6600 came out hardly anything has been much better, mainly just temps.
 
Well they're right to do so of course, will maximize their profits and until they shrink the CPUs again it's not like we can make them run any faster, unless of course they make a new G0 magic thingie.
 
MHz is a very poor indicator of processor speed; since it is only directly comparable between the same kind of chip. The other changes Intel are making will deliver faster processor speeds without a headline shift in MHz.
 
Intel hasnt improved the ghz from the 945 that was out 2 years ago, but you could hardly say they havent been innovative.

Increasing the Ghz above 3.2 also doesnt mean that Intel will not be innovating in 2008, particularly in this community as the Ghz a cpu is launched at is often of little interest, its more about what it is capable of.

For example

The QX9650 is the same Ghz as the QX6850, but there is definately a good improvement from one to the other

Intel can also look at what price points it can get technology down to. I'm sure a 45nm cpu at the price points of E2xxx/E4xxx would be of more interest to most here than a .2ghz bump on a E8xxx.

Also as a strategy Ghz isnt really where Intel pushing and hasnt been since the launch of C2D.

Architecture/Cores/Cache/FSB/Graphics on board/and more can all be used to innovate with out touching the Ghz.

Admittedly competition will always help, but I think Intel has learned it cant sit still and be complacent....
 
Intel Guy said:
I'm sure a 45nm cpu at the price points of E2xxx/E4xxx would be of more interest to most here than a .2ghz bump on a E8xxx.
Click to expand...

I agree with all your points bar this one tbh Matt. Our biggest sellers by *far* are the mid-range cpu's such as the E6550/E6750 and the Q6600 (when it comes to quads).

But the budget end is still quite strong :)

Si
 
I dont think you disagreeing with me :)

The 6550/6750 are more popular than the 6850, even though it is 3hz compared to 2.33/2.66Ghz? I guess that is because of what the cpu's are capable of rather than what Ghz they are (same with the Q6600 and Q6700)

The 45nm at E2xxx/E4xxx comment was an example of bringing technology to new price points, i could have also put 45nm quads at E6x50 price points.

I am not saying that either of these are going to happen, just that Intel can continue to push forward with out increasing the speed.
 
The E6850 is a waste of money to be honest. You can get the E6750 which is basically the same CPU only with a lower multi for £40 less... Some people seem more attracted to the E6850 because of the psychological milestone of 3Ghz but to be honest that's a little irrational. It's only 333mhz faster after all... And the Q6700... Well you'd have to be a bloody mad man to buy them at retail prices.
 
Right now both companies dont need to do well. AMD just need to release something that is competitive. Then intel can own them by releasing their next line of cpus, which will render AMD completely uncompetitive once again.
 
Mr Jack said:
MHz is a very poor indicator of processor speed; since it is only directly comparable between the same kind of chip. The other changes Intel are making will deliver faster processor speeds without a headline shift in MHz.
Click to expand...

That is very true, but the 5-10% over AMD will only be enough to equal it out a little bit in the consumer market, since AMD will probably still beat them in terms of price/performance.
 
Intel Guy said:
Intel hasnt improved the ghz from the 945 that was out 2 years ago, but you could hardly say they havent been innovative.
Click to expand...
The last thing Intel's CPUs have been recently is innovative - they've nicked most of their ideas from AMD and refined them.

They adopted the Athlon's more-work-per-cycle design for the C2D after quietly dropping the deeply flawed Netburst architecture. They adopted AMD's 64-bit extensions after proclaiming there was no place for 64-bit on the desktop. Next up is their version of Hypertransport and on-board memory controllers with Nehalem.

Intel are basically taking AMD's innovation and just "doing it better", refining the technology and adding their own enhancements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom