Kentsfield when will we see this instock at ocuk

[mark35]

looking to upgrade to one of these need it asap
spec

Tuniq Tower 120 CPU Cooler
Asus P5B Deluxe (Socket 775) PCI-Express DDR2 Motherboard
MY-013-GS G.Skill 2GB DDR2 HZ PC2-6400 (2x1GB) CAS4 Dual Channel Kit
Connect3D ATI Radeon X1800 XT 256MB

 

[Duke]

There are different dates on the web, but most point to late November/sometime December.

 

[caff]

I noticed in my copy of PCW magazine it mentions the 4 Core Extreme processor being something like 67% faster than existing dual cores? They also say late November release date.

No idea how much they'll cost though. I'm sure someone can provide stats and estimated prices

 

[Messiah Khan]

Your looking at roughly Mid November for the QX6700. Im not sure about price, but ~£800 shouldn't be too far off the mark. Then in January sometime, the Q6600 and another (the Q6400 I think) will be released for much more reasonable prices.

 

[mrthingyx]

I noticed in my copy of PCW magazine it mentions the 4 Core Extreme processor being something like 67% faster than existing dual cores?

Running what, pray? Something that made use of all four cores at once, no doubt? Just like old-fashioned SMP: more cores are better for workstation and professional apps, but 2x 2.4GHz will be slower for 99% of games today than a single 2.8GHz CPU. The same logic applies for multi-core systems.

This will change as straight-line speed becomes less important, but will hold for a good while yet.

I've heard mid-November, but will look for it when it's officially announced.

 

[xirokx]

but ~£800 thats the cpu not mentioning the rest of it

 

[smids]

How much? More than I can afford/want to spend on a CPU alone.

Esp. considering how much my second core gets used as it is .

 

[FrankJH]

but 2x 2.4GHz will be slower for 99% of games today than a single 2.8GHz CPU.

Of course the single core will be faster its got 400Mhz extra - usability however is completely different, and in this even just running one major application or game in windows the dual core will feel more fluid

After all before now while playing a game or encoding something we had to stop all av scanning, as many background tasks etc etc before we could get a really smooth experience - now none of these matter as its taken care of with a difference core , which wouldnt be used anyway in most applications.

I (as long as most on here I would guess) would much prefer a slower dual core cpu than a faster single core one, its a no brainer!!!! Obviously if its going to be half the speed then maybe not, but you are talking abut 16% core speed difference - no contest at all in my mind

edit... with the X6800 dual core selling at near enough £700 inc vat (unless you mean £800 + vat for quad) and the quad not being in direct competition with the Core 2 Duo, I cant see it being that close in price myself, even lowest speed Core 2 Quad I would expect to be nearer £1000+vat , especially as they are primarily aimed at businesses

 

[Stelly]

The sooner the better BUT you have to remember that no program at the moment support dual core never mind quad core technology

Stelly

 

[Messiah Khan]

edit... with the X6800 dual core selling at near enough £700 inc vat (unless you mean £800 + vat for quad) and the quad not being in direct competition with the Core 2 Duo, I cant see it being that close in price myself, even lowest speed Core 2 Quad I would expect to be nearer £1000+vat , especially as they are primarily aimed at businesses

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217

Like other "Extreme" chips from Intel, the estimated price tag is $999 for the new processor.

A price tag for the Q6600 has not been set yet, but the processor will retail for less than the QX6700 but more than the Core 2 Duo E6700. The E6700 has a street price of approximately $530 USD, but price cuts will bring the cost of the CPU down before the Q1'07 launch of mainstream Kentsfield.

The sooner the better BUT you have to remember that no program at the moment support dual core never mind quad core technology

Stelly

Yes there is. 3D studio max for example support multiple core bucket rendering.

 

[stoofa]

There is a good article in "PC Magazine" (December cover date, subscribers should have got it last week) about the Quad cores etc.

It basically goes on about how the new Quad core CPU's are a "benchmarkers" dream.
However for the rest of us we aren't going to notice any significant speed increases in day to day activity.

They were also saying just how difficult it is to get applications etc working and utilising the quad cores.
I don't have the article in front of me, but because of the way processes are sent out to cores "on the fly" so to speak, every time you run an application it is run in a different way.
Maybe the first time cores 1,2,3,4 are initially used in that order, the second time 1,2,4,3 and so on and so forth.
You could run an application 10 times without a problem and it would fail on the 11th.
Run it 100 times and it will fail on the 101st, run it 1000 times it could fail on run 1001.
It makes debugging all a bit of a nightmare.

Whereas dual core really has delivered, mainly because the OS/applications have been waiting for SMP, quad cores really aren't going to be the next coming.
87% quicker...play those benchmarks!

 

[Things change I've changed]

Gibbo - do you think your be getting the QX6700's in before christmas ?, I keep hearing that there is only going to be a limited supply which is a little worrying.

 

[harris1986]

imo quad core = e-penis and that's it!

 

[Things change I've changed]

imo quad core = e-penis and that's it!

now now, don't be jealous

 

[FrankJH]

$999 means £999 over here if the usual happens, but to be honest i really dont know why they are comparing a workstation /proffessional chip with desktop style ones as pricing is never usually comparable at the start.

 

[mrthingyx]

Of course the single core will be faster its got 400Mhz extra - usability however is completely different, and in this even just running one major application or game in windows the dual core will feel more fluid

After all before now while playing a game or encoding something we had to stop all av scanning, as many background tasks etc etc before we could get a really smooth experience - now none of these matter as its taken care of with a difference core , which wouldnt be used anyway in most applications.

I (as long as most on here I would guess) would much prefer a slower dual core cpu than a faster single core one, its a no brainer!!!! Obviously if its going to be half the speed then maybe not, but you are talking abut 16% core speed difference - no contest at all in my mind

edit... with the X6800 dual core selling at near enough £700 inc vat (unless you mean £800 + vat for quad) and the quad not being in direct competition with the Core 2 Duo, I cant see it being that close in price myself, even lowest speed Core 2 Quad I would expect to be nearer £1000+vat , especially as they are primarily aimed at businesses

No argument, there, but you have to remember a couple of things:

Once upon a time, juicing a single core didn't take much: gaming and encoding had to be done separately. With dual-core, the creamy smoothness of SMP is there for anybody who really wants it, With quad core, the benefits are harder to see: yes, encode a DVD, zip an almighty file folder,, fold and game at the same time but I personally would really struggle to do more than two of those at once. I'm sure there are people who can find a gazillion benchmarks to run at the same time and miss pressing 'shift' when typing the !!!!s, but I ain't one of them... at least until they stop using more power than an induction melting furnace.

 

[FrankJH]

No argument, there, but you have to remember a couple of things:

Once upon a time, juicing a single core didn't take much: gaming and encoding had to be done separately. With dual-core, the creamy smoothness of SMP is there for anybody who really wants it, With quad core, the benefits are harder to see: yes, encode a DVD, zip an almighty file folder,, fold and game at the same time but I personally would really struggle to do more than two of those at once. I'm sure there are people who can find a gazillion benchmarks to run at the same time and miss pressing 'shift' when typing the !!!!s, but I ain't one of them... at least until they stop using more power than an induction melting furnace.

I dont have any arguement with what you said here, but you were comparining a single core to dual cores in your original post rather than dualies to quad as you are here - at the moment I see little point of quads either ---- still be nice to have one though, but not at the rumoured price lol