Penryn

[Sam1993]

When the Penryn comes out what should I get out of that and the Q6600?

And could someone explain to me what the difference between these 2 chips will be and what the best one to go for would be?

Sam.

 

[steve258]

Penryn = 45nm native quad-core with SSE4, consumes less power, bigger L2 cache (upto 12mb).

Clock for clock penryn performs slightly better.

 

[nightmare99]

Q6600 = Q9300, Q6600 will effectivly be end of life.

 

[Corasik]

Penryn = 45nm native quad-core with SSE4, consumes less power, bigger L2 cache (upto 12mb).

Clock for clock penryn performs slightly better.

Penryn based cores, are 2x6mb cache, not native quad. But still very fast, with increased FSB speed 1333, and 1600 so not really bottlenecked badly as C2D is a very efficient design with an excellent branch predictor (Quad pumped FSB and the logic for the branch predictor are about the only good to have come out of P4)

Nehelem is the first 'native' quad core, it also brings back hyperthreading. ETA sometime in 2008.

Penryn based chips will be slightly faster than C2D's, and they are also introducing 'half' multipliers, so there is a greater range of clock speeds available. Pricewise a 2.67Ghz Penryn quad will be about the same as the 2.4Ghz Q6600.

I believe there will be some Penryn 'dual' cores as well.

Note: I use the term Penryn as a generalism to encompass the entire penryn "45nm" family which includes mobile, desktop and server parts.

It will also use less power, run cooler, and hopefully overclock at least as well. But as its a new process (45nm) nobody really knows how well the first batches will overclock.