When will i7's and DDR3 be more affordable?

[EvilOne]

I think the whole ddr-3 tri-channal thing is a joke too, it offers next to no benifit compared to dual channal ddr2, apart from costing 3-4 times more. Can see how the unlocked AM2+ Deneb chips that can use any DDR2 are really gonna take off.

About the P55 chipset, i think intel have delayed it till the get rid of more of there core2 stock. That way as they slowly change there production from core2-i7 there stocks wont run low on either. Can see the P55 being rushed out quickly if deneb lives upto expectations vs core2quads. Intel dont want to lose market share to AMD, like Nvidia just have through slow reactions.

 

[drunkenmaster]

939 boards were not that expensive compared to 754 boards though; and Deneb in AM2+ should perform pretty well comapred to AM3 still.

thats mostly because, they were cheap anyway, you could get fantastic £60 gigabyte boards that overclocked the same as the £130 versions in 754 or 939, theres only so cheap a decent motherboard can get and frankly, we were already at production levels where everythign was dual channel already, the single channel 754 was a step back with less traces than a NF2 board or a intel dual channel setup. 939 was back to the dual channel it always had. Triple channel is a step forwards up the scale though, and its a big leap. Its an exponential scale, more traces = more space but more signal problems, which means even more space and insulation. triple channel is getting to that point where rather than 2x2=4 and its not a massive increase, its at the other end of the exponential scale where 50x50 isn't double the number but shockingly exponentially higher

Remember not only do the boards need more layers, more tracers and more copper for insulation(in a market where copper is expensive) like anything else new, production numbers are low and production lines have to be redesigned to cope with say, 12 layer boards instead of the 8 layer boards they've been making for decades, so production costs are expensive due to upgrades. Yes the board prices will come down, but a 12 layer board with far more copper in will simply always cost a lot more than an 8 layer board with less copper.

 

[rypt]

thats mostly because, they were cheap anyway, you could get fantastic £60 gigabyte boards that overclocked the same as the £130 versions in 754 or 939, theres only so cheap a decent motherboard can get and frankly, we were already at production levels where everythign was dual channel already, the single channel 754 was a step back with less traces than a NF2 board or a intel dual channel setup. 939 was back to the dual channel it always had. Triple channel is a step forwards up the scale though, and its a big leap. Its an exponential scale, more traces = more space but more signal problems, which means even more space and insulation. triple channel is getting to that point where rather than 2x2=4 and its not a massive increase, its at the other end of the exponential scale where 50x50 isn't double the number but shockingly exponentially higher

Remember not only do the boards need more layers, more tracers and more copper for insulation(in a market where copper is expensive) like anything else new, production numbers are low and production lines have to be redesigned to cope with say, 12 layer boards instead of the 8 layer boards they've been making for decades, so production costs are expensive due to upgrades. Yes the board prices will come down, but a 12 layer board with far more copper in will simply always cost a lot more than an 8 layer board with less copper.

So the question is, do we really need tri-channel now? Would it not have been better to release i7 with the option of either a dual-channel DDR2 board, or a tri-channel DDR3 board?

 

[gurusan]

This DDR3 only thing ain't all bad. Making DDR3 more mainstream pushes the memory companies to churn out better and more varieties of DDR3.

Hopefully prices will drop faster and lots of good kits will become available shortly. Then we just need some cheaper mobos to be released :/

 

[Jay_t]

I'm sure there is someone here that has a good idea when the prices are at the stage where they dont drop much afterward, or should i say a sweet spot.

Anyone?

The pound is crashing against the dollar. Down from 2.1 dollars to the pound to 1.45 dollars to the pound. Expect PC components to get more expensive as these extra costs are passed on.

 

[555BUK]

I must say that this is the first new chipset for years that I have absolutely no interest in. Compared to Conroe (which Intel released with very competitive prices) this new chipset is about as popular as a banker in Detroit.

Even the Yanks complain prices are too high for CPU, chipset and RAM.

I expect prices to fall heavily after Christmas. But even then, Conroe still offers more than enough performance and there is little reason for most people to upgrade.

 

[rypt]

The pound is crashing against the dollar. Down from 2.1 dollars to the pound to 1.45 dollars to the pound. Expect PC components to get more expensive as these extra costs are passed on.

Why should it get more expensive? For some parts we were already paying more than the prices in USA.

Think for instance about some Foxconn boards, or even graphics cards. USA had 4850's for $100 in mainstream shops ... find me anywhere a 4850 for £80 in a MAINSTREAM shop, had 16GB OCZ flash for $10.

 

[DeathTyrant]

I am also going to wait and see how Deneb pans out. If it turns out to be significantly better value when it comes to performance vs cost, then I will go back to AMD. My first PC was a wonderful AMD 64 3500 Venice 90nm (because it was the shiznit), my second is my current E6600 (because C2D were/are the shiznit).
I want to be able to get a great i7 or Deneb system for no more than £650.

i7 920 - I want to spend £200
X58 board - I want to spend £200-250 (for something like the new EVGA)
6GB DDR3 - I want to spend £200 (for the good stuff mind you)

The other stuff I already have.

 

[Paul2506]

Well i switched from AMD to Intel and i'm happy with intel atm ,If it does turn out AMD takes over again,Then i'll just do a full new rig with AMD and give this one to one of my sons,Failing that i will just wait till the prices drop on the i7's and build something up from there.

 

[Stu]

P55 isn't expected until 4Q09.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

i7 is showing increases with SLi so it leads me to believe that when the next powerful single graphics card is released, it will be faster with the i7's over c2d cpu's

correct?

 

[drunkenmaster]

i7 is showing increases with SLi so it leads me to believe that when the next powerful single graphics card is released, it will be faster with the i7's over c2d cpu's

correct?

not even slightly, its no faster in sli/cf at all, a fast dual core, a slower c2d, a phenom and a i7 are all the same speed in gaming.

Reviews where sli/cf/quadfire/tri-sli aren't at gpu limits show increase, but so do single cards not at their optimum res, you don't game at those resolutions, reviews use low res to highlight any difference between cpu's but all say it will make no difference at gpu limited resolutions which you should be gaming at basically. The single review that showed it faster didn't really use gpu limited resolutions, when it did use tri sli /quad fire at 2560x1600, scores were similar, at 1920x1200/1680x1050 where these setups are not in any way gpu limited they showed a difference, of course they showed a difference because they benched an i7 against a C2D, dual core, not a quad. No other review shows a difference.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

I could easily afford a C2D setup now which would come at just under half the price a i7 setup would cost, i want to go to new tech not older tech though

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

of course they showed a difference because they benched an i7 against a C2D, dual core, not a quad. No other review shows a difference.

oh ok, thanks for that. I guess most people believed that review though, at least from what i read.

 

[drunkenmaster]

oh ok, thanks for that. I guess most people believed that review though, at least from what i read.

i think the main problem is review sites that use to do a couple reviews on the side of normal jobs ending up becoming a time drain and turned into a full time job, advertising became a huge part of peoples income and SO many review sites have gone down the pan in terms of quality. Anandtech aren't a patch on what they were a year ago, let alone 4-5 years ago. [H] weren't ever that great and are mostly crap now, Toms was always a joke of massive intel ad payment proportions, guru3d is nothing but a joke now.

That review would have shown a difference at non gaming resolutions even if up against a C2Q, but they still used a dual core to make the difference massive, the conclusions were beyond a joke.

Its a shame as very few sites do decent reviews anymore. You really need to look through every review for the last 6 months, take a tally of who is being advertised throughout and factor that into the results these days. Impartial review sites are few and far between.

 

[Nullvoid]

i think the main problem is review sites that use to do a couple reviews on the side of normal jobs ending up becoming a time drain and turned into a full time job, advertising became a huge part of peoples income and SO many review sites have gone down the pan in terms of quality. Anandtech aren't a patch on what they were a year ago, let alone 4-5 years ago. [H] weren't ever that great and are mostly crap now, Toms was always a joke of massive intel ad payment proportions, guru3d is nothing but a joke now.

That's a fair point actually. I used to have the utmost respect for the guys at the Tech Report since they always produced quality articles, missing release dates even to ensure they didn't publish one ridden with inaccuracies and mistakes. They've gone downhill ever since they took on sponsorship from newegg though. In their rush to release their i7 launch arcticle they tried to simulate the performance of a 940 instead of using a proper one and managed to botch it but instead of fixing it before or after release, you get this tucked away in the middle of the fourth page:

Ours (the "uncore" clock) was running at 3.2 GHz when we simulated the 940, when the proper clock speed is 2.13 GHz. That discrepancy potentially made both the memory controller and the L3 cache quicker than they would probably be in the actual product. We've decided to leave the numbers for the 940 in the review, but please realize that they may overstate its performance somewhat. We will try to follow up with more exact numbers in a future article or update.

That same kind of assurance has popped up in other articles as well but they never follow up.

Sorry for going a bit off-topic by the way.

 

[magpie1966]

I bet even when Deneb comes out depending whether your looking at the review in question, it will depend on t how they spin it, green of amd or the blue of Intel,

I just want to see a straight clock for clock comparison without all the bull, I think if we're waiting for one of them it will have to be done by one of our own, who obviously has loads of cash lol. The days of good reviews are gone, its spin spin spin.

computer politics good grief......

 

[Yamahahahahaha]

The extremely low prices of DDR2 were caused by a shortage and over-correction back in 2006 / 2007.

The DRAM industry suffered a lot through this.

They will not let DDR3 run into such a vast over supply again.

 

[AlexTrickle]

When the pound becomes stronger it will help prices a lot aswell i suppose, how long will that take though

Atleast 2011 before the economy starts to stabilise and recover, although in terms of currency exchange rates it could be sooner/later depending on which economy improves the quickest; that of Britain or that of America.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

I think the best thing to do for i7 is to ignore it and wait until the next chipset comes out. I'm willing to bet that LGA 1336 won't last long at all compared to LGA 775.

- Huw