Why hasn't intel released lower clocked quad cores?

[eyetrip]

They have released the q6600, which is derived from the e6600, but why haven't they broadened the range of quad cores with offerings such as q6300 or q6400?

I think these would sell really well. I know the prices of the q6600 will be dropping drastically, but still think there would be a market for these offerings... wouldn't there?

 

[Justintime]

Maybe they're milking it as much as they can before they release lower clocked models, kinda like they did with the early core 2 release if i remember well.

 

[steve258]

Because there is no competition in the quad-core market yet, they have just brought the C2Ds down to £50 mark and that's only because of the X2 price cuts. It's expensive cuz it's the best and people are willing to pay the premium.

We shall see a complete native 45nm quad-core line up once AMD brings out their next gen quad-core chips. In the meanwhile you can either go for the cheaper Xeon alternatives or the AMD's 4x4 platform which costs much more than a top-end C2Q.

 

[matja]

You can buy a Xeon X3210 @ 2.13 Ghz - cheaper than a Q6600, and overclocks quite well if you're into that thang, too. Although, its not quite as good value (pound/Mhz) as a Q6600.

Q6600 = £6.92 per MHz
X3210 = £7.40 per Mhz

 

[Psycho Sonny]

You can buy a Xeon X3210 @ 2.13 Ghz - cheaper than a Q6600, and overclocks quite well if you're into that thang, too. Although, its not quite as good value (pound/Mhz) as a Q6600.

Q6600 = £6.92 per MHz
X3210 = £7.40 per Mhz

those figures cannot be right

both are over 2000mhz so that means

Q6600 costs over £14,000 and the X3210 costs over £15,000

 

[Mattus]

It's the units that are wrong.

Q6600 = 6.92 MHz per £
X3210 = 7.40 MHz per £

... so the Xeon is actually better value!

 

[Justintime]

Can't even see how that'd work out if it was in pence.


edit -

It's the units that are wrong.

Q6600 = 6.92 MHz per £
X3210 = 7.40 MHz per £

... so the Xeon is actually better value!

Ahh

 

[Psycho Sonny]

i would get one if they didnt run so goddam hot, they shouldnt make processors that run so hot, its bad for us overclockers, im waiting for them to bring out a quadcore that runs cooler than a dual core or for their price to drop significantly because ive already spent over £4000 in the past 2 years

 

[Mattus]

It runs hotter than a dual core because it's basically two dual core chips stuck together. Native quad core (Penryn/Barcelona) should run a bit cooler.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

It runs hotter than a dual core because it's basically two dual core chips stuck together. Native quad core (Penryn/Barcelona) should run a bit cooler.

yeah i know that, every year do the chips get smaller, i mean the actual components used, because the chips stay roughly the same size if not the exact same, for example, 95nm and 65nm i hear a lot about these and they get smaller each year, so in turn it reduces the heat but they use more of them so the heat stays the same.

basically what i want is chips to run cooler so to do that they need to either not use so many transistors or whatever it is or use smaller ones, for example if my e6600 is 2 cores and uses 200 million of these things at 95nm, i would want my next chip to be q6600 which is 4 cores and uses 400 million of these things at 65nm, so they would probably be the same heat output.

i know nothing about this sort of thing but i reckon it would be better if they focussed on reducing heat output as well as processing power, my e6600 ar 3.6ghz chucks out a hell of a lot of heat theres no way i could get a quad core to 3.6ghz

 

[eyetrip]

Personally, I am only hoping for 3GHz out of a q6600 when I get one.

I am not going to be waiting for Penryn, as I do not think it would be compatible with my board - Asus p5n-e.

Am not too worried about the heat, as I have fairly good cooling for my pc.

I suppose the fact that AMD has no quads does mean that there is no pressure on Intel to reduce prices much at the moment, as stated above.

Am not in a rush for a quad yet though, as my e4300 at 3.15GHz is handling most things just fine.

 

[devablue]

i believe in november the Q6300 & Q6400 will be released at a decent lowish price.

 

[matja]

sorry, i cant see how I worked that out either, i dont even have the excuse of posting it at 4am like most of my posts