If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
Newegg has some new i7-800 and i5-700 chips, and boards. New socket, screw
compatibility. Looks like only four max SIMMs not six like i7-900 series, and no L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. Only interesting feature is that one core can run like hell if the others are idle, makes it nice for single threaded loads. Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
On Sep 10, 12:31*am, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Newegg has some new i7-800 and i5-700 chips, and boards. New socket, screw compatibility. Looks like only four max SIMMs not six like i7-900 series, and no L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. Only interesting feature is that one core can run like hell if the others are idle, makes it nice for single threaded loads. Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question.. Three memory channels have become two, new motherboards come with four dimm slots instead of six. Onward and upward. Core i7 920 systems are still a bargain. Robert. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Newegg has some new i7-800 and i5-700 chips, and boards. New socket, screw compatibility. Looks like only four max SIMMs not six like i7-900 series, and no L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. Only interesting feature is that one core can run like hell if the others are idle, makes it nice for single threaded loads. Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question. the i7 (860, 870) have 256K L2 cache per core for a total of 1M, they also have 8M L3 cache (shared by all cores). ~k |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
Robert Myers wrote:
On Sep 10, 12:31 am, Bill Davidsen wrote: Newegg has some new i7-800 and i5-700 chips, and boards. New socket, screw compatibility. Looks like only four max SIMMs not six like i7-900 series, and no L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. Only interesting feature is that one core can run like hell if the others are idle, makes it nice for single threaded loads. Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question. Three memory channels have become two, new motherboards come with four dimm slots instead of six. Onward and upward. Core i7 920 systems are still a bargain. I don't know how you measure 'bargain' in your terms, by performance/$ or performance/watt it looks as if the newer chip win. The 920 is a bargain by those measures only when compared to other 900 series chips. From memory the i5 part has 64-bit but not virtualization, that's an issue for many uses, since VM is becoming common. I looked at an i7-920 system and didn't think it was cost effective. When the 35nm parts come out the 920 will drop in price and I will probably build a small system around that, drop in 12GB of ram and move more VMs there. I just built a small 3TB RAID box with eSATA, so I'm ready to go when that happens. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
On Sep 18, 5:19*pm, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Robert Myers wrote: On Sep 10, 12:31 am, Bill Davidsen wrote: Newegg has some new i7-800 and i5-700 chips, and boards. New socket, screw compatibility. Looks like only four max SIMMs not six like i7-900 series, and no L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. Only interesting feature is that one core can run like hell if the others are idle, makes it nice for single threaded loads. Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question. Three memory channels have become two, new motherboards come with four dimm slots instead of six. *Onward and upward. *Core i7 920 systems are still a bargain. I don't know how you measure 'bargain' in your terms, by performance/$ or performance/watt it looks as if the newer chip win. The 920 is a bargain by those measures only when compared to other 900 series chips. From memory the i5 part has 64-bit but not virtualization, that's an issue for many uses, since VM is becoming common. I looked at an i7-920 system and didn't think it was cost effective. When the 35nm parts come out the 920 will drop in price and I will probably build a small system around that, drop in 12GB of ram and move more VMs there. I just built a small 3TB RAID box with eSATA, so I'm ready to go when that happens. If you don't need virtualization and don't care about the loss of a memory channel and dimm slots, sure, an i5 system might save you a hundred dollars. It was my impression that production of the three- channel systems would not be continued in the long run. Robert Myers. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
The 32nm Clarksfield coming out at the end of the year are only dualies
which won't move the 920's prices. Its replacement is the 6core Gulftown which likely won't be near $300 at launch which leaves room the 920 at its current price if the rumors of its death aren't true. If your an overclocker the 920 still has value. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
Robert Myers wrote:
On Sep 18, 5:19 pm, Bill Davidsen wrote: Robert Myers wrote: On Sep 10, 12:31 am, Bill Davidsen wrote: Newegg has some new i7-800 and i5-700 chips, and boards. New socket, screw compatibility. Looks like only four max SIMMs not six like i7-900 series, and no L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. Only interesting feature is that one core can run like hell if the others are idle, makes it nice for single threaded loads. Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question. Three memory channels have become two, new motherboards come with four dimm slots instead of six. Onward and upward. Core i7 920 systems are still a bargain. I don't know how you measure 'bargain' in your terms, by performance/$ or performance/watt it looks as if the newer chip win. The 920 is a bargain by those measures only when compared to other 900 series chips. From memory the i5 part has 64-bit but not virtualization, that's an issue for many uses, since VM is becoming common. I looked at an i7-920 system and didn't think it was cost effective. When the 35nm parts come out the 920 will drop in price and I will probably build a small system around that, drop in 12GB of ram and move more VMs there. I just built a small 3TB RAID box with eSATA, so I'm ready to go when that happens. If you don't need virtualization and don't care about the loss of a memory channel and dimm slots, sure, an i5 system might save you a hundred dollars. It was my impression that production of the three- channel systems would not be continued in the long run. I'm sure there are a lot of people in that position, and frankly I bet 90% of them don't benefit from 64 bit capability either. The average person hears that and thinks it will be twice as fast, when the truth is it will use slightly more memory for the same small program, and that's about it. People running the address space intensive applications will get some benefit, but otherwise not so much. An application using less than 2GB memory is unlikely to run any better as 64 bit than 32 bit. I doubt that more than 10% of all desktop users would benefit at all from 64 bit, although that doesn't stop them from demanding it. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
On Sep 21, 4:01*pm, Bill Davidsen wrote:
If you don't need virtualization and don't care about the loss of a memory channel and dimm slots, sure, an i5 system might save you a hundred dollars. *It was my impression that production of the three- channel systems would not be continued in the long run. I'm sure there are a lot of people in that position, and frankly I bet 90% of them don't benefit from 64 bit capability either. The average person hears that and thinks it will be twice as fast, when the truth is it will use slightly more memory for the same small program, and that's about it. People running the address space intensive applications will get some benefit, but otherwise not so much. An application using less than 2GB memory is unlikely to run any better as 64 bit than 32 bit. I doubt that more than 10% of all desktop users would benefit at all from 64 bit, although that doesn't stop them from demanding it. To be honest, I have no idea what Intel was thinking when it put all that bandwidth out there, but I like it, even if it's useless to everyone else. I mean, what are we going to do with all that power has been the running joke since forever on some forums. *No one* seems to be making 4gb non-ecc ddr3 dimms at a reasonable price. Maybe the 4 (as opposed to 6) memory slot boards will change that. Robert. Robert. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
Robert Myers wrote:
If you don't need virtualization and don't care about the loss of a memory channel and dimm slots, sure, an i5 system might save you a hundred dollars. It was my impression that production of the three- channel systems would not be continued in the long run. i7 920 is already being phased out, although as far as I know the higher-end 9xx models are all on the roadmap for a while longer. AFAIK, the 8-core chips will be socket 1366 and triple-channel memory, and the additional bandwidth may well be a bigger deal for those. I'm not sure if a desktop 8-core is in the short term cards though (at least as an Extreme Edition) or if it will only be sold as Xeons to begin with. -- Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/ preferred email | is "nate" at the | "I do have a cause, though. It's obscenity. I'm posting domain | for it." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
New Intel chips out
Bill Davidsen wrote:
L2 cache size shown in specs, just L3 and some market babble about advanced voodoo memory and power allocation. ... Intel has a two part manual out, in which I found nada on the L2 question. L2 on the i7 9xx is 256kb per core. i7 8xx and i5 750 are also the same. -- Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/ preferred email | is "nate" at the | "I do have a cause, though. It's obscenity. I'm posting domain | for it." |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple Abandons IBM, Will Use Intel Chips | Sparky Spartacus | Dell Computers | 2 | June 9th 05 07:19 PM |
What's new in notebook chips from Intel and AMD? | Yousuf Khan | General | 2 | December 30th 04 10:44 PM |
What's new in notebook chips from Intel and AMD? | Yousuf Khan | Intel | 2 | December 30th 04 10:44 PM |
new Dothan chips introduced by Intel | Yousuf Khan | General | 0 | November 27th 04 09:00 PM |
new Dothan chips introduced by Intel | Yousuf Khan | Intel | 0 | November 27th 04 09:00 PM |