Print 39 comment(s) - last by Hydrofirex.. on May 2 at 7:00 PM

Intel's quad-core receives a 1333 MHz front-side bus upgrade

Intel plans to refresh its Conroe-based dual-core processors in Q3’2007. The planned Conroe refresh includes a faster 1333 MHz front-side bus for the dual-core processor. Intel’s latest roadmap unveils details of a front-side bus increase for its quad-core processors.

The quad-core 1333 MHz front-side-bus upgrade is initially limited to Intel’s Core 2 Extreme. Intel expects to debut its Core 2 Extreme QX6850 next quarter to the tune of 3.0 GHz, similar to the upcoming Core 2 Duo E6850. The Kentsfield 65nm core forms the basis of Intel’s Core 2 Extreme QX6850, as with its other quad-core products.

Aside from the front-side bus speed bump, the Core 2 Extreme QX6850 shares similar characteristics as the previously released QX6800. The new quad-core processor will have 8MB of L2 cache and support for Intel’s Virtualization, Enhanced Memory 64, XD bit technologies.

Expect the Core 2 Extreme QX6850 to arrive next quarter with pricing set at $999 per-unit, in 1,000-unit quantities. Intel also plans aggressive quad-core and dual-core price cuts in Q3’2007.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Dude, I don't care who you ask..
By zsouthboy on 4/17/2007 2:38:56 PM , Rating: 3
This is a (technical term) shitload of processing power for $1k.

By tungtung on 4/17/2007 2:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yupe ... not to mention you got the bragging right of having the fastest (non overclocked) chip available ... $1k for some people is nothing ... even though their computer ended up just used for word processing and (porn) surfing ... :P

As for those who think the price is just excessive, again you must consider how much these companies are putting in R&D (already mentioned by some poster) and charging these exhorbitant prices is one of the way they can try to recoup the loss as quick as possible and help their cash flow to fund the next round of R&D.

Segmenting the market
By 3kliksphilip on 4/18/2007 6:26:48 PM , Rating: 2
Recently I have found that prices for high-end products are getting higher and higher. For instance, Custom PC claimed that high-end graphics cards used to be around £200, caps. Recently that has risen to about £500. CPUs are taking the same route. Although this means that every consumer has a product, which will suit them, I can't help but think that 'Ultra high-end' will simply become 'high-end', with people needing to spend excess of £300 for decent components.
My geforce 8800 gts cost £240 and even that can't run current games at highest everything. Armed Assault, 3dmark 2006... these can slow it down to as little as 10-20 fps.

I don't know what I'm trying to say here, but I had to let it be known that prices for high end products are getting higher and higher, which could make what would have been high end prices a couple of years ago only deliver mid range performance. In my opinion, unless you have £200 to spend on a graphics card or processor, you're better off simply getting a £100 model and overclocking it, as high end components have begun rising in price. For instance, when released, the ATI radeon X800 Pro cost £228 and the X800 XT cost £285 (Bear in mind these are from a computer magazine, prices online would have been cheaper). These prices seem reserved compared to the latest Geforce 8800 GTX models.

999 price is getting old
By GlassHouse69 on 4/17/07, Rating: -1
RE: 999 price is getting old
By Draco on 4/17/2007 1:21:39 PM , Rating: 2
How can you sue two companies for monopolizing the same field?


I agree though, $1k for the flagship chip is steep, but hey if people pay it. More power to them. That is capitalism.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By rcpmac on 4/17/2007 5:16:28 PM , Rating: 2
How does this chip differ from the chip in the 8-core Mac Pro that runs two Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Clovertown” processors which has been available for awhile now?

8-core processing
Two 3.0GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5300 series processors
Intel Core microarchitecture
8MB of L2 cache per processor (16MB total; each pair of cores shares 4MB)
64-bit data paths and registers
1.33GHz, 64-bit dual independent frontside buses

runs windows and/or mac osx natively

Less than $4000 about $3500 edu.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By coldpower27 on 4/17/2007 6:28:13 PM , Rating: 2
Clovertown's are certified for Dual Socket opteration while Kentsfield's aren't.

Intel's Skulltrail platform will bring Dual Socket with Lots of PCI-E lanes to the desktop enthusiast to compete directly with AMD's Quad FX.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By FITCamaro on 4/17/2007 7:32:58 PM , Rating: 4
They rip you off less than Apple.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By sxr7171 on 4/18/2007 12:01:01 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah but still a better deal than those Voodoo PCs.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Shintai on 4/17/2007 1:22:17 PM , Rating: 3
K10 FX chip would just be 1000$ too....

RE: 999 price is getting old
By AnnihilatorX on 4/17/2007 1:23:37 PM , Rating: 2
The reason for rediculously high price is that if they aren't, those low quantity chips would be sold out in no time creating shortages, and affect lower end part sales figures.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By IcY18 on 4/17/2007 1:26:11 PM , Rating: 5
Wow, What you said is quite opposite of the truth. If anything it was AMD that was price gouging with their processors. Because they held the performance crown all there performance processors were $500 or above with of course there FX-line topping out at $1200. Both Intel and AMD bring out their most expensive chips at the price they think the market will accept.
If anything it was Intel that, when they brought in their new line of Core 2 Duos, drastically reduced the avg price for a good performance chip. With many of them under $500 for a quality part. With no chips in the 700-800 , Intel gave you good performance at a low price, and the ultimate performance at a high price, range it would have been stupid to ever consider buying a X6800 at $999 unless you were the ultimate enthusiast with the cash to do it in which that price doesn't effect you at all.

Now AMD is just cutting prices cause that is the only way they can compete, and no AMD is still not making profit from these price cuts. Just check out there quarterly profits. So in the end we can thank Intel for bringing AMD to their senses, and now we can all enjoy the lower avg prices and higher performance chips that are available.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By JamRockaz on 4/17/2007 2:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
Here here

RE: 999 price is getting old
By smilingcrow on 4/17/2007 6:54:20 PM , Rating: 3
'999 price is getting old'.

With inflation I would hope that these prices would go up; $999 is so 20th century.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By darkavatar on 4/18/2007 12:53:17 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, considering inflation $999 is really a bargain XD

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Hydrofirex on 4/17/07, Rating: -1
RE: 999 price is getting old
By GlassHouse69 on 4/17/2007 9:42:07 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, price cutting so deep they dont make a profit!



they are still making a profit. They just raped you prior to this with insane profit.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Hydrofirex on 5/2/2007 7:00:31 PM , Rating: 2
Then duh, don't buy it! As a wise man once stated. Something is worth ONLY what someone else will pay for it.


RE: 999 price is getting old
By redbone75 on 4/18/2007 3:41:01 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly. How long did it take for the now lowly X2 3800+ to drop from $300? Even when Intel had dual-core processors available for much less, AMD was comfortable in the fact they had the performance crown so they could charge much more. Now, in the post-Core 2 age, AMD's processors are far more accessible. I'm hoping AMD's next chips will put a little squeeze on Intel so we can get cheaper Core 2s. Ain't competition grand!

RE: 999 price is getting old
By deeznuts on 4/17/2007 1:27:12 PM , Rating: 5
No offense, but are you young? Really young? You have unrealistic ideals and expectations about how businesses operate.

AMD is getting slaughtered btw, by the huge cuts in its AM2 line. AMD wants nothing more then to charge more. I mean, you don't even have to be in the finance field to know they are lowering guidances, earning expectations, etc. Here is the latest one:

You do realize companies have to pay for R&D, in addition to manufacturing right? Right? So if something costs $30 in materials to make, you don't sell it for $40.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By afkrotch on 4/18/2007 9:47:49 PM , Rating: 2
AMD is also ATI, so that has to also be factored into the equation also.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By FreakyD on 4/17/2007 1:28:14 PM , Rating: 4
By the way you talk, you didn't pay $999 for a processor, so don't complain. It's all simple economics, when there's a new part, there's low supply, high demand, the price is high. The healthy competition between AMD and Intel has made dual core processors under $100, I'd say that's a bargain for most individuals that don't need a quad core extreme.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By derwin on 4/17/07, Rating: 0
RE: 999 price is getting old
By Xietsu on 4/17/2007 1:43:14 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, no. It's "we can establish a premium for top-of-the-line because our economy is capitalist and we are satisfied with the amount of market activity such a pricepoint is able to engender". Pretty simple, comments like these are just about one hundred percent pointless. lOl ;D

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Xietsu on 4/17/2007 1:46:21 PM , Rating: 2
BTW, lmao, I did think it was pretty damn funny how fast everyone was able to jump on this novice poster. At least at DailyTech you get set straight fast (no inferred comparison). =]

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Verran on 4/17/2007 1:58:07 PM , Rating: 3
How DARE they try to make a profit? That's just total BS! Clearly they know nothing about business!

What do they think this is? A capitalist economy or something?

What are they trying to do? Earn a living? Feed families? Make a profit?


RE: 999 price is getting old
By awer26 on 4/17/2007 1:58:59 PM , Rating: 2
You forget that included in the price of the newest chips are a large percentage of R&D costs. Even though the chip may cost a few dollars to build, there have been millions of dollars of research spent to make that first chip.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Goty on 4/17/2007 2:41:18 PM , Rating: 2
$999 processors are not made to be sold in large numbers, they're made to say, "Look, I have a bigger e-penis than you do!" It's all about marketing.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By rippleyaliens on 4/17/07, Rating: 0
RE: 999 price is getting old
By FITCamaro on 4/17/2007 7:38:24 PM , Rating: 2
Feel free to send me some hard drives.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Dactyl on 4/17/2007 8:06:15 PM , Rating: 2
There are professionals (engineers, graphics people, etc.) for whom the difference between a $1000 CPU and a $500 CPU is more than $500 in productivity/year.

So it makes perfect sense for some people to have those CPUs.

It's not all about being the baddest gamer.

Of course, that's what I think this is all about. The little kid who whine about high prices was really whining that it's not fair he only has a 7600GT and 20" LCD while some other gamers have 2x8800GT and 30". That's life, kid. I heard there are villages in Africa where kids don't even have 6150 graphics.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Goty on 4/17/2007 10:48:22 PM , Rating: 2
Right, I agree with that, but those engineers and graphic designers aren't a respectable segment of the market. All the money is made in the mainstream segment, where Joe Consumer says, "Oh, I hear Intel has the fastest desktop processor in the world. This Core2Duo must be faster than (insert random CPU name here)."

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Polynikes on 4/17/2007 3:55:39 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't AMD's FX60 debut at $999 or more?

RE: 999 price is getting old
By coldpower27 on 4/17/2007 6:25:33 PM , Rating: 2
AMD Athlon 64x2 4800+ Debuted at $1001 I believe, and yes the Athlon FX-60 was $1031 at launch.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Russell on 4/17/2007 4:25:12 PM , Rating: 2
Monopoly isn't the word you're looking for. Cartel sounds better :)

RE: 999 price is getting old
By kamel5547 on 4/17/2007 4:31:09 PM , Rating: 5
Personally I have no issue with $1000 chips, I'm not going to buy one, but if someone is let them pay for the R&D these companies do.

BTW have you looked at AMD's bottom line lately... I wouldn't say they are making enormous amounts of money. Enormous reductions in capital expeditures (and thus future chip technology) yes, but their profit is probably very close to 0 or below 0 this quarter (just guessing).

That being said, you can sue the video card companies, hard drive makers, etc. for the same reason. There is no anti-trust when the fab to make these chips costs billions. The investment has to be re-couped in about 18 months before the next re-tooling begins and another billion ahs to be spent.

RE: 999 price is getting old
By Hydrofirex on 4/17/2007 6:34:55 PM , Rating: 2
It might be like 20 dollars for all anyone actually knows.

Yeah, years of R&D, low initial yields of product, and massively expensive white room space all run for about the equivalent of $20 US per chip....

To say nothing of how ignorant you sound on just manufacturing process alone, let's not forget our handy friends ECONOMICS. If you think a Super Man #1 is worth however many 10's of thousands it's worth becuase it took that much money to make it then I apologize in advance for calling you out.


RE: 999 price is getting old
By GlassHouse69 on 4/17/07, Rating: 0
RE: 999 price is getting old
By Kizor on 4/18/2007 4:15:08 AM , Rating: 1
You know what? You sound like a complete and utter moron that I am not going to even list the things that you got wrong.

Also, the fact that you just loooooooooooooooooooove to rape people is a little... disturbing.

Anyway. Like someone said before, the cost of 999 is the price in which Intel thinks it will sell the chips. Which it obviously does.

"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki