backtop

Hardware Intel's "Lynnfield" Core i5/Core i7 Launch
Brandon Hill (Blog) - September 8, 2009 7:42 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 33 comment(s) - last by Major HooHaa.. on Sep 27 at 11:07 AM
Info and pricing on Intel's latest CPU launch

Today, Intel announced the new Lynnfield Core i5 750, Core i7 860, and the Core i7 870 which are running at 2.66GHz, 2.8GHz, and 2.93GHz respectively. Intel also lists prices at $196, $284, and $562 respectively.

Lynnfield processors are built using a 45nm manufacturing process, have a 296 mm2 die size (774 million transistors), and use the LGA-1156 socket. All three of the new processors have a TDP of 95W. Both the Core i7 860 and Core i7 870 make use of Hyper Threading which allows them to processor 8 threads -- the Core i5 750 comes with Hyper Threading disabled.

Here's what some of the reviewers from around the web are saying about the we Lynnfield processors:

I'll start this conclusion with what AMD must do in response to Lynnfield. The Core i5 750 is a great processor at $196, in fact, it's the best quad-core CPU you can buy at that price today. In nearly every case it's faster than AMD's Phenom II X4 965 BE, despite the AMD processor costing almost another $50. Granted you can probably save some money on an integrated 785G motherboard, but if you're comparing ~$120 motherboards the AMD CPU is simply overpriced. -- AnandTech

Ultimately, Intel's has done what they set out to do with Lynnfield--bring Nehalem's features and benefits down into more mainstream price points. The new Core i5 and Core i7 800 series processors are excellent additions to Intel's already stellar CPU line-up and the P55 Express chipset is shaping up to be the darling of motherboard manufacturers and potentially the overclocking community at large. -- Hot Hardware

Intel's new Lynnfield Core i7 and Core i5 processors weren't intended to win overall performance crowns, but they came closer than many expected them to in our testing.  Lynnfield indeed brings the features and performance of the Nehalem architecture to a new price point and market and in doing so will likely spark a wave of PC enthusiast upgrades this fall and winter. -- PC Perspective

Intel's Lynnfield processors are sure to be a hot item to grab in the coming weeks, so those looking to shop for a new Core i5 or Core i7 processor can head over to the usual suspects for your hardware kicks:


Intel Core i5 750
Newegg
Amazon
Tiger Direct

Intel Core i7 860
Newegg
Amazon
Tiger Direct

Intel Core i7 870
Newegg
Amazon
Tiger Direct

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
i7 860
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2009 8:45:14 AM , Rating: 2
Looks like this will probably be my next CPU. Assuming AMD doesn't counter it with something faster/as fast and cheaper.




RE: i7 860
By Lord 666 on 9/8/2009 9:15:26 AM , Rating: 5
Bah, I'm waiting for the 32nm refresh.


RE: i7 860
By therealnickdanger on 9/8/2009 10:22:21 AM , Rating: 5
Pfft, it's all about the 16nm refresh with on-die GTX485 SLI and dual-zone climate control.


RE: i7 860
By tviceman on 9/8/09, Rating: -1
RE: i7 860
By Spuke on 9/8/2009 3:02:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Bah, I'm waiting for the 32nm refresh.
Same here.


RE: i7 860
By defter on 9/8/2009 4:17:43 PM , Rating: 2
Sandy bridge is Intel's first quad core 32nm CPU, and it will be released only in late 2010/early 2011. There will not be a 32nm shrink of quad core Nehalem.


RE: i7 860
RE: i7 860
By defter on 9/9/2009 4:33:06 AM , Rating: 2
As you can see your from link, there will not be a 32nm shrink of quad-core Nehalem.


RE: i7 860
By Dark Legion on 9/8/2009 11:54:35 PM , Rating: 4
tick-tock.


RE: i7 860
By tastyratz on 9/8/2009 10:31:41 AM , Rating: 1
why bother?
Street price right now puts a core i5+ mobo at about 50 bux less than an i7 920 + mobo... and who in their right mind would go i5 to shave only 50 bux?
Right now its just going to serve the entry level market for them... but as a custom builder I really need to see those prices driven down before its a consideration IMHO


RE: i7 860
By Parhel on 9/8/2009 11:32:50 AM , Rating: 3
That was my takeaway as well. The AnandTech article made these CPUs sound like the second coming, but to me the i7-920 is still the better deal. Especially when you consider that you'll be able to drop in a 32nm 6-core CPU next year, for which the i5 mobos will lack the necessary memory bandwidth.


RE: i7 860
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2009 4:01:45 PM , Rating: 1
I seriously doubt anything will take advantage of a 6 core CPU, much less a 4 core CPU, in the next few years. At least games. And I don't do AutoCAD or anything else that intensive thats multithreaded on my home PC.


RE: i7 860
By UNHchabo on 9/8/2009 5:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
Most media encoding can take advantage of as many cores as there are present; video encoding is very parallelizable, and audio encoding is almost always done more than one song at a time, even if most encoders aren't multi-threaded. You might encode an entire album at once, for instance.

If I might throw in a shameless plug: I wrote an encoding front-end called FlacSquisher that takes a folder of Flacs and encodes them to MP3 or Ogg format; I listen to the Flacs on my computer, and Oggs on my Rockbox'd Sansa. The way I set it up, it creates one thread per logical core, so on those 6-core CPUs, it will create 12 threads. :)

http://sourceforge.net/projects/flacsquisher


RE: i7 860
By plonk420 on 9/8/2009 7:56:17 PM , Rating: 2
i can. just google my nick :P

as for the USEFULNESS (other than video compression), that is to be seen...


RE: i7 860
By monomer on 9/8/2009 4:33:07 PM , Rating: 3
50 Bucks seems a little wishful to me. Here's my in-depth, exhaustive pricing analysis, using a whopping one source:

Right now, from Newegg, you can get an Asus mobo and an i5-750 for $345 (134.99 + 209.99).

The cheapest i7-920 + mobo combination is $440 (159.99 + 279.99), or add $10 if you want to go with an MSI or Foxconn mobo instead of Jetway.

So, the difference at Newegg is at least $95, which makes the i5 a little more appealing considering you're genrally looking at something like 90-95% of the performance.

If you want to use triple-channel memory with the i7 you're looking at another ~$30, and adding very little real world performance for most aplications.

That said, I agree with the Parhel's post, as having triple channel memory may be of use if you can get a Sexa-core drop-in replacement for LGA-1366.


RE: i7 860
By Max G on 9/9/2009 1:28:19 AM , Rating: 2
It's "Hexa-core" dude.

Or simply "Hex-core"... (try not to change H into S as you like)


RE: i7 860
By jonmcc33 on 9/9/2009 10:50:45 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, it's less price for nearly similar performance (most people won't tell a major difference) as well as significantly lower power draw at idle. The Turbo Mode is also better on the newer LGA-1156 processors, giving more performance on processes that use less threads (between 1-2) than their LGA-1366 brothers.


RE: i7 860
By Major HooHaa on 9/27/2009 11:07:41 AM , Rating: 2
For me the i7 860 look pretty good, consumes less power than the Bloomfield Nehalem's while offering performance that's almost as good at stock (non-overclocked) speeds.

But I want to ask if we will see any (40nm?) 3GB sticks of DDR3 RAM on sale for this system. Allowing the Dual Channel Memory system to be loaded with a total of 6GB's of RAM. Thereby making it slightly more future proof.


By Amiga500 on 9/8/2009 11:30:16 AM , Rating: 5
And there is nothing coming until 2011 (bulldozer).

It doesn't take Nostradamus to forecast many more quarters of red results for team green!

Right now, its looking like bulldozer is more important for AMD than K7, K8 and K10 put together!




By tviceman on 9/8/2009 1:53:19 PM , Rating: 2
And, unfortunately, it's just as important for us. AMD failing means Intel won't have to compete to maintain technological superiority and for prices.


By Grabo on 9/8/2009 3:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
Yah, and I found this a bit funny in the anandtech article:
" There's no technical reason that Intel couldn't have enabled Hyper Threading on the Core i5, it's purely a competitive move. A Core i5 750 with HT would not only defeat the purpose of most of the i7s, but it would also widen the performance gap with AMD. Intel doesn't need to maintain a huge performance advantage, just one that's good enough. "

Eh? The performance advantage is huge according to your article. The only reason then for not enabling HT on the i5 is that it would have hurt i7 sales. Is this the Deathstar flexing its wings?
[H] of course thinks so. "As for the Phenom II, AMD might as well nickname the Core i5-750, the "Coffin Nailer.""


By monomer on 9/8/2009 4:42:10 PM , Rating: 2
On the bright side, Evergreen is looking to be a really strong competitor. The GPU battle this Q4 is shaping up to be really interesting, though again Intel is going to really put on the squeeze on the low end graphics when Clarkdale is released.


By phatboye on 9/8/2009 5:20:00 PM , Rating: 2
Fortunately AMD thier ATI division is doing pretty well, plus AMD received a large amount of funds from ATIC, both of which should (hopefully) keep AMD afloat until bulldozer cores arrive.


By TomZ on 9/8/2009 5:41:47 PM , Rating: 3
Well, graphics only accounts for about 20% of AMD's total revenue, so I wouldn't count on ATI to save the day.


HT over VT-d once again
By dgz on 9/8/2009 1:02:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Both the Core i7 860 and Core i7 870 make use of Hyper Threading which allows them to processor 8 threads -- the Core i5 750 comes with Hyper Threading disabled.

Dunno why authors make such a big deal of HT while VT-d is the real winner here. Funny how both features - with VT-d being the most important even for desktop user - are artificially disabled in 750. Also, what's the big difference between 860 and 870? I can't seem to find any which would somehow justify twice the price of the latter.




By Captain Orgazmo on 9/8/2009 2:10:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, what's the big difference between 860 and 870? I can't seem to find any which would somehow justify twice the price of the latter.


Clearly some bean counter at Intel, using a formula complex enough to kill a common calculator, has decided, in his infinite wisdom, that there are just enough suckers to justify the separate product line and packaging.


RE: HT over VT-d once again
By defter on 9/8/2009 2:14:35 PM , Rating: 2
Core i5 750 supports virtualization (VT). Even Intel's low-end cpus will support virtualization in the near future.


RE: HT over VT-d once again
By dgz on 9/9/2009 4:32:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Core i5 750 supports virtualization (VT).

I said VT-d (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT-d), not just virtualization.

It allows a virtual OS to access one or more GPUs, for example. Meaning you can actually play modern games on a virtual machine with little performance loss. OnLive does this.

Every desktop AMD CPU, except a few but not all Semprons, supports Virtualization since 2006.


RE: HT over VT-d once again
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 9:55:14 AM , Rating: 2
I looked at the data sheets for the Core i5, and it looked to me like VT-d is supported. Where did you find information that it is not?


RE: HT over VT-d once again
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2009 4:03:32 PM , Rating: 2
Intel always charges a premium for its highest frequency CPUs.


i5 vs. PhII x4 955/965
By Lunyone on 9/8/2009 11:33:38 PM , Rating: 2
Is it me or does it look like 95% of the reviews seem to make the i5 750 look like it's sooo much better than the PhII x4 955/965?? I've looked at about 8-10 reviews on the i5 and it looks like in 90-95% of the graphs that I looked at, shows that the i5 is on par with the 955/965. Yes if the 955/965 drops under $200 than the AMD camp will basically be at the same price point of an i5 setup. There are more mobo options at this time with the AMD setup, but everything else will be about the same expense. Most of the reviews I've read seem to always show the OC'ing numbers on the i5 and no OC'ing numbers on the 955/965 to compare to. This seems like a blatant schewing of the results, in favor of the new Intel chip. Yes the i5 generally is going to perform well, but we need to compare apples to apples here. Anyone feel this way too??




RE: i5 vs. PhII x4 955/965
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 9:59:33 AM , Rating: 2
No, it doesn't seem that way to me. It seems like Core i5 tromps on the AMD part from a performance perspective, and it also at the same time costs less and consumes far less power. Plus turbo mode.

AMD will have to drop their price to $169 or $179 to continue to sell it, if you ask me ($200 will not do). Can they even afford to do that?


Reviews for i5 750 and i7 870
By maroon1 on 9/9/2009 6:15:43 AM , Rating: 2
Here are some reviews for i5 750

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-8...
http://techreport.com/articles.x/17545/14
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1060/1/

I wonder how AMD will respond to this, becuase i5 750 is not only cheaper than Phenom II 965 but it is also faster and consume way less power.




"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki