backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 33 comment(s) - last by maroon1.. on Apr 10 at 6:17 AM
Intel's quad-core receives a clock speed upgrade to 2.93 GHz

Intel today bumped the clock speeds of its quad-core Core 2 Extreme processors with the addition of the QX6800. The new Core 2 Extreme QX6800 clocks in at 2.93 GHz, matching last summer’s dual-core flagship X6800. Intel’s new Core 2 Extreme QX6800 features 8MB of total L2 cache and an unlocked upper multiplier for overclocking goodness.

As with the previous Core 2 Extreme QX6700 and Core 2 Quad Q6600, the new QX6800 shares the 65nm Kentsfieldcore. Intel expects to introduce 45nm Penryn-based processors in the second half of 2007. The new Core 2 Extreme QX6800 is Intel’s fourth consumer quad-core processor, whereas AMD isn’t set to introduce its upcoming Barcelona quad-core architecture until later this year.

Users wanting 2.93 GHz of smooth quad-core power will have to cough up a pretty penny. Intel prices the Core 2 Extreme QX6800 at $1199, however, aggressive Q3’07 price cuts will drop the QX6800 down to $999.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Quad Core Extreme
By Setsunayaki on 4/9/2007 5:27:45 AM , Rating: 1
Hi all!~ ^_^

I get scared at anything that says the word Extreme...Remember Intel's EXTREME EDITION Chipset graphics?

I read a few reviews on the actual performance of the quad core. Im a gamer myself and a software engineering student. I love the fact that the quad cores are being released to help with system loads under heavy programs, but have the problem that there are no real optimization out there in programs to use Quad Core.

We are still in the age of Dual Core processor programs being created. Quad Core processors mean that for more programs to take advantage of multiple cores, there will be a heavier emphasiz on multithreading. Individual programs will require an extra step on the part of the OS to find an Idle core to push the program into it. The performance hit would be minimal, but in practical uses the core itself is overkill, unless your mission specifics entail many over the top assignments in the area of Development and Server Input/Output operations.

If you download Intel's Dual Core Technical Manuals, the first thing you read on the revisions page is "Fixed L1 cache size problem" so as always...I love the idea of a new processor, specially one with four cores....just like the others that exist out there, but hate the fact that in order for the processor to be really really useful...You will have to wait 2 - 3 years for "quad core" specific applications.




RE: Quad Core Extreme
By cheetah2k on 4/9/2007 5:51:27 AM , Rating: 1
Agreed, but those who like to 3dmark06 the life out of their systems with huge ego boosting scores will love this CPU.

It's also interesting to see Intel leaving the QX series multiplier unlocked, just like the AMD FX series. At least Intel has a lot more overclocking headroom. i could only get ~300 to 400 Mhz out of an FX-60


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By loah on 4/9/2007 6:41:13 AM , Rating: 1
i think talking about multi cores not being for gaming is old news. everyone understands that games are not very well threaded but will be in a year. but what this chip does have is a higher clock speed to match even the fastest dual processor out there with a few hundred more you will now get twice the cores. what might probably happen is that people will starve this chip with too little memory since most suggest at least a gig per core.

what this chip will most likely be used for is for people in the graphic industry since adobe cs3 will probably be better threaded and all 3d rendering programs will love the extra cores.

most people will buy within their means and needs, if you have to complain about how you or most people you think wont need it and or cant use it because of what is optimized for the chip then its obvious you dont need it. who would buy this to game. if they did, they would buy it regardless of anything anyone says.

personally i welcome new chips. it just means that everything is moving along, prices will get cheaper, and competition will get heavier.


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By Sithtiger on 4/9/2007 8:39:48 AM , Rating: 2
I'm buying it to game, but that's not the only reason. Like others said, I like to multi-task. So I can back up a movie while doing a scan and surfing the web. There aren't that many games out there that support multi-core, not to mention even dual-core but it's always been that way with tech. Anyway remember when the GeForce 256 introduced T&L? It wasn't supported at first but now T&L is old OLD news and everyone has it but it took a while for games to start supporting it. That's just the way things are.

You buy technology for the now but it's nice to be prepared for the future. I usually upgrade bi-yearly but if I didn't I know that if I bought a QX6800, heck even a Q6600, I'd be good for 4 years with that same CPU easy! You can't really say that now days with a single-core processor!


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By SquidianLoveGod on 4/9/2007 10:38:33 AM , Rating: 2
Part of that could be blamed on the fact most people had Voodoo 2/3's or TNT/TNT2's and the Voodoo 4 and Voodoo 5 which were competitors of the Geforce 256/2 Didnt have TnL.
Same thing happened with Pixel shading, the Geforce 4 MX440 IMHO slowed down the acceptance of pixel shaders, as it was a popular part back in its day, and lacked Pixel shading. The Radeon 9200 probably slowed down the use of Pixel shaders 2 as it only supported a max of 1.4.

Eh, I think the move from Dual Core; coding wise is just going to be as hard on developers as going from 1 core to 2 cores, as it is going from 2 to 4 cores. But maybe they will learn some tricks which might allow them to make the move to more cores easier.

I still have a Dual Pentium 3 Tualatin 1.4 gigger, 1024Mb of SD ram, and a Radeon 9800SE Soft modded to a 9800Pro and it runs Oblivion, I don't even know of Oblivion is multi-threaded?


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By Lazarus Dark on 4/9/2007 7:53:19 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
hate the fact that in order for the processor to be really really useful...You will have to wait 2 - 3 years for "quad core" specific applications.


I'm tired of hearing this BS. It's the chicken and egg, people.
Why would anyone have worried two years ago about making anything multithreaded? Two years ago the only dual processor systems where high end servers and graphics workstations. So there was no point in optimizing any regular programs or games for multithreading. It would have been a waste of time. But now we do have multicores, moving into quad and octo and more in a couple years. So most software companies are now working on multithreading their apps, it will just take a little while for it all to come out. We needed multicore processors first. Multithreading would have been a waste otherwise.

As a side note, no one ever seems to understand the benefit of multitasking on quad cores and beyond. While gaming on a QX6800 with all the eye candy, you can be downloading a couple torrents, performing a virus scan, and maybe even encoding a ripped vob file to h.264 or recording a high def show using your digital tuner card; all while never dropping below 60 fps in the latest shooter (provided you've got an 8800 gtx to go with that extreme processor). I don't know about you, but the rest of my computing needs don't stop just because I want to play a game for an hour.


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By masher2 (blog) on 4/9/2007 8:40:23 AM , Rating: 2
Agree all, but I'd like to add there are quite a few programs that will effectively use 4 (or more) cores. I've been using a four-cpu machine (not 4-core) for 7-8 years now. Much of the software in the scientific or financial analysis realm, simulation, CAD, graphical rendering or modeling, even some transcoding apps...and some of these packages have been able to use multiple processors for a decade or more.


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By Spartan Niner on 4/9/2007 11:28:39 AM , Rating: 2
Multi-threaded applications ARE being adopted, though perhaps at a slow pace on the consumer end. For scientific research and commercial/rendering/crunching apps multi-threading has been around for a while. Folding@Home has an SMP beta client that I'm running on my dual-core rig right now, and it has four threads. It would be perfect for a quad-core/quad-proc system to crunch F@H data on. Also, Valve is supposedly releasing a multi-threaded version of the Source engine this fall, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some other game devs follow suit. Supreme Commander for one already benefits from multiple cores. The point I'm trying to make is that quad-core apps aren't 2-3 years away... they're already here and devs just need to be given incentive to write or re-write multi-threaded apps.


RE: Quad Core Extreme
By Hexxx on 4/9/2007 10:49:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You will have to wait 2 - 3 years for "quad core" specific applications.


Supreme Commander already takes advantage of quad core systems with a significant difference between quad and dual core setups. Many games being released over the next 6-12 months are reported to be efficiently multi-threaded enough to show tangible performance increases, I think your time scale is slightly off there.


QX6700?
By RobbieMc on 4/9/2007 6:48:35 AM , Rating: 2
So how does this differ from a QX6700 with a multiplier of x11?




RE: QX6700?
By Anosh on 4/9/2007 7:10:40 AM , Rating: 2
For those who do not overclock see this as yet another CPU.

Also perhaps this has another stepping and thus issues that might appear with x11 on QX6700 are resolved.

In short, there is probably no real difference.


RE: QX6700?
By sdsdv10 on 4/9/2007 7:48:26 AM , Rating: 1
It has a higher clock speed.

QX6700 - 2.66GHz
QX6800 - 2.93GHz


RE: QX6700?
By fk49 on 4/9/2007 8:31:51 AM , Rating: 2
What OP meant was that both the QX6700 and the QX6800 have a 266 mhz FSB and that the only difference in the their speeds is accounted for by the QX6700's stock 10x multiplier adn the QX6800's stock x11 multiplier.

However, Intel's Extreme edition series (QX,X,etc.) come with unlocked multipliers like the Athlon FX series that can be changed freely by the users. Thus, a user with a QX6700 could easily change their stock x10 to an overclocked x11 and get the same speeds. In that sense, there is no real difference to light overclockers.

As another poster mentioned though, the QX6800 is binned higher as having more potential, so those looking for the highest overclocking possible would rather have a QX6800.


RE: QX6700?
By Etern205 on 4/9/2007 2:50:00 PM , Rating: 2
Pigs can finally fly!

They actually got benchmarks! :O
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38...


lol
By medavid16 on 4/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: lol
By Vinnybcfc on 4/9/2007 8:02:24 AM , Rating: 2
Give me a QX6800 and I will clock it to levels the Q6700 cant reach

Your quite ignorant in thinking stupid people buy this, People with LN2 and Phase cooling can get this processor up to silly overclocks. It is designed for people who need excessive speed or records

Would you say the same about the AMD FX series?


RE: lol
By Pitbulll0669 on 4/9/2007 8:50:28 AM , Rating: 2
I have the QX6700 and have it OCd to 3.4 .Its the same chip just faster.BUT everything Ive read say it will be running VERY Hot..SO. Dont run this baby without H2O setup. as Im doing with mine. .Yoy'll cook it in minuts.. AIR DOES NOT WORK HERE!So if you are planing on getting one if you are going to use air,Your a retard!...Other wise the runs like a champ and NOTHING Bogs it EVER!.Pit.


RE: lol
By marvdmartian on 4/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: lol
By Nightmare225 on 4/9/2007 9:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is, Intel is actually delivering the fastest processors ever seen right now. That's more than anyone can say for AMD, no matter how short their processor names are... ;)


PLUS THIS.......
By crystal clear on 4/10/2007 5:22:52 AM , Rating: 2
Useful additions to the article-

Quote-

Intel says that the new CPU is aiming to attract the attention of gamers and digital design professionals who are looking to squeeze more speed out of their computer system. While performance gains out of multimedia and digital design applications may not be too surprising - Intel claims that the QX6800 can encode video 65% faster than the dual-core EX6800 – advantages in the gaming field is something we are still getting used to.

Several new games scheduled for release this year are expected to make use of more than four processing cores. These titles include as Crytek’s Crysis, Gas Powered Games’ Supreme Commander, Flagship’s Hellgate London as well as versions of Valve’s Half-Life 2, which will use quad-core resources to enable physics processing.

According to Intel, the service pack 1 for Microsoft’s Flight Simulator X, due out later this month, will also support the quad-core chip. “Flight Sim X SP1 greatly increases multicore utilization and will scale as more threads are available leading to reduced load times as well as frame rate improvements and greater visual complexity during flight,” a Microsoft representative said in a prepared statement.

Boutique PC builder DigitalStorm was among the first companies to offer a PC system equipped with a QX6800 processor. The firm charges $345 for an upgrade from a QX6700 to a QX6800 processor and offers basic 2.93 GHz quad-core systems from about $3200.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31537/135/




RE: PLUS THIS.......
By crystal clear on 4/10/2007 5:40:06 AM , Rating: 2
"Intel Delivers Its Fastest Enthusiast Quad-Core Processor
Added Performance Welcomed by 'Hardcore' PC Users and Developers"

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20...


By maroon1 on 4/10/2007 6:17:05 AM , Rating: 2
If the QX6700 runs default at a 10x multiplier, wouldn't the QX6800 just run at an 11x multi? And if thats the case, why would anyone buy that when they could just get the QX6700 and raise the multiplier up one?




AMD launches "PRICE CUTS" instead of CPUs
By crystal clear on 4/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: AMD launches "PRICE CUTS" instead of CPUs
By Zirconium on 4/9/2007 7:21:27 AM , Rating: 5
What the hell??? This is typed like those pump-and-dump scam emails I get.


By crystal clear on 4/10/2007 2:37:12 AM , Rating: 1
You are PARANOID-you have "A SCAM EMAILS fixation",to such a extent that your comment it self now appears like a SCAM.

My comment-I mean the"CONTENTS" of it,are"NOW" A NEW ARTICLE
POSTED BY DAILY TECH.

AMD Cuts Prices on High-end Processors
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6848

Your "pump-and-dump scam COMMENTS" are worth their place
in the garbage can.


RE: AMD launches "PRICE CUTS" instead of CPUs
By Fenixgoon on 4/9/2007 7:25:07 AM , Rating: 2
so AMD pricecuts.. big deal, intel is releasing the E2XXX series which can easily compete on the low end and OC to much higher speeds. IMO, AMD REALLY needs to get AM3 and/or Fusion out, otherwise they might find themselves between a rock and a hard place.

not only that, but pricecuts mean lower profit per chip (assuming the cost is doesn't vary for a batch of a given CPU)


By crystal clear on 4/9/2007 8:11:17 AM , Rating: 2
Any PRICE CUTS from AMD & INTEL is good for all !

Leave the "profits margins etc" for them (AMD/INTEL) to bother about !


RE: AMD launches "PRICE CUTS" instead of CPUs
By fk49 on 4/9/2007 8:24:17 AM , Rating: 2
Well it's great for you now, but what about five years down the road? The price war is leaving AMD (and maybe Intel too) in financial trouble which means their R+D costs will go up. The end result is that newer processors come out later and/or at higher prices that come down slower.

So for the mean time, price cuts are a great thing but they can have devastating long-term costs if it goes on for too long.


By crystal clear on 4/9/2007 9:12:05 AM , Rating: 2
I do not wish to divert from the subject matter-but since you raised the issue-I give my response to you.

"The price war is leaving AMD (and maybe Intel too) in financial trouble "

Believe me their CEOs & CFOs & shareholders have thought
about this & its effects on the long run.
They already are working on solutions for this.(they are paid just for that)

In business when you are involved in a "price war"
you think short term & long term is put on a hold......

"which means their R+D costs will go up"

Both of them will do their cost cutting elsewhere,but not
R&D budgets.

R&D is their only way/solution to SURVIVE in this business.

"but they can have devastating long-term "

Bad acquisations-like AMD/ATI adds extra debt burden on the company.
This as you say-"have devastating long-term costs if it goes on for too long."
This as you say-" The end result is that newer processors come out later and/or at higher prices that come down slower".

Intel is concentrating on CUTTING its manufacturing cost &
NOT its profits(you will see in future) & ofcourse raising its R&D budgets.
They have no debt burden to bother about.


RE: AMD launches "PRICE CUTS" instead of CPUs
By BucDan on 4/9/2007 2:06:00 PM , Rating: 1
the buying of ati makes them stronger in the long run but not right now. the price cuts are used for getting room to launch the k10's. if they dont drop the prices then they'll have to launch k10 at like 600+.

and the qx6800 is a joke. the price is rediculous. a 1-10 sec improvement in encoding.....what? u cant stretch out ur legs during that time? and 500 pts in 3dmark....its no big deal... and 5-20 fps in gaming is no big deal. u cant event see the difference when u play... ur eyes can only see about 30 or 60 frames per sec.....just be smart with ur money and get a q6600 or a qx6700 and overclock. dont be involved with buyers remorce


By crystal clear on 4/10/2007 4:16:54 AM , Rating: 1
"the buying of ati makes them stronger in the long run but not right now"

"The right now" words in your sentences prompts me to quote this-

Raising more money may be sticky. AMD borrowed $2.5 billion from Morgan Stanley last October to finance its acquisition of ATI Technologies, which saddled AMD with debt.
Under the terms of that credit agreement, if AMD raises money through a new debt issue, it is required to use all those proceeds to help pay down the Morgan Stanley loan. If AMD issues new shares, 50% of those proceeds would go toward the loan, according to Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
AMD could try to renegotiate the terms of that lending deal, observers say.
The company is moving to increase its number of authorized shares of common stock from 750 million to 1.5 billion, a move that must be approved by shareholders at the chipmaker's May 3 annual meeting.
AMD, in a recent proxy statement, said the ability to issue common stock may be used for such things as raising "cash to expand our business

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/whats-next-a...

"the price is rediculous" ...."just be smart with ur money'

So what do U Do ?-Wait ! a bit the PRICES WILL FALL.
Plus a pleasant surprise-A NEWER STEPPING !


By crystal clear on 4/10/2007 5:02:49 AM , Rating: 2
Quote-
"I do not wish to divert from the subject matter-but since you raised the issue-I give my response to you."

Unquote-

1) I did NOT wish to open new topic of discussion before the
AMD annoucement-
"Advanced Micro Devices Inc. on Monday warned that first-quarter sales came in well short of Wall Street targets"

2) I prefer Daily Tech to bring in the Topic-Ofcourse !

3) I dropped in a few hints like -

"They already are working on solutions for this"

"Both of them will do their cost cutting elsewhere,but not
R&D budgets."

AMD response-" said it would cut capital spending this year by $500 million, restructure some operations and take other steps to reduce costs".

"Bad acquisations-like AMD/ATI adds extra debt burden on the company." (I meant Financially)

"They(Intel) have no debt burden to bother about."

Amd response-It is moving to increase its number of authorized shares of common stock from 750 million to 1.5 billion, a move that must be approved by shareholders at the chipmaker's May 3 annual meeting.
AMD, in a recent proxy statement, said the ability to issue common stock may be used for such things as raising "cash to expand our business

Thats all !


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki