Intel Preps 45nm Quad-core Desktop Launch
September 28, 2007 4:44 AM
comment(s) - last by
Intel's Extreme Edition "Yorkfield" processor will launch on November 12; sub-3.0 GHz variants will launch in the first half of January 2008
Intel’s latest roadmap reveals upcoming additions to its desktop processor lineup. Unfortunately, anybody awaiting a straightforward naming convention will need to hold out a bit longer as the processor numbers for desktop
chips complicate the naming situation even further.
The launch of an Extreme Edition version of a chip before mainstream offerings follows Intel’s
, and as such the rest of the
family will not be seen until the first half of January 2008. The company ambiguously names January 2nd through 20th as the slated launch date for the processors, though companies generally tend to time launch events with trade shows. The 2008 International Consumer Electronics Show starts on January 7, 2008.
Quad-Core Desktop - 1333 MHz FSB
The first of the new desktop processors, the quad-core
-based QX9650, will be released on November 12 at an expected price of $999. The operating frequency of Intel's highest end 45nm quad-core at launch will be 3.0 GHz.
processors will not launch with the 1600 MHz front-side bus. Intel's halo
enthusiast Skulltrail V8 platform
uses 1600 MHz workstation processors on a server-class motherboard and chipset.
The Intel Q9550, Q9450 and Q9300 will be the first of the mainstream
offerings. At $266, the 45nm 2.50 GHz Q9300 replaces the 65nm 2.4 GHz Q6600.
Dual-Core Desktop - 1333 MHz FSB
Intel guidance also suggests an intermediate SKU between E8400 and E8200, aptly named the E8300. This processor will eventually replace the 2.83 GHz dual-core processor previously named E8200. Since the E8300 and E8200 specifications are not set in stone, neither is the final pricing. Intel's lowest price-point for dual-core 65nm is $163, and it's safe to wager that the E8300 or E8200 will also carry the same pricing.
Before Intel's media-blitz on November 12, the company will silently launch the 65nm 2.4 GHz dual-core E4600
processor on October 21, 2007.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: AMD is only six months or so behind Intel
9/28/2007 9:45:32 AM
While multi-threaded applications are still few and far between, there is more of a use for dual and quad core processors than many people realize.
There are two factors, the speed of individual applications, and then you have system performance. Even if most applications are single threaded, a multi-core processor will allow the different applications to run on different cores.
So, your anti-virus might sit on one core, other background applications might be spread out on other cores, and the main application you want to run will then have a larger percentage of whatever core it may run on(if it is single-threaded). In the past, with only a single processor core, your anti-virus, background applications, and the main program you want to run were all forced to share the same core. This might leave you with only 80 percent of the CPU resources for the program you really want to run. With dual-core, this might get bumped up to 90 percent available(with a single-threaded program), or higher.
Going to Windows Vista adds a LOT more to what goes on in the background, so everything seems a little slower. So, quad-core would more than balance out the increased operating system demands on the CPU.
If we were in an age of lean and mean operating systems that didn't do much behind the scenes, then dual and quad core processors would be overkill for most people. As time goes on though, it seems that we NEED the extra cores just to handle all the excess garbage that Microsoft puts into their operating systems.
It also takes roughly four to six years for a modern application to be designed from scratch. As a result, the move to multi-threaded application design even if it started when the Athlon 64 X2 and Pentium D first were released would only start showing up at around this time. Most applications are based on previous work as well when it comes to game engines and updated versions of software. So, did Office 2007 start as an all new project, or was it based on Office 2003, which was based on 2001, etc. Since so much of the new versions are based on single-threaded applications from years ago, there is a great chance that the new versions are also only single-threaded.
"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher
Intel Details "Skulltrail" Enthusiasts Platform
April 17, 2007, 12:50 AM
"Prepare to be Punished": Microsoft is Killing OneDrive With Cuts, Blames Users
November 3, 2015, 8:23 PM
Apple's New "Magic" Peripheral Line Packs High Tech, High Prices
October 13, 2015, 9:39 PM
Samsung Adds 2 TB 850 EVO, PRO SSDs for $800, $1000
July 7, 2015, 4:23 PM
Seagate Senior Researcher: Heat Can Kill Data on Stored SSDs
May 13, 2015, 2:49 PM
How to Recover Most Apps After Your NVIDIA Driver Crashes in Windows 10
March 30, 2015, 12:54 PM
Tinkerer Gets Old School Mac Plus Running on the Modern Web
March 24, 2015, 6:41 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information