Intel announced to release two new versions of Core i7 CPU at the end of this month labeled Core i7 950 at 3.06 Ghz and Core i7 Extreme 975 clocked at 3,33 Ghz. Intel is once more breaking it's own record of holding the crown of the fastest desktop processor on earth.The two new CPU-s will hit retail shelves on 31 May with speculated prices of $649 and $1,129 respectively.
Are you eagerly expecting to buy one of these iCores! Live us your comment what you reckon about it.
6 Comments:
Easily the best processor around but if we don't have a similarly high-end hard disk then owning this processor is typically a waste of resources...instead of utilizing it to the max, maybe only 25-50% of its processings are used by the hard disk.
So far, the most realistic high-end processor to own is still the Core 2 Extreme...:)
@BE James
How true about similar components. I am glad you are one of those who know that for best performance hard drive is crucial component, much more important than processor.
I also agree with extreme core2duo version. Quad cores are not really an option for achieving best performance due to their lower frequencies and inabilities of using all 4 cores in majority of everyday applications.
I am really glad about your way of thinking. mate.
I think Quad Cores are quite similar with Core i7 in certain areas...that it is practically too high-end for most users. What do you think, Thomas?
@Be James
I would say do not ever go for quad-cores. Do not understand me wrong they are just fine but sadly 99% of programs are not written to use all their power. It is extremely difficult to create program that would take advantage of all 4 cores or even just 2. So as a result you will see in many benchmarks that 2-core processors are actually faster than their quad cousins. Here is a perfect example of AVG 8 antivirus scan on both 2 and 4 cored processors. The first 4 rankings belong to duo core processors and amazingly only on the 5th place is the first quad core cpu. Really nice example of the multi-core cpu architecture that isn't going to work in the future. Intel and AMD will have to figure out something apart making smaller architecture like 32 nm or 22nm.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/AVG-Anti-Virus-8,822.html
This is my next processor i'm going to upgrade.Good post..
thanks
@Techie
I would rather go for Core i5. It is cheaper and has the same architecture as its bigger cousin. Most importantly of course, it has built-in memory controler, which was a primary advantage from AMD. Integrated memory controler boost FSB from 1333Mhz to several thousands, I am not sure but it is a dramatic boost in memory flow from cache to "brains".
According to what I saw Core i7 and i5 brings between 20-30% performance boost over Penryn processors. And the best thing here is you do not need to go for i7 to get this technology. i3 model will do just fine, if you can spare a few megs of cache and slight frequency drop. In reality each of these model should give you more than enough processing power for whatever you do.
On my main computer I have E7400, 2.8Ghz core2Duo with 3 megs of SDLC and I can tell you I never saw it utilize at 100% although my processor is getting data from SUPERTALENT UltriDrive GX, the fastest SSD built on Indilinx controller which is supplying my CPU with data at a rate well over 200MB/s.
I sometimes smile when I see computer shop's descriptions of athlon x2 6000 or even core2duo E7000 series as being processor for no more than family usege. These people really do not that basically all todays CPU-s are powerful enough to do everythin it can be done on PC.
Post a Comment