Haha, 2 days after my birthday!
![]()
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
4
w00t. im going to an AMD sponsored lan on sept 14-16. maybe they will have some there to give away
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Quote:
They're server parts, they'll be socket 1207.
Originally Posted by jonny1989 This is good news,Do any of then come in AM2 socket,if so i will have to by one,for that price they better own the core 2 and the quads. |
Quote:
Those are server parts.... always more expensive than desktop. I would say the desktop equivalent of the same parts will be 20-40% less.
Originally Posted by sepheroth003 expensive! Hope their worth it, I would love to see AMD pull out a rabbit now. |
2
Quote:
![]()
If you are right, and giving a very liberal assumption of 40%, that means that the lowest end quad-core is going to be roughly $192 ($320 * .6). That's not that bad considering the Q6600 will be $266. However, the big wild card is still performance and OCability. The Core chips have been OCing so well so I don't know if lower cost and slightly better performance is going to make up for the OC potential of the Core chips.
Originally Posted by DuckieHo Those are server parts.... always more expensive than desktop. I would say the desktop equivalent of the same parts will be 20-40% less. |
2
Quote:
Based on common assumptions:
On the OCing side... the 1.9GHz chips should be able to do at least 2.5GHz since AMD will be selling one at that clock speed. Since these are server which are usually clocked slower than maximum, I would think a 1.9GHz has the potential to hit 2.7GHz pretty easy. A 40% OC would be nice.
Originally Posted by Cheetos316
|
On the OCing side... the 1.9GHz chips should be able to do at least 2.5GHz since AMD will be selling one at that clock speed. Since these are server which are usually clocked slower than maximum, I would think a 1.9GHz has the potential to hit 2.7GHz pretty easy. A 40% OC would be nice.
Quote:
Each chip is a Native quad last time i checked, so 8 cores total
Originally Posted by pow3rtr1p Wait, is this still a 4x4 type set up with 2 dual cores, or is this actually quad core? I was expecting quadcore, not more stupid dual cores... |
Quote:
Nope. It's just two dual cores. It should be two quads...but its not.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...017130006.html
Originally Posted by johonm333 Each chip is a Native quad last time i checked, so 8 cores total |
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...017130006.html
Quote:
AMD had to not only delay the launch, but it had to lower the speed of the launch (It was suppose to launch at 2.5Ghz). I think that gives you an idea of how poorly these are going to scale.
Regardless, from the only known benchmarks of these chips, they are slower clock for clock than the Core 2 Quad. How can you figure a $390 chip (2.0Ghz) is going to compete with a $266 Q6600 (2.4Ghz) which is known to scale well above 3.2Ghz.
Really, anyone who buys these chips at these prices has lost their mind.
Originally Posted by DuckieHo Based on common assumptions: On the OCing side... the 1.9GHz chips should be able to do at least 2.5GHz since AMD will be selling one at that clock speed. Since these are server which are usually clocked slower than maximum, I would think a 1.9GHz has the potential to hit 2.7GHz pretty easy. A 40% OC would be nice. |
Regardless, from the only known benchmarks of these chips, they are slower clock for clock than the Core 2 Quad. How can you figure a $390 chip (2.0Ghz) is going to compete with a $266 Q6600 (2.4Ghz) which is known to scale well above 3.2Ghz.
Really, anyone who buys these chips at these prices has lost their mind.
Quote:
4x4 is two dual cores, but barcelona is a true quad core. Lets not get confused.
Originally Posted by saxahonker Nope. It's just two dual cores. It should be two quads...but its not. http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...017130006.html |
Quote:
thats the key. hopefully the prices are lower. not only do quads (Q6600) slightly outperform at stock...but they also OC more. 3.2GHz is not EASY, unless good cooling is obtained, but 3GHz is for sure
and btw these are native quad cores
Originally Posted by pauldovi Really, anyone who buys these chips at these prices has lost their mind. |
and btw these are native quad cores
2
Quote:
3 days after mine, lol
Originally Posted by Mad_Handlez89 Haha, 2 days after my birthday!
|
Quote:
Well obviously the whole "native" thing isn't helping them out so much.
Guys, native quad core doesn't make this chip super special. Sorry.
Originally Posted by Sreenath thats the key. hopefully the prices are lower. not only do quads (Q6600) slightly outperform at stock...but they also OC more. 3.2GHz is not EASY, unless good cooling is obtained, but 3GHz is for sure and btw these are native quad cores |
Guys, native quad core doesn't make this chip super special. Sorry.
1. Inquirer.
2. AMD.
3. LOL!
Assuming you neglect all of the above:
4. Prices
Quote:
I think the idea behind native quads is that they would naturally generate less heat and take a bit less power, which is the only problem intel's current processors have (since they're sure as hell not bottlenecked). Plus native quads -> non-native octos. Its just a point in technology we should all be looking forward to see. But then again, 45nm should achieve much better results with power and temperature than native quad.
2. AMD.
3. LOL!
Assuming you neglect all of the above:
4. Prices
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi Well obviously the whole "native" thing isn't helping them out so much. Guys, native quad core doesn't make this chip super special. Sorry. |
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
