Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,397 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Intel Core i7 870 - $219.99 IN STORE ONLY.


http://cdn.travidia.com/rop-sub/31391216

Intel Core i7 870 Box
BX80605I7870 - LGA1156

FRYS.com #: 6000928

* Processor: Intel® Core™ i7 Quad Processor 870
* Architecture: Nehalem 45nm, LGA1156
* Thermal Design Power: 95W
* L3 Cache: 8MB
* Clock Speed: 2.93GHz
* Memory Support: DDR3 1333/1066
* Dual Channel Memory
* 3 Year Warranty
* Includes Heatsink/Fan

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,988 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinitegrim View Post
They are binned better and are a 1156 i7. Mine goes to 4ghz @ 1.248vcore
With HT enabled? Damn!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,169 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinitegrim View Post
To anyone that wants one buy doesnt have frys, here is your solution....

BETTER

They are binned better and are a 1156 i7. Mine goes to 4ghz @ 1.248vcore
The X3440 most likely won't be better binned than an 870. The 870 is the top of the line consumer 1156 chip. The X3450/X3460 would probably be closer to the Xeon equivalent.

The X3440 also only has a 19x multiplier with a turbo max of 20x whereas the 870 has a 22x multiplier with a turbo max of 23x.
 

·
Goddess of Misfortune
Joined
·
3,246 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinitegrim View Post
To anyone that wants one buy doesnt have frys, here is your solution....

BETTER

They are binned better and are a 1156 i7. Mine goes to 4ghz @ 1.248vcore
XEON FTW!

I was fortunate to get my X3460 for $200.

Man, I wish a Fry's would open up in Florida.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by xxbassplayerxx View Post
The X3440 most likely won't be better binned than an 870. The 870 is the top of the line consumer 1156 chip. The X3450/X3460 would probably be closer to the Xeon equivalent.

The X3440 also only has a 19x multiplier with a turbo max of 20x whereas the 870 has a 22x multiplier with a turbo max of 23x.
ACtually the highest single core multiplier of the 870 is 27x for 1 core at 3.6ghz

the i7 880 has been announced, and will now be the top of the line consumer chip
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,169 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blazing angel View Post
ACtually the highest single core multiplier of the 870 is 37x for 1 core at 3.6ghz

the i7 880 has been announced, and will now be the top of the line consumer chip
I believe you mean 27 (133x27=3600). However, I was talking about the max applicable for all four cores. The i7 920 actually has a 22x multiplier that can be applied to one core as well, but no one really counts that.

The 880 has also not hit stores/e-tailers yet, so the current 870 chips should still be binned very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by xxbassplayerxx View Post
I believe you mean 27 (133x27=3600). However, I was talking about the max applicable for all four cores. The i7 920 actually has a 22x multiplier that can be applied to one core as well, but no one really counts that.

The 880 has also not hit stores/e-tailers yet, so the current 870 chips should still be binned very well.
True true

i wonder how mych the 880 will cost?

550%


Also i meant 27..damn new keyboards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,914 Posts
Top of the line or not, I havent met a singe X3440 owner who cannot get it over 4ghz easily.

Infact I dont really know how to overclock an i7. All I did was raise the voltage, multiplier and fsb(whatever its now called). So I bet you could do better then I have with it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,169 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinitegrim View Post
Top of the line or not, I havent met a singe X3440 owner who cannot get it over 4ghz easily.

Infact I dont really know how to overclock an i7. All I did was raise the voltage, multiplier and fsb(whatever its now called). So I bet you could do better then I have with it.
I just have a different perspective. When I overclock, I try to push my entire system. This means finding the perfect bus speed paired with the perfect multipliers across all components. Giving more available multipliers on the chip mean I have more freedom with the base clock (BCLK) while retaining my CPU frequency.

Normally, pushing your BCLK means pushing other components as well as they are all related to it.

For instance, with my W3520, I'm sitting at 4.2GHz.

I have my multipliers set up as follows:

BCLK: 200
CPU Multiplier: 21x (4200MHz)
Memory Multiplier: 10x (2000MHz)
Uncore multiplier: 20x (4200MHz)

If I did not have the 21x multi, I would have to push 210 BCLK which would mean I'd have to be using one of the following two options:

Option 1:
BCLK: 210
CPU Multiplier: 20x (4200MHz)
Memory multiplier: 10x (2100MHz)
Uncore Multiplier: 20x (4200MHz)

Option 2:
BCLK: 210
Memory Multiplier: 8x (1680MHz)
Uncore Multiplier: 16x (3360MHz)

With Option 1, I might have difficulty getting my memory to 2100 (I personally wouldn't because my RAM is epic, but most memory won't go that high with decent latencies). I also would probably have difficulty running my Uncore at the minimum of 4.2GHz as that would take a lot of voltage.

With Option 2, my system wouldn't be pushed nearly as hard as it could go. The lower strap just seems lackluster.

So basically, if you plan to do a total system OC, more options are your best friend. 4GHz is easy for most (as you said), but there's a lot more beyond that which can be done as well.

I also am concerned with max overclocks. With a 20x multi, you'd have to push the board much harder to reach absolute maximum clocks (for extreme overclocking). For instance, to reach 5.6GHz on my W3520 (21x multi, just like the 920), I have to push 266 BCLK. Very few boards can do this (which is why my CPU-Z shot is the highest recorded with that processor).

I looked at grabbing a Xeon E5620 (32nm quad core 1366 chip) but it had a max multiplier of 19x. To push speeds that the chip would easily be capable of, I'd have to push the board much too hard. 4GHz would require 210 BCLK. 4.2 would require 221, a limit which many people have difficulty pushing boards past.

But yeah, long-winded reply basically saying why I personally would choose the 870 over the X3440.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,914 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by allthatisman View Post
Does it make sense to upgrade from an i5 750 to this chip? All I do is play games...
NO.

My e7200 doesnt even cause a problem with my GTX 470
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Wow wish this would have been around a few weeks ago. I got my 870 for ~$280. I have a frys 10 min away from me, and could possibly pick one up if someone is interested, just add a few $$ for shipping.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,169 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by litho View Post
how does this compare to the i7 930 at micro center for $199, besides the socket difference, which is better ?
The 870 is definitely binned better. Generally, 1156 chips require more voltage than 1366 chips for the same clocks, but recent 930's have been terrible.

I'd go with the 870 as long as you aren't planning more than two graphics cards.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top