Fastest Intel for 2008 is 3.2GHz quad core

jmke · 1st November 2007, 17:51

Intel struggles to keep its Thermal Design Power (TDP) to 130W and its 3.2GHz QX9770 will be just a bit off that magical number. The planned TDP for QX9770 quad core with 12MB cache and FSB 1600 is 136W, and this is already considered high. According to the current Intel roadmap it doesn’t look like Intel plans to release anything faster than 3.2GHz for the remainder of the year. The next CPU after QX9770 is Bloomfield, a version of a Nehalem marchitecture with quad core and eight threads scheduled for Q4 2008 introduction.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...71&Ite mid=34

Sidney · 1st November 2007, 18:18

This may explain the wide range of overclock voltage from those QX9650 reviews.

1st November 2007, 18:56

It's kinda odd, I mean the chips reach 4 Ghz on stock cooling yet the TDP should be too high?

2nd November 2007, 01:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rutar

It's kinda odd, I mean the chips reach 4 Ghz on stock cooling yet the TDP should be too high?

Does not seem odd at all. The only chips that are on the market are those released by Intel, and the only Penryns they are releasing are QX9650's. Right now if the chip is not QX9650 quality they are not selling it... so you are not going to see anything but the best of the crop.

2nd November 2007, 08:45

Can they afford to keep a large stock of unused dies instead of releasing a lower clocked version?

I would say most of the dies are good for being sold as 3 Ghz chips and they keep the best for a possible counterstrike to an AMD chip and they keep selling the 65 nm chips for the lower clocked versions to use the 65 nm fabs properly.

1st November 2007, 17:51	#1
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,019	Fastest Intel for 2008 is 3.2GHz quad core Intel struggles to keep its Thermal Design Power (TDP) to 130W and its 3.2GHz QX9770 will be just a bit off that magical number. The planned TDP for QX9770 quad core with 12MB cache and FSB 1600 is 136W, and this is already considered high. According to the current Intel roadmap it doesn’t look like Intel plans to release anything faster than 3.2GHz for the remainder of the year. The next CPU after QX9770 is Bloomfield, a version of a Nehalem marchitecture with quad core and eight threads scheduled for Q4 2008 introduction. http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...71&Ite mid=34 __________________

1st November 2007, 18:18	#2
Sidney Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 15,738	This may explain the wide range of overclock voltage from those QX9650 reviews. __________________ lazyman Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 CPU Review	thorgal	WebNews	0	23rd June 2009 09:16
Intel latest Core 2 series CPU-Pentium E6300 and Quad Q8400 performance review	windwithme	Hardware Overclocking and Case Modding	3	19th June 2009 08:54
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400S	jmke	WebNews	1	31st March 2009 17:59
Intel cuts Core 2 Quad Q6600, Q8200 prices	jmke	WebNews	0	22nd October 2008 13:20
Intel: Core i7 to Be Up to 52% Faster Compared to Core 2 Quad.	jmke	WebNews	0	10th October 2008 17:30
Intel Launches Core 2 Duo E5200, Core 2 Quad Q8200 Chips	jmke	WebNews	0	3rd September 2008 22:17
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 and Core 2 Duo E7200 processors	jmke	WebNews	0	18th April 2008 09:42
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 CPU Quad Core	jmke	WebNews	0	22nd January 2007 21:45
Quad Core Intel Xeon 53xx Clovertown	Berry	WebNews	0	27th December 2006 13:07
Intel Core 2 Duo vs Core 2 Quad	jmke	WebNews	0	27th November 2006 19:05

1st November 2007, 18:56	#3
Rutar Posts: n/a	It's kinda odd, I mean the chips reach 4 Ghz on stock cooling yet the TDP should be too high?

2nd November 2007, 08:45	#5
Rutar Posts: n/a	Can they afford to keep a large stock of unused dies instead of releasing a lower clocked version? I would say most of the dies are good for being sold as 3 Ghz chips and they keep the best for a possible counterstrike to an AMD chip and they keep selling the 65 nm chips for the lower clocked versions to use the 65 nm fabs properly.