Core 2 Extreme QX9650 Launch & Review - 45nm Yorkfield aka Penryn is here! - PAGE 27

Wow that was a crt eye burner but a really good read also.

The lower power consumption and virtualisation improvements make Penryn really interesting for the server Xeons. Actually lower power consumption is good for everyone, including Folding@Home. This launch kind of has something for everyone .

if only they didnt cost $1000 aud.

Price? Availability?

Any other models coming out of Penryn like an x9600 or something that will be sub 400 dollars?

Will there be anything Penryn related for under $300 that will work on a Gigabyte GA-965p-DS3?

I doubt you will see anything soon under $300 that is at 45 nano meters. Still looks good, but question comes to usage really... I have a Core 2 Extreme currently (not overclocked QX6700 and is very very cold) and pushing the CPU above 50% is quite hard with even the latest games at full graphics and processing... basically a dual core at 2.66 GHz could handle the latest games at full power without too much of a problem. So if people need to get such a processor I think it's needs consideration of what you are actually getting and why you are getting it. It is of course the step in the right direction for the market but I would not advise people to spend the huge amounts of money for such a processor unless they know exactly why they are getting it ^^;;.

Except crysis, which gets a very nice boost with 4 cores over 2 .

quote R3sistance

I doubt you will see anything soon under $300 that is at 45 nano meters. Still looks good, but question comes to usage really... I have a Core 2 Extreme currently (not overclocked QX6700 and is very very cold) and pushing the CPU above 50% is quite hard with even the latest games at full graphics and processing... basically a dual core at 2.66 GHz could handle the latest games at full power without too much of a problem. So if people need to get such a processor I think it's needs consideration of what you are actually getting and why you are getting it. It is of course the step in the right direction for the market but I would not advise people to spend the huge amounts of money for such a processor unless they know exactly why they are getting it ^^;;.

Its expected in January 2008 that there will be a $266 penryn dual core with 6MB of L2 cache, and a $316 quad core variant with 12Mb of L2 cache. Google it.

quote axforts2212

Its expected in January 2008 that there will be a $266 penryn dual core with 6MB of L2 cache, and a $316 quad core variant with 12Mb of L2 cache. Google it.

why people can not link to source I dunno, well I can not see the links on google as you did not give the search string you had google parse for ya... >.>... still... the technology to produce smaller circuits costs more... that's why I doubt you will see such cheap processors with in the next year on the 45 nanometer technology =/.

http://www.pureoverclock.com/images/news/intel_penrynchart.jpg

http://www.pureoverclock.com/story.php?id=1489

Google search for "penryn prices"

Hey guys, i've been thinking about overclocking my qx9650 when it arrives (pre-ordered) but to be honest i'm not sure how to go about it. I've been reading up on OC'ing - but i've read stuff where they haven't changed voltages and achieved 3.6ghz (what i'm overclocking to) and some that have changed voltages etc...

The system i'll be running is
Mobo: Asus Maximus Formula SE
Ram: 4Gb Team Xtreem PC8500/1066
CPU: QX9650

Can anyone give me advice as to how to go about achieving a 3.6ghz clock?

quote

Can anyone give me advice as to how to go about achieving a 3.6ghz clock?

No but here`s how to get 4.5Ghz
[link name=]http://img225.imageshack.us/my.php?image=45ghzlx4.jpg[/link]

quote R3sistance

quote axforts2212

Its expected in January 2008 that there will be a $266 penryn dual core with 6MB of L2 cache, and a $316 quad core variant with 12Mb of L2 cache. Google it.

why people can not link to source I dunno, well I can not see the links on google as you did not give the search string you had google parse for ya... >.>... still... the technology to produce smaller circuits costs more... that's why I doubt you will see such cheap processors with in the next year on the 45 nanometer technology =/.

actully moving to the 45nm saves money for intel. You can fit more cores per 300mm wafer than you can with a 65nm process. The cost is moving to the process once its setup you save alot of money actully.

I don't deny the prices but I saw something that said Jan 20th not the 8th and it was more recent, this Penryn chart is 3 months old. Wolfsdale overclock really nice even though its a sample, 4.7 on air can't wait for water benchmarks.

- Christine