Intel i9 (Gulftown) 6-core

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

zetec_influenced

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2010
1
0
18,510
The good thing is knowing someone on the inside. IE the guy whos making them and the software engineer for the cpu. to what i know 1366 pin and well worth it. all i say is owners of the 1366 pin MB's your day of lucky will come
 

yannifb

Distinguished
Jun 25, 2009
1,106
2
19,310


The only thing i can see that will be worthwhile is having SB work on 1366 mobos. But Intel didn't even rumor about SB's compatibility with current sockets.
 

SmilingSamoyed

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2010
2
0
18,510
Just buy an i7 920 system, upgrade the CPU when the i9 comes out (or wait two years for prices to drop), and upgrade your video card as you see fit. There's absolutely no logic in waiting 6 months to buy a computer that will last you 4 years.
Or save yourself a few hundred dollars buy just upgrading your Q6600 to a Q9650.
Exactly how long has your Q6600 system lasted you so far? Certainly not 4 years.
What video card do you have in it now? Certainly not one where your system has become CPU limited.
Or you could just buy a pair of $500 video cards in SLI/Xfire if all you care about is FPS for gaming. It all comes down to how much cash your asking to burn for what kind of performance boost. What's your budget?
----------
I have to laugh. I have an HP AMD Turion64 ML-40 laptop. It's JUST NOW running internet (multiple tabs), games (nothing cutting edge), and office slowly. ANY new machine would run circles around this, but I've gotten my ROI on this machine.
I'm looking at an i7 and then replacing a similar aged (7+yo) desktop in 6 mths. Have to wait for the paychecks to come rolling in :-(.
Any current machine, when matched with what you do 95% of the time will last you 3+ years. IMHO.
 

ric926

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2010
38
0
18,530





A CPU FOR 89.99??? ON WHAT PLANET??
 

ubservers

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2010
10
0
18,510
From the new "i" architechture develloped by intel, i9 will surelly be something not to neglect. It won't be a "high price for nothing". Q6600 is still a good CPU, but i7 or i9 will be amazingly faster because it uses each core in a whole new way which is some kind of a revolution
Go for it!
 

ric926

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2010
38
0
18,530
Well their just about at the limit at 45nm and clock speeds arent gonna get much faster so to maintain moores law (cpu's dbl in speed.etc every 18 months) they are just adding more procs on a die, if they dont you think the dot com bust was bad in the 90's.....the whole world is strung out on tech, make the economic troubles of 08-09 look like a good time
 

ric926

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2010
38
0
18,530



each core is dedicated to an app or process vs switching back and forth, 2 apps use 2 cores, 3 apps 3 cores, etc, true multitasking
 


Nehalem version of the I7?

Isn't that a little redundant?
 

yannifb

Distinguished
Jun 25, 2009
1,106
2
19,310
...entanglement?

Entanglement is when two particles are basically in exactly in the same state, to put it in very, very rough terms. Essentially, anything that happens to one of the particles will happen to the other at the exact same time with the exact same effect. And to skip some explanation and go straight to how it impacts computing power- one qubit (a bit in a quantum computer) can exist in 4 different states at once (as opposed to either a 1 or 0 like a normal transistor). So two qubits can exist as eight states as once, and it expands exponentially. So by now you should see why it has such massive potential in computers.

Oh and sorry for waitin so long to reply. I got lazy :D. Which is also why i gave you a very rough explanation. If you want me to elaborate just ask.
 
G

Guest

Guest

No thanks...I'm waiting for the i11 at $19.99 on an infomercial
 

Misko195

Distinguished
Apr 13, 2010
484
0
18,810
If you wannt play games in next 2-3 years, take i7 970x with two 5890 in crossfire or GTX480 in SLI, 24 DDR3 ram good water cooling system and i garanted you will be able to play games in next 3 years........

Sorry on my english :)
 

witcherx

Distinguished
May 20, 2009
337
0
18,790
1 of those cards is more than enuf to play all the games today.. no need to take two cards.. If you want.. you can check wat type of game content is there in the future.. and then switch.. btw.. nothing is "garanted"
 
Permission to smash this thread to bits? [:huntluck:3]

Thread has been going on way to long...... Once though core i9 is core i7, last time i commented on this thread was 8 months ago, shall i contiune?
 

vaerax

Distinguished
Jan 4, 2010
38
0
18,530
Wow this is ridiculous. I had the same stock build and just got an i7-920. It's a better processor. The truth is Q6600 is fine for 99% of all games w/ a decent graphics card; I was running a GT8800 w/ 2GB memory and I had sc2 beta turned ALL THE WAY UP @ 1050p. There was literally 1 setting I didn't max, and i suffered no slowdown whatsoever (so I could probably max it fine). Everyone makes a big deal about the new processors, but honestly most video games don't USE 4 threads; quad core isn't significantly better than dual core for most games as I understand it. There's a good expalantion of that on this forum somewhere. I only read the first 10 or so entries before I got the point - sorry if this is repeat information. If you want a better gaming experience, instead of even considering an i9, get a decent i5/i7, overclock the heck out of it, and get an uber monitor - or 2 - and an appropriately uber gpu. When it comes to games, you're basically wanting eye-candy, and that will be more cost efficient eye candy. Regards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.