Intel Releases Core i7-2700K Processor

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Remember when Nehalem could transcode video so quickly, and that was why you had to buy it, even if you didn't transcode video?

Anybody notice that video/multimedia became less important the day Bulldozer came out?
 
[citation][nom]eidetic_mammaries[/nom]Remember when Nehalem could transcode video so quickly, and that was why you had to buy it, even if you didn't transcode video?Anybody notice that video/multimedia became less important the day Bulldozer came out?[/citation]

No. But, I do remember Nahalem dominating in every single benchmark possible, from professional applications, to video/multimedia, to gaming.
 
[citation][nom]fulle[/nom]No. But, I do remember Nahalem dominating in every single benchmark possible, from professional applications, to video/multimedia, to gaming.[/citation]
who was dominating in price ?
 
People cry too much about AMD getting sodomized and what will happen when they go under.

Intel would still have to innovate, because they'd be competing with themselves. If their CPUs are only 20% faster, who's going to want the new one? You'd kill your upgrade cycle, and they'd also lose server sales. Remember, there are many competitors there and its the same architecture.

Pointing to the Pentium 4 as Intel being complacent is one of the dumbest things people keep saying. The Pentium 4 was an EXTREMELY advanced processor with some of the greatest innovations seen in a processor. It just didn't work well when everything was put together because of other issues (like the weak decoding). Also, what makes Sandy Bridge so good? Well, it's the Pentium 4 technology that is now part of it. It's not a Pentium Pro derivative anymore, it's got tons of Pentium 4 DNA, finally used to good effect.

Pentium 4 sucked, but not because Intel was complacent, or wasn't advancing technology. We're seeing how good that technology was in Sandy Bridge. Other decisions they made with the product made all the good in it, not so good.
 
As I can see on Newegg, it's not 15 bucks more than a 2600K, but 55 $ !!!!

I was waiting for this 2700K. Not sure to take it with this price tag ... :/
 
[citation][nom]ohim[/nom]Then explain how the hell does this "celeron" manages to keep pace or even outpace your beloved i7 2600 in Multimedia (photoshop/3d rendering/media encodin). You know computers are used to other things than games. And don`t tell me 4 vs 8 core because they are not really 8 cores and software is quite badly coded for this kind of CPU.[/citation]

The i7-2600k bests bulldozer in every benchmark albeit by just a bit in a few. Overclock the i7 to 4.5ghz and you've got a beast for what it's sucking down in energy. Overclock bulldozer to 4.5ghz (if you can even get it there) and it's sucking down over 150 watts more than SB at the same clock speed.

Bulldozer isn't a huge turd but it's also nothing to be proud of. Intel designed their chips for their target market, the consumers. AMD took a server chip and tried to market it as a gaming chip for consumers and that's just an outright lie.
 
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]People cry too much about AMD getting sodomized and what will happen when they go under.Intel would still have to innovate, because they'd be competing with themselves. If their CPUs are only 20% faster, who's going to want the new one? You'd kill your upgrade cycle, and they'd also lose server sales. Remember, there are many competitors there and its the same architecture.Pointing to the Pentium 4 as Intel being complacent is one of the dumbest things people keep saying. The Pentium 4 was an EXTREMELY advanced processor with some of the greatest innovations seen in a processor. It just didn't work well when everything was put together because of other issues (like the weak decoding). Also, what makes Sandy Bridge so good? Well, it's the Pentium 4 technology that is now part of it. It's not a Pentium Pro derivative anymore, it's got tons of Pentium 4 DNA, finally used to good effect. Pentium 4 sucked, but not because Intel was complacent, or wasn't advancing technology. We're seeing how good that technology was in Sandy Bridge. Other decisions they made with the product made all the good in it, not so good.[/citation]

Someone gets it at least. I've been saying all along that AMD really isn't the motivator to Intel that everyone thinks.

On other topics, though, to the people complaining Bulldozer needs proper, specialized software to make the most out of it. Please kindly crawl back into your hypocritical holes and never come out again. :) I listened to all kinds of whining and griping back when the P4 pulled that trick and if it wasn't valid then, it's not valid now that AMD is doing it.

Second, to the people complaining that Intel is charging $15 for a 100MHZ minor bump, uh, excuse me. Where have you been the last few years? That's the entire story of Phenom II. I watched it slowly creep up in 100MHZ increments and no one complained when AMD was doing it. So again, shooting your own company in the foot. :)

Third, the word innovate. That term gets thrown around almost as much as the word "terrorist" these days. Nothing is new under the sun. It's not necessarily about innovating in a field since obviously a product can suck on the first go, but sometimes someone can take an idea and make it better.

Innovation is a term spouted to often by people who really don't know the meaning of the word. It's like the blank stares I got when I asked people to explain "What is new about the motion controls on the Wii?" after using that term. No one could explain the meaning or why, but could only explain that they had heard the Wii called innovative. Newsflash: Intel and AMD are not innovative by most standards and build on an existing product base.
 
[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]Dude do you see how far behind BullDozer is, Bulldozer was expected to be ready in 2009 at which point it would have been an amazing CPU, and by now it would be almost 50% faster and more than able to go toe to toe with IVy Bridge, AMD fudged up. That simple and now they are playing catchup and won't catch up any time, soon, I don't even know if they can catch up, atleast before they bought Dec Alpha who was light years ahead anyone else and we got the Athlon, there own engineers are bumbling idiots, so why are you even deluding yourself.[/citation]

right now i would take a phenom II over a bulldozer, but with an os optomised for it, and a revision 1 promising 15% more, each year for 4 years, i'm even guessing there will be a die shrink in that time too, which will further push performance, i can see a future for bulldozer, its not the kill the intel extreme future that most people saw or wanted, but its still a future.
 
It's the same sort of thing AMD does. 955 @ 3.2, 965 @ 3.4, 970 @ 3.6. It is just too keep the lineup fresh and and it's a way to drop the pricing.
 
[citation][nom]ozzy702[/nom]The i7-2600k bests bulldozer in every benchmark albeit by just a bit in a few. Overclock the i7 to 4.5ghz and you've got a beast for what it's sucking down in energy. Overclock bulldozer to 4.5ghz (if you can even get it there) and it's sucking down over 150 watts more than SB at the same clock speed. Bulldozer isn't a huge turd but it's also nothing to be proud of. Intel designed their chips for their target market, the consumers. AMD took a server chip and tried to market it as a gaming chip for consumers and that's just an outright lie.[/citation]
You do realise that there are a lot of ppl who actually don`t overclock their CPU? And yes BD is not that awesome but there are parts where you can actually have a reason why to buy .. and that`s multimedia (i don`t care if in a game i get more fps from another cpu, as long as the frame rate is above 60 who cares , the eye can`t see beyond that anyway) But as long as i`m using Adobe`s Creative Suite and BD behaves just a little behind that 2600 but above the 2500 i really don`t give a sh*t about gaming. But sadly most of the comments around here are based on just that or that the i7 smashes BD in iTunes ...i would love to see those who buy i7 play with iTunes all day!

I even saw bald statements that the new Core I3 are about as powerful as a Phenom II processor .. yeah in synthetics they are about equal .. guess what ... work with bouth of the platforms in daily activities and you`ll see that there`s a huge difference ... stop looking like retards to only synthetics, they actually mean nothing to real world applications. In fact i don`t even get it why there are still synthetic benchmarks being used when they don`t give any real world performance numbers.

And who the hell uses iTunes anyway to convert music ? I installed that piece of crap once, saw how stupid and sluggish it is and never touched it ever ... and in 2011 is still no multicore aware. Clearly very bad coding there. Shouldn`t be used for benchmarking.
And yes AMD might not have the greatest design (but i still have faith in this one) but you can`t compare to the Intel giant in resources, and stop lieing to yourselfs if AMD dies Intel will keep innovating ... yes they will but at a much lower pace and at bigger price points, monopoly and corporate greed always goes like this.

Better stop bashing AMD for nothing .. is not a football game where if your team wins you feel joy ...better pray that AMD puts out a better revision fast of BD or works out something with MS to really improve it`s performance .. that way it forces Intel to push even harder thus bouth sides will be winners since bouth chipmakers will produce quality processors at competitive prices, there`s no actual benefit here if one of the companies produces a very bad CPU or even dies. As consumers we only have benefits if bouth Intel and AMD produce competitive producs, so stop all the hate and show some faith. Buy what ever you want, Intel or AMD, but be thankfull to the opposition for having driven your favourite brand to be as good as it is.
 
AMD are still punching above their weight in the consumer markets; just remember how much smaller than Intel they are. If they can manage to make a decent comeback in the server market with Valencia and Interlagos, AMD won't be struggling for money.
 
[citation][nom]Zagen30[/nom]They've been working on IB for years, long before BD started to look like a failure. They're not going to just not release it if it's already done.[/citation]

yeah i remember reading that they started work on Tri-gate in the 90s...
 
[citation][nom]heavenly[/nom]It should be able to hit 5GHz a lot easier on air than the 2600k; I'd love to see how high people can get it on liquid cooling.[/citation]
AMD will not die, they just have lots of catching up to do...
 
[citation][nom]ohim[/nom]You do realise that there are a lot of ppl who actually don`t overclock their CPU? And yes BD is not that awesome but there are parts where you can actually have a reason why to buy .. and that`s multimedia (i don`t care if in a game i get more fps from another cpu, as long as the frame rate is above 60 who cares , the eye can`t see beyond that anyway) But as long as i`m using Adobe`s Creative Suite and BD behaves just a little behind that 2600 but above the 2500 i really don`t give a sh*t about gaming. But sadly most of the comments around here are based on just that or that the i7 smashes BD in iTunes ...i would love to see those who buy i7 play with iTunes all day!I even saw bald statements that the new Core I3 are about as powerful as a Phenom II processor .. yeah in synthetics they are about equal .. guess what ... work with bouth of the platforms in daily activities and you`ll see that there`s a huge difference ... stop looking like retards to only synthetics, they actually mean nothing to real world applications. In fact i don`t even get it why there are still synthetic benchmarks being used when they don`t give any real world performance numbers.And who the hell uses iTunes anyway to convert music ? I installed that piece of crap once, saw how stupid and sluggish it is and never touched it ever ... and in 2011 is still no multicore aware. Clearly very bad coding there. Shouldn`t be used for benchmarking.And yes AMD might not have the greatest design (but i still have faith in this one) but you can`t compare to the Intel giant in resources, and stop lieing to yourselfs if AMD dies Intel will keep innovating ... yes they will but at a much lower pace and at bigger price points, monopoly and corporate greed always goes like this.Better stop bashing AMD for nothing .. is not a football game where if your team wins you feel joy ...better pray that AMD puts out a better revision fast of BD or works out something with MS to really improve it`s performance .. that way it forces Intel to push even harder thus bouth sides will be winners since bouth chipmakers will produce quality processors at competitive prices, there`s no actual benefit here if one of the companies produces a very bad CPU or even dies. As consumers we only have benefits if bouth Intel and AMD produce competitive producs, so stop all the hate and show some faith. Buy what ever you want, Intel or AMD, but be thankfull to the opposition for having driven your favourite brand to be as good as it is.[/citation]

um... yea, you can precieve higher than 60fps, now... i dont know if you ACTUALLY see it, or if its a precieved like sound frequency's the human ear can hear, we can still precieve them.

its not just itunes, its all single core applications as of now, that said, how many applications are single core?

because they give you a number, synthetics i mean, and some simulate real world applications, and spit out a number. real world, if you never touch a single core application, the lower number would mean nothing to you, and same the other way, if all you do is use single core applications (this includes chrome, its "multicore" but not at the same time) than you would only get he raw end.

i use itunes, only when parents want something on their ithings, it encodes it to work with them, while i only encode to flac. im sure other people do this too.

the architecture they introduced has yet to be optimized for an os, so wait till win 8 and revision 1 before judge. intel will innovate, not poring research into it, but enough, and the prices will be similar to what they are today for years, even if amd did die, they cant suddenly hike, otherwise government would stick their foot up their collective butt.

agree completely with last paragraph


 
Great, Intel's dominated the high-end desktop market for 4 years. So? It's a TINY market, Llano is king in the low-medium end dekstop market. Bulldozer's multi-threading is set to clean up with Interlagos in the server market. Zacate's thrashing Atom so hard in the netbook market it's embarrassing. Other elements of the fusion line are geared to dominate Intel on their own ultrabook platform and Llano on the mobile platform is selling more units than GlobalFoundries can kick out.

But sure, Intel's owning the top 5% of desktops.
 

then why bulldozer didn't beat an i7 2600k
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom