Intel Roadmap Leaked, Shows Core i3, i5 Info

[Marcus Yam]

Core i5 and Core i3 details sound plausible.

Intel Roadmap Leaked, Shows Core i3, i5 Info : Read more

 

[sunflier]

Roadmap also shows a dual-core Clarkdale-based Core i5 with Hyperthreading that'll launch at the faster clock speeds starting at 3.43GHz, play Crysis and ramping all the way to 3.73GHz.

 

[rags_20]

The higher clock speeds with 4 logical cores ought to be good for gaming. Can probably get it to 4.5 on water. Pair it with 5870 CF and you're good to go.

 

[pbrigido]

I am looking forward to seeing some benchmarks for the 3.73GHz i5.

 

[jerreece]

I'm interested to see how this Clarkdale i5 dual-core with HT will compare with the current i5-750. Sounds like the i5-750 will be the only "i5" branded chip without Hyperthreading. Different base clocks, but the dual-core using the right applications would have 4 logical cores, versus the i5-750's 4 physical cores.

Probably stand out most in synthetic benches that can use HT well.

 

[jerreece]

Japanese site PC Watch has details on a roadmap leak that details low-powered "S" versions of the Core i5 750 and i7 860, which feature a thermal design power of 82W rather than the usual 95W. These chips will supposedly run all four cores at 2.4GHz for the i5 and 2.53GHz for the i7.

BTW: Is anyone else wishing Intel came out with a low power version without underclocking? Lowering TDP is great, if you can get the same or better performance. Kind of makes me wonder if they only reached the lower TDP simply because they are downclocked.

 

[JofaMang]

Interesting spread of products and features. Here's hoping the prices are low enough to push AMD into being more competative. Viva la competition!

 

[megabuster]

What's the point of upgrading to the latest and greatest anymore, when ALL games can run 60+ FPS on 4 year old platforms? Instead of killing PC Gaming, consoles are killing hardware innovation.

 

[burnley14]

The i3 530 looks like it will be an absolute steal. I can do without the Turbo mode, spend the extra cash on a better cooler, and reach 4GHz, all with a processor that costs barely over 100 bucks. Yes please.

 

[tayb]

It looks as if Intel knows it has an architectural advantage at the time being so they are focusing more on ramping up the speeds than improving on their architecture. This is the same sort of pattern we saw from Intel in the late 90's and early 00's that led to AMD grabbing the performance crown for 3-4 years because they focused on improved architecture while Intel focused on ramping up speeds. Might we be seeing history repeat itself in the next couple of years? Is Intel resting on its laurels thinking AMD doesn't have anything up its sleeve? I guess we'll find out.

 

[agnickolov]

Buried in the chart is also the fact we won't see value upgrade for Core i7 920 - Gulftown is going to be extreme edition only...

 

[cyberkuberiah]

[citation][nom]sunflier[/nom][/citation]

wow , crysis fever still going strong ! no , stop , this is irritating now .

 

[cyberkuberiah]

[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]It looks as if Intel knows it has an architectural advantage at the time being so they are focusing more on ramping up the speeds than improving on their architecture. This is the same sort of pattern we saw from Intel in the late 90's and early 00's that led to AMD grabbing the performance crown for 3-4 years because they focused on improved architecture while Intel focused on ramping up speeds. Might we be seeing history repeat itself in the next couple of years? Is Intel resting on its laurels thinking AMD doesn't have anything up its sleeve? I guess we'll find out.[/citation]

yeah , but amd has a lot to cover . intel's leading in IPC as well as TDP as well as manufacturing process . the trio of three will create this new i3/i5 .

 

[cyberkuberiah]

[citation][nom]pbrigido[/nom]I am looking forward to seeing some benchmarks for the 3.73GHz i5.[/citation]

yeah , and moe so , i want to see the overclocking results on a good air cooler .

 

[lemonade4]

[citation][nom]megabuster[/nom]What's the point of upgrading to the latest and greatest anymore, when ALL games can run 60+ FPS on 4 year old platforms? Instead of killing PC Gaming, consoles are killing hardware innovation.[/citation]

You include Crysis in your list of 60+ FPS games? Console hardware having killing hardware innovation? what are you stuck in 2006?

 

[gt1209]

Sign me up for i5 750s

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]It looks as if Intel knows it has an architectural advantage at the time being so they are focusing more on ramping up the speeds than improving on their architecture. This is the same sort of pattern we saw from Intel in the late 90's and early 00's that led to AMD grabbing the performance crown for 3-4 years because they focused on improved architecture while Intel focused on ramping up speeds. Might we be seeing history repeat itself in the next couple of years? Is Intel resting on its laurels thinking AMD doesn't have anything up its sleeve? I guess we'll find out.[/citation]

And AMD releasing a 3GHz Phenom II all the way up to a 3.6GHz Phenom II is what again?

 

[dupaman]

[citation][nom]jerreece[/nom]BTW: Is anyone else wishing Intel came out with a low power version without underclocking? Lowering TDP is great, if you can get the same or better performance. Kind of makes me wonder if they only reached the lower TDP simply because they are downclocked.[/citation]
Or you can just undervolt the CPUs yourself... no point in paying intel a huge premium for the same result like with the C2Q S series. See the comparison with the Q9550s VS Q9550 here: http://www.silentpcreview.com/article954-page5.html

 

[dupaman]

wth? Link didn't show up. Just goto silentpcreview and look for it under the CPU/mobo section. Page 5 shows the undervolting results.

 

[AtuBrian]

[citation][nom]rags_20[/nom]The higher clock speeds with 4 logical cores ought to be good for gaming. Can probably get it to 4.5 on water. Pair it with 5870 CF and you're good to go.[/citation]
if only everyone had the kind of money indeed yes it would be fine but no

 

[enzo matrix]

[citation][nom]megabuster[/nom]What's the point of upgrading to the latest and greatest anymore, when ALL games can run 60+ FPS on 4 year old platforms? Instead of killing PC Gaming, consoles are killing hardware innovation.[/citation]
Yeah, totally. If I turn off AA, lower all the settings and play at 640*480 I might be able to play... laggy COD4 on my radeon X1300?
Bahumbug, who need DX10?

 

[buwish]

3.7GHz stock...not bad.

 

[anamaniac]

[citation][nom]psycho sykes[/nom]I have a question.. How could the i7 870 operate with the same TDP as the i5 (95W) at higher Freq and turbo boost? This means that the i7 870 is 95W while the i7 860 and the i5 750 have to be lower.. Right? I'm confused.[/citation]
They likely do use less power.
The i7 860 is a higher binned chip however, meaning it can stabiliy run on a lower voltage at the same speed (usiong less power).

I however want 2GHz quad cores with a GPU sitting right next beside them.

 

[ik694]

Considering the i7 920 easily overclocked to 4GHZ+ i dont really care what these do. lol

 

[tmc]

Perhaps heeding the warnings about only allowing 1 graphics card bus to be utilized got Intel shifting towards improving the i5's and i7's that they already have on the market by updating them at similar price points. This I am happy with... as long as Intel is not slapping consumers in the face with a dead-end to the i5-750/860 chips then I'm satisfied that the mid-grade chips/system have a future at similar price points. That puts AMDs feet to the fire on improving mhz/per watt ratios more BECAUSE intel won't abandon the 2 graphics card entusiast as once thought in the mainstream product lines-- just the budget lines.