Intel's Q8300; May be Last Quad Core

[HaZ]

Following suit with our Intel road map back in September of this year, Intel has has launched the last Quad-Core that consumers may see for the next while, if more are to come at all – The Q8300.

Intel's Q8300; May be Last Quad Core : Read more

 

[mtyermom]

What's the point of this proc? Fill in the gap left by the q6600? I suppose it does this at stock, but certainly not to the overclocking enthusiast.

 

[grieve]

The overclock enthusiest is what 2% of the population?

But i do agree... what is the point of this processor?

 

[Linux4geeks]

Yea, I don't see a point other than having a nice complete lineup... but with the Socket 775 going sooo cheap now... you can get a QX9650 for $500 Buy it Now on eBay... WHY get this?

 

[jaragon13]

Why is the comment box issue not fixed?
Also,why like 50 dollars more than the Q8200 or Q600

 

[enewmen]

How can this Q8300 be the last Quad Core? There will be more quad i7s and Sandy Bridge quads.
Just don't get it.

 

[malveaux]

Uh,

There's the Q6600 and then there's the Q9550. There's no reason to have chips between these two. Pointless.

 

[Freiheit]

I'm with The Doctor on this one. i7 is practically all quad-core, so what's this nonsense about this being the last quad-core "for the next while", whatever that actually means. Still, competition (Intel/AMD) is driving prices down and performance up. Whether this chip is "needed" is debatable, but it sounds like it's got good specs at a good price.

 

[rocky1234]

Someone should do a study just to see just what the percentage is out there for us overclockers now I am pretty sure we make up more than 2% of the market by now if we didn't then all these companies would not be going out of their way to make overclocking products for us to buy.

 

[Mucke]

There's the Q6600 and then there's the Q9550.

The new one is much cheaper to produce, compared to the Q6600 (45nm instead of 65nm and 4MB less cache -- you can save a lot of waver)

In about one month, Deneb will be available. I wouldn't buy any quad-Core before. Remember what the gtx200-prices did when the HD48xx-cards came out...
For me it will be a Deneb anyway: the MB/RAM-costs keep the system cheap -- and supporting AMD keeps the prices low in the future.

 

[cl_spdhax1]

i think he meant the last core2 quad, since the i7 is a different architecture. but, a 45nm quad core at 2.5ghz for about 200 is cheap, and should easily overclock past another ghz, to about 3.5~3.8.

there was a past article about crysis benefiting by using more than just 2 cores, but 4+ very fast cores or 8 threads on the i7. so, q8300 is more than welcomed.

 

[enewmen]

[citation][nom]kami3k[/nom]It seems many people on here can't read. "Intel has launched the last Quad-Core based on Core 2" Maybe if you actually read it you would of seen that.[/citation]
There is no need to be critical of fellow readers.
I noticed the detail soon after I submitted and it's not possible to delete posts.
I regret the post.

 

[dwo]

@kami3k: Maybe YOU should try reading the title. I just hope this was an honest mistake by the author and that the article was edited after publishing, because if not a lot of us are not going to put up with intentionally being mislead for the purpose of increasing (ad) views. The RSS feed's summary was also plainly wrong:

"Intel's Q8300; May be Last Quad Core (tom's hardware)"
"Following suit with our Intel road map back in September of this year, Intel has has launched the last Quad-Core that consumers may see for the next while, if more are to come at all – The Q8300."

 

[JonnyDough]

It isn't his fault that Tom's bloggers sensationalize everything.

 

[ozzie82]

I hate how all this overclocking has started off lol, such a stuid thing, what i mean by that is that, a kiddie gets a computer , and its Q6600 and straight away he wants to overclock it to 3.6 > 4ghz just so that he can proudly show it on his website sig, its 100% pff, The world has gone mad !!!

Overclocking now is as easy as renting a whore for a night, yer granny could do it. i wouldnt label most people overclocker, that tag dont belong to most, but only the real overclockers that clock for a reason and not just to have so called better benchmarks and better in gameplay

So really ,grieve is right, 2% is a good figure cos the other 98% is made up of people who dont overclock say 30% then 70% of kiddies and mad nabs with there silly overclocking sigs lol

ok rant over

goodbye

 

[ozzie82]

I hate how all this overclocking has started off lol, such a stuid thing, what i mean by that is that, a kiddie gets a computer , and its Q6600 and straight away he wants to overclock it to 3.6 > 4ghz just so that he can proudly show it on his website sig, its 100% pff, The world has gone mad !!!

Overclocking now is as easy as renting a whore for a night, yer granny could do it. i wouldnt label most people overclocker, that tag dont belong to most, but only the real overclockers that clock for a reason and not just to have so called better benchmarks and better in gameplay

So really ,grieve is right, 2% is a good figure cos the other 98% is made up of people who dont overclock say 30% then 70% of kiddies and mad nabs with there silly overclocking sigs lol

ok rant over

goodbye

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

[citation][nom]malveaux[/nom]Uh,There's the Q6600 and then there's the Q9550. There's no reason to have chips between these two. Pointless.[/citation]

What he said. There's going to be tons of i7 and i5 quads on the way. Perhaps the author should say the last "Core 2" quad core, but say it in the title as well.