Tuesday, May 26th 2009

Intel Delays Launch of Core i5 Platform

Intel's Core i5 series marks the consumer mainstream entry of the Nehalem architecture, in a bid to propagate quad-core processors, at the same time letting the market digest existing inventories of dual-core processors, and making sure its foundries are well-oiled to cater to the 32 nm process, Intel is giving its "Lynnfield" quad-core processor a quarter's head-start. Taiwanese industry observer DigiTimes notes that the platform' debut may have been delayed by a little over a month.

Originally slated for July, the industry debut of Lynnfield and its launch companion, Intel P55 chipset, have been pushed to early September. Stocks of the processors and compatible motherboards however, will be in time for the launch. The processors may be available to retailers about a week ahead, in late August itself, while compatible motherboards even earlier, in mid-August.

Intel plans to start the lineup with three models (yet to be named), clocked at 2.66 GHz, 2.80 GHz, and 2.93 GHz, and priced at US $194, $284, and $562 respectively (in 1000-unit tray quantities). Major motherboard vendors such as ASUS, Gigabyte, and MSI have already displayed some of their first compatible motherboards. The P55 chipset itself is expected to be priced at $40.Source: DigiTimes
Add your own comment

34 Comments on Intel Delays Launch of Core i5 Platform

#1
twicksisted
out of interest what are the key differences between i5 and i7 chips besides the socket.
both appear to be quad core and they both have pretty similar clock speeds... is it more cache or HT?
Posted on Reply
#2
human_error
Is it me or do the differences in speed not justify the differences in price with those chips, you're paying more than twice as much for 297mhz between bottom and top models(unless the top chip is an EE, though i thought intel wouldn't release an EE variant of a mainstream chip). I know it's the same with i7s too but at least with those you can OC very easily (so almost everyone has a 920), hopefully OCing i5 will have similar benefits.

Plus the motherboards had better be significantly cheaper than i7 boards else i5s will be too expensive for the "current gen" midrange.

**edit**

by: twicksisted
out of interest what are the key differences between i5 and i7 chips besides the socket.
both appear to be quad core and they both have pretty similar clock speeds... is it more cache or HT?
i7 has an intergrated memory controller and triple channel memory, i5 has dual channel memory and is 2 dies on one package (the two communicate using a QPI interface i believe) -the cpu part which is 4 cores and HT and the northbridge part which is memory controller, pci-e links and a link to the southbridge. Some variants of i5 will also have an integrated gpu on the same package as well. The i5 motherboards should be cheaper as there is no northbridge on i5 motherboards as it is basically part of the cpu package.

**edit 2**

to put the pricing in perspective you could get a core i7 920, a x58 mobo and a triple channel ddr3 kit for LESS than the top end i5 processor, at the same time giving more performance. (remember i7s have turbo, which would put an i7 920 at 2.99ghz, faster than the top end i5 clock speed wise too!)
Posted on Reply
#3
WhiteLotus
by: btarunr
Intel plans to start the lineup with three models (yet to be named), clocked at 2.66 GHz, 2.80 GHz, and 2.93 GHz, and priced at US $194, $284, and $562 respectively (in 1000-unit tray quantities).
$278 for .13 more GHz o.0
Posted on Reply
#4
lemonadesoda
$562 for i5, and less than 3Ghz, is completely silly IMO. I understand a premium on every ouce of Mhz on the top of the line Q extremes, Xeons or i7 extremes, but on the "budget-consumer" range, a CPU over $250 is sub-strategy management out of order.
Posted on Reply
#5
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: lemonadesoda
$562 for i5, and less than 3Ghz, is completely silly IMO. I understand a premium on every ouce of Mhz on the top of the line Q extremes, Xeons or i7 extremes, but on the "budget-consumer" range, a CPU over $250 is sub-strategy management out of order.
What's more, at exactly that price you will be getting Core i7 950 (3.06 GHz), available nearly around that time. Intel is good at mocking itself.
Posted on Reply
#6
Cheeseball
The motherboards had better be below US$100, otherwise going i5 is useless with i7 in place.
Posted on Reply
#7
Mussels
Moderprator
the main differences i can tell

i7 = triple channel, 3 16x PCI-E 2.0 slots sli and crossfire (x58)
i5 = dual channel, 1 16x slot 1 4x slot crossfire only? (p55)
Posted on Reply
#8
filip007
Dont buy this Core i5 its stupid go for Quad 775 or AMD its better.
Posted on Reply
#9
Mussels
Moderprator
by: filip007
Dont buy this Core i5 its stupid go for Quad 775 or AMD its better.
hmmm. i'll uh, keep that in mind.
not.
Posted on Reply
#10
twicksisted
i wonder how these will OC as that 2.6ghz one looks cheap enough :)
Posted on Reply
#11
Mussels
Moderprator
by: twicksisted
i wonder how these will OC as that 2.6ghz one looks cheap enough :)
being 32nm... probably pretty damn well. due to the less complicated design (loss of a memory channel) i'm expecting higher % overclocks compared to i7.
Posted on Reply
#12
twicksisted
aaaah ok its 32nm... i diddnt realise... thats awesome :)
at that price im sure to go for one... im not big on crossfire / sli anyways... always had crossfire motherboards and never really used it :)
The X4 slot can be used for physics i guess should be quick enough
Posted on Reply
#13
Mussels
Moderprator
by: twicksisted
aaaah ok its 32nm... i diddnt realise... thats awesome :)
at that price im sure to go for one... im not big on crossfire / sli anyways... always had crossfire motherboards and never really used it :)
The X4 slot can be used for physics i guess should be quick enough
since its PCI-E 2.0, i doubt it would slow most crossfire setups anyway. i ran my setup on a 4x 1.1 slot for a while without any real slowdown, so a 2.0 slot should be sufficient for any single GPU cards.
Posted on Reply
#14
human_error
by: Mussels
being 32nm... probably pretty damn well. due to the less complicated design (loss of a memory channel) i'm expecting higher % overclocks compared to i7.
I didn't think the initial core i5s were going to be 32nm, i heard that they would launch at 45nm and migrate to 32nm Nov/Dec timeframe (around the same time intel launches the six core core i7 variants).

**edit**

just re-read the article, and even though the tpu article sais they will be 32nm the source doesn't mention 32nm as the initial launch process.
Posted on Reply
#15
Mussels
Moderprator
by: human_error
I didn't think the initial core i5s were going to be 32nm, i heard that they would launch at 45nm and migrate to 32nm Nov/Dec timeframe (around the same time intel launches the six core core i7 variants).
from what i read, the delays we are seeing is because they decided to skip 45nm entirely.
Posted on Reply
#16
Darksaber
W1zzard's Sidekick
Welcome to a world with no real competition.

People were always joking "if AMD would not be, then Intel would still be offering P4s". True that.

Core i7 has no chipset alternative to the X58, so Intel can ask for as much as they want and no other chipset manufacturer can release i7 chipsets (SiS, Via etc), (thus no cheap boards). Now that there are no alternative products out there that can compete directly with the i7 and a good performance base for 775, they are letting manufacturers sell out of the old stuff before introducing new i5 boards.

Moving the date back from July to September has one single reason: Give the companies the possibility more time to sell off their inventory of series 4 boards.

This situation will only get worse. Check the prices of the i5:

2,93 at just above 400€ , 2,8 GHz at just over 204€ and 2,66 GHz at just 141 € (when buying 1000 pieces). Pretty damn expensive stuff if you ask me...

I hope it does not get worse...

my 2 cents.
Posted on Reply
#17
zAAm
by: twicksisted
i wonder how these will OC as that 2.6ghz one looks cheap enough :)
I'll say under correction that since the northbridge is integrated into the cpu, they'll probably lock the FSB and multiplier so that you can't overclock it at all? Otherwise the i7 would kind of be a waste if you only get another memory channel and you can SLI/Xfire properly with x16 links...

Can anyone confirm this? ;)
Posted on Reply
#18
Mussels
Moderprator
by: zAAm
I'll say under correction that since the northbridge is integrated into the cpu, they'll probably lock the FSB and multiplier so that you can't overclock it at all? Otherwise the i7 would kind of be a waste if you only get another memory channel and you can SLI/Xfire properly with x16 links...

Can anyone confirm this? ;)
intel may well lock it on their motherboards, but it sure as hell wont be FSB locked once asus and DFI start playing with it :)
Posted on Reply
#19
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Update: Intel P55 southbridge chipset will be sold for $40 a piece (to motherboard vendors ofcourse).
Posted on Reply
#20
Mussels
Moderprator
by: btarunr
Update: Intel P55 southbridge chipset will be sold for $40 a piece (to motherboard vendors ofcourse).
aww, for that price i want one for a keyring
Posted on Reply
#21
zAAm
by: Mussels
intel may well lock it on their motherboards, but it sure as hell wont be FSB locked once asus and DFI start playing with it :)
I don't know, Intel can be sneaky sneaky sometimes... :p
If they include the whole oscillator module on the cpu they can probably lock the FSB so that there is no way you can overclock a 2.6GHz to a 2.9GHz...
Posted on Reply
#22
Mussels
Moderprator
by: zAAm
I don't know, Intel can be sneaky sneaky sometimes... :p
If they include the whole oscillator module on the cpu they can probably lock the FSB so that there is no way you can overclock a 2.6GHz to a 2.9GHz...
intel locked the multiplier so it couldnt be unlocked on 775 (non extreme chips) and yet brands found a way to unlock that, by tricking speedstep (thats why you have the range of multis down to 6x unlocked on enthusiast boards)

If these chips support turbo mode, they'll get unlocked too.
Posted on Reply
#23
zAAm
True, but if you have a lower unlocked multiplier and no way to increase the FSB you're still pretty much screwed? :p
Posted on Reply
#24
Mussels
Moderprator
by: zAAm
True, but if you have a lower unlocked multiplier and no way to increase the FSB you're still pretty much screwed? :p
you're forgetting turbo mode, i7 (and possibly i5) have the ability to raise multis too. the only thing that held i7 back there was a wattage limit, and that got turned into a BIOS option on many boards.
Posted on Reply
#25
zAAm
Ok, so maybe you'll be able to overclock the 2.6GHz to 2.9Ghz at most? If you trick Speedstep into thinking that only one core is at full capacity and none of the others are working it'll raise the multiplier to 22x from 20x. Still that isn't a very large overclock... But I guess if you can get an overclock like that instead of paying double for the 2.9GHz I can fully understand :p

Also, I'm not sure on what level they 'tricked' Speedstep? On the motherboard/northbridge/cpu/somewhere in between. Maybe Intel will still rip out the sneakiness and keep that from happening. lol

All I'm saying is that they'll probably try to hinder you from overclocking since the i7's sales would drop since they'd then be targeting the upper enthusiasts...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment