Intel Speeding Up Sandy Bridge Launch

[btarunr]

At this year's Computex expo held in Taiwan, some of the most unexpected exhibits were socket LGA1155 motherboards from almost every motherboard vendor, including from lesser known brands, among market-heavyweights such as ASUS, Gigabyte, and MSI. Socket LGA1155 is expected to be the platform on which value-thru-performance processors from Intel, based on its next-generation Sandy Bridge architecture will run. The fact that motherboard vendors managed to show almost market-ready products as early as May, shows that these products could in fact reach market before next year's CES event, which is typically held in January.

That seems to be the case, according to a recent report by PC World. In the company's Q2 conference call, Intel CEO Paul Otellini said that due to rave reviews by industry customers (which likely include OEMs, hardware vendors, and other partners), Intel is speeding up launch of new processors. "I am more excited by Sandy Bridge than I have been in any product that the company has launched in a number of years," he said, adding "Due to the very strong reception of Sandy Bridge, we have accelerated our 32-nanometer factory ramp and have raised our capex guidance to enable us to meet the anticipated demand."

On Tuesday, Intel announced record earnings, calling its Q2 2010 performance "the best ever" for the company. The new processors based on the Sandy Bridge architecture will be built on the 32 nm manufacturing process, and use the new LGA1155 package, compatible with certain Intel 6-series chipsets.

Source: PC World

[btarunr]

Many Thanks to DanishDevil for the tip.

[Laurijan]

Are there any pics of that Computex motherboard-booth anywhere?

[HalfAHertz]

Oh noez here comes Skynet!

[NeSeNVi]

Hurry up! I'm waiting for it. My 7 years old P4 deserves for rest.

[happita]

My pee pee twitched a little.

[DRDNA]

Originally Posted by happita

My pee pee twitched a little.

Go see a doctor

[Wrigleyvillain]

My decision to skip Nehalem is looking better and better.

[FreedomEclipse]

I will be waiting for this me thinks. but i'l wait n see, my Q9550 is still good to go

[Wrigleyvillain]

Yep S775 + a 5850 (or two) is plenty for my needs still as well.

[FreedomEclipse]

I plan to sell off my 5850 for something else ;P I only got it cuz im skint & 1 of my crossfired 4870s never made it back from RMA

[Delta6326]

i haven't heard much about sandy bridge but is it going to carry the same name like i3 i5 i7? also will 1155 work on 1156 mobo's being that it has the one less pin?

[FreedomEclipse]

Originally Posted by Delta6326

also will 1155 work on 1156 mobo's being that it has the one less pin?

Did AMD socket 939 work on socket 940?

theres your answer

[Delta6326]

im not for sure never had a amd rig

[FreedomEclipse]

Originally Posted by Delta6326

im not for sure never had a amd rig

[Delta6326]

so im going with a no?

[erocker]

No it won't work.

[Wrigleyvillain]

That was classic.

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by Delta6326

i haven't heard much about sandy bridge but is it going to carry the same name like i3 i5 i7? also will 1155 work on 1156 mobo's being that it has the one less pin?

Rumors suggest that yes, it will use the same i3, i5, i7 brand identifiers, but with a new model numbering scheme.

Like i3 2xxx, i5 2xxx, i7 2xxx.

[newfellow]

So, this article says nothing when I can pick one up.

No way for current i7. the 920/930 sucks. 980X costs way too much so does 965.

I am honestly considering to buy an QX9650 cheap somewhere or perhaps it's little brother Q9650 just because multiplier of 9 is enough to pop it to decent speeds 4-cores is enough,
but I would love to have 8-12 or more. No reasonable person goes to 8xx or 7xx or 6xx series they are simply too slow, has too low caches, has too weak speeds & uses old crappy dual
channel memory who the hell wants dual channel we've seen it it doesn't work. Plus cost is the same on 920 compared to these which has 8 threads.

AMD 6-core starts to look really good, but bought twice the NFORCE crap ones the AMD crappy motherboards those North bridges are so horrid I wouldn't take one even, if donated
to me. Although, just to consider 1090T might actually still fly, but highest OC at 3,8-4.1Ghz ??? screw that with AMD clocks.

Only reasonable Intel core to buy is 'Xeon E5640' for the moment.

[TheLaughingMan]

Originally Posted by FreedomEclipse

Did AMD socket 939 work on socket 940?

theres your answer

First while that parallel is right, the analogy is wrong. 939 did not work with 940. AM3 (938 pins) does work with AM2 (940 pins). So what he asks is a fairly valid question even though Intel has never done platform socket compatibility with any of their chips.

Originally Posted by newfellow

So, this article says nothing when I can pick one up.

No way for current i7. the 920/930 sucks. 980X costs way too much so does 965.

I am honestly considering to buy an QX9650 cheap somewhere or perhaps it's little brother Q9650 just because multiplier of 9 is enough to pop it to decent speeds 4-cores is enough,
but I would love to have 8-12 or more. No reasonable person goes to 8xx or 7xx or 6xx series they are simply too slow, has too low caches, has too weak speeds & uses old crappy dual
channel memory who the hell wants dual channel we've seen it it doesn't work. Plus cost is the same on 920 compared to these which has 8 threads.

AMD 6-core starts to look really good, but bought twice the NFORCE crap ones the AMD crappy motherboards those North bridges are so horrid I wouldn't take one even, if donated
to me. Although, just to consider 1090T might actually still fly, but highest OC at 3.8-4.1Ghz ??? screw that with AMD clocks.

Only reasonable Intel core to buy is 'Xeon E5640' for the moment.

I am honestly not sure what to say here. I am not sure where to start so I will simply say

[FreedomEclipse]

Originally Posted by TheLaughingMan

First while that parallel is right, the analogy is wrong. 939 did not work with 940. AM3 (938 pins) does work with AM2 (940 pins). So what he asks is a fairly valid question even though Intel has never done platform socket compatibility with any of their chips.



I am honestly not sure what to say here. I am not sure where to start so I will simply say

i was talking about the very early skt 940, when AMD decided it could be released to the general public & not just for industrial. obviously since then its come a long way

[mdm-adph]

Originally Posted by TheLaughingMan

First while that parallel is right, the analogy is wrong. 939 did not work with 940. AM3 (938 pins) does work with AM2 (940 pins). So what he asks is a fairly valid question even though Intel has never done platform socket compatibility with any of their chips.

What was the difference between AM2 and AM2+, then? I'm running an AM3 chip on an AM2+ socket right now.

[kaneda]

Originally Posted by TheLaughingMan

I am honestly not sure what to say here. I am not sure where to start so I will simply say

Right there with you dude. I read it in disbelief.

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by newfellow

So, this article says nothing when I can pick one up.

No way for current i7. the 920/930 sucks. 980X costs way too much so does 965.

I am honestly considering to buy an QX9650 cheap somewhere or perhaps it's little brother Q9650 just because multiplier of 9 is enough to pop it to decent speeds 4-cores is enough,
but I would love to have 8-12 or more. No reasonable person goes to 8xx or 7xx or 6xx series they are simply too slow, has too low caches, has too weak speeds & uses old crappy dual
channel memory who the hell wants dual channel we've seen it it doesn't work. Plus cost is the same on 920 compared to these which has 8 threads.

AMD 6-core starts to look really good, but bought twice the NFORCE crap ones the AMD crappy motherboards those North bridges are so horrid I wouldn't take one even, if donated
to me. Although, just to consider 1090T might actually still fly, but highest OC at 3,8-4.1Ghz ??? screw that with AMD clocks.

Only reasonable Intel core to buy is 'Xeon E5640' for the moment.

This post makes no sense. You can get an i7 920 for pretty darn cheap, cheaper than a Q9650, and the 920 spanks it. The Q9650 is still $330.

The i7 8xx series also spanks the 775 quads, and is cheaper. They also have 8 threads like the 920.

Dual channel ram vs triple channel does not matter. All that matters is the end results, and the end results point towards dual channel being sufficient for all but the most memory intensive apps out there.

The AMD chipsets are no longer crappy. They offer good performance, stability and even clock better than in the past. The 1090T is roughly equivalent to the i7 8xx or 9xx series clock for clock. And I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about with nForce. That part of your comment wasn't very clear.

And the E5640 is really no better than an i7 920 for a single cpu system for most people. You might as well spend the extra $200 and get a 6 core, or spend over $500 less, get a 920, then use the money saved on a better gpu, or screen or something. 32nm is not worth over $500.