1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Preparing Low-cost Core 2 Quad Q8200 Processor

Discussion in 'News' started by malware, Jun 14, 2008.

  1. malware New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,476 (1.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    Latest report from DigiTimes brings us a word of new Core 2 Quad Q8000 series processors.
    Source: DigiTimes
     
  2. intel igent

    intel igent New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    4,641 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    434
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    i wonder how these will fair against the tricore's?
     
  3. DarkMatter New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,714 (0.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Considering the price of 1000 units is $203 won't be the price at retail too high to compete against tri-cores?
     
  4. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    333x7

    400 FSB = 2.8GHz quad, prolly around the $250au price point... sounds expensive/not that good
     
  5. Luke

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Messages:
    216 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    53
    hmm i have seen Q6600 for around 220-250AU so this doesn't look like a good deal to me at all
     
  6. mullered07

    mullered07 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,648 (0.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    204
    Location:
    UK
    yea the q6600's are close to that price in the uk already so what does this offer that the q6600 doesnt lower clock rate, same cache :wtf:
     
  7. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    lower clocks, lower multiplier, lower cache (q6600 is 8MB) higher stock FSB (1333 vs 1066)

    also
    No virtualisation support.
     
  8. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    I'm glad to see that the production of Quads is getting to the point where we have budget Quad-Core CPUs. But 200$ is really not budget, when I can get a Q6600 for about the same price. There's really no reason to upgrade from a Q6600 at this point in any way. A new architecture would be the only viable upgrade path.

    But, I doubt that a 3.2-3.6Ghz Quad-Core CPU won't hold it's own for at least 2 years. Not even Crysis takes more than 50%.
     
  9. JrRacinFan

    JrRacinFan Served 5k and counting ...

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    19,414 (6.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,483
    Location:
    Youngstown, OH
    I wonder if these would be 45nm or 65nm. If it was 45nm I could see it doing ok, with the lower power req's and temps.
     
  10. Luke

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Messages:
    216 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    53
    i would guess it is 45nm
     
  11. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    that 50%, means its maxing out two cores. crysis doesnt utilise quads.

    Its a common misconception due to how windows reports CPU usage.
     
  12. Basard

    Basard

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    586 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    38
    Location:
    Oshkosh
    so many cpus, so little time.....
     
  13. allen337

    allen337

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    955 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    113
    Location:
    Danville IL
    That price will fall, didnt take long for intel to come off their $600 Q6600, so within 6-8 months this will be a budget minded builders dream. With 1333 fsb it will make for a awesome clocker too, we hope. ALLEN
     
  14. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    wonder if these will be like the e7200s :D 4ghz quads on air sounds good to me
     
  15. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,921 (6.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    For the same price as a Q6600 and weaker specs idk.. Might as well grab a Q66..
     
  16. Megasty New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,263 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    The Kingdom of Au
    If you already have a Q6000 then you're set for a while, especially with the G0s. Even the last Q6600 I bought can reach 4Ghz with no problem. That price will last for a week. The Q6000s will also eat these alive because of the cache. It doesn't get any more simple than that.
     
  17. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,029 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,094
    With the latest Q6600's clocking like complete ass, and these new chips being 45nm, this might be worth it over a new Q6600. They will probably reach higher clock speeds. It would be a hard decision if you were buying new, IMO.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  18. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,705 (11.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,668
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Are we forgetting Intel is doing a "clearence sale" on Q6x00? They want to flush Kentsfield off the market.
     
  19. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    If Windows Vista doesn't report idividual CPU core usage correctly, then what are we to do to find out what the actual usage is?

    I am more than 100% sure that Crytek put an exclamation on Quad-Core CPU's. This is evident further by their work with and funding from Intel themselves.
     
  20. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    on air stable doubtful...
     
  21. Megasty New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,263 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    The Kingdom of Au
    Who can get a Q6 to 4 GHz on air, winter air maybe, but not room temp. The only stable 4 Ghz I've been able to get was on water.
     
  22. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    mine certainly wont on air. neither does the 3-4 i've seen around. The earliest batches did that, but not for long - 3.6 is the most common clocking off them. The latest batches struggle for 3.2 (i made a thread about it here on TPU a while back)
     
  23. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    If Crysis was able to use Quad cores, you would be seeing greater than 75% cpu usage. As it stands, Crysis is only able to max the equivalent of 2 cores.
     
  24. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    windows reports it as 25% per core.

    Crysis advertised 'best on intel quad core' but that doesnt mean the game even supports them.

    25% = 1 core 50% = 1 cores, and so on.
     
  25. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Yep, that's why I said Crysis would use > 75% if it was able to use a quad. That's a minimum of 3 maxed cores, plus whatever you throw on top of that.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page