Intel Preparing Low-cost Core 2 Quad Q8200 Processor

[Mussels]

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.

i was quoting you to agree, rather than re-quote Weer

 

[Wile E]

i was quoting you to agree, rather than re-quote Weer

Ah, I see. Sorry then. lol.

 

[btarunr]

Now for the bigger question: Is this a 65nm Kentsfield with 2+2 MB L2 ?

 

[DaedalusHelios]

The Q8200 will reach higher OC and use lower voltage/power consumption but not by much over the G0 (Q6600)

But It will be a case of whichever is priced better of course. Lets say Q6600's go for $190 new. Then I wouldn't pay more than $200 for a new Q8200. The prices would be relative to each other as to which would be a better chip to get.

Its sad Intel has to create its own competition nowadays in the quad market.

 

[Mussels]

the 8200 might reach higher clocks, but the performance would be held back due to the cache and low ass multiplier.

 

[btarunr]

That's right. A thread cannot access more than 2 MB of L2 cache at a given time.

 

[Mussels]

That's right. A thread cannot access more than 2 MB of L2 cache at a given time.

that actually goes into a funny thing i did once in regards to kentsfield design.

Kentsfield is 2 dual core CPU's with 4MB cache each.

so cores 0 + 1 share 4MB while cores 2 + 3 share 4MB.

Back when i was using some video encoding program that only supported dual cores, i actually realised that locking the CPU to use cores 1 and 2, would make it work as if it was an 8MB dual core - each thread had 4MB of cache each (instead of fighting over 4MB total)

totally random info, but it worked and sped the encoding up.

 

[kyle2020]

its fantastic that they are considering budget builders, i really like that - but the Q6600 is almost the same price, so i dont really see the point?

 

[btarunr]

Awww look where the "similar threads" link takes me. Fascinating history.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=4356

 

[Mussels]

lol that thread was as popular as a pentium D at a greenpeace summit.

 

[btarunr]

lol that thread was as popular as a pentium D at a greenpeace summit.

We'll now see AMD do that, with its Phenom X4 9950 that eats 140W "nom nom nom... eating ur megawhats!".

 

[Mussels]

We'll now see AMD do that, with its Phenom X4 9950 that eats 140W "nom nom nom... eating ur megawhats!".

forget thermal grease, lets just use some BBq sauce. For a heatsink, a frypan...


The way i see it, with todays 'green' mindset (and increasing electrical bills for the non greens) any CPU over 100W stock, is just ridiculous.

 

[Temps_Riising]

wonder if these will be like the e7200s 4ghz quads on air sounds good to me

Not with a 7x multi are you gonna get 4gig A quad running at 572mhz FSB would be something else, thing is most modern boards cant hit 500FSB on a 45nm quad so prob the best yer gonna see is 3.4 - 3.5gig.....possibly only 3.3gig.

 

[mrhuggles]

the 8200 might reach higher clocks, but the performance would be held back due to the cache and low ass multiplier.

with your northbridge? low multiplier could potentialy be a good thing

 

[tkpenalty]

lol that thread was as popular as a pentium D at a greenpeace summit.

ROFL. That has been sigged .


Ocing these chips won't be this easy, the obvious inferior manufacturing process (evident by lower clocks, higher temps etc) will certainly spoil and prevent most of the Q8200s from being able to hit 4GHz...

 

[Megasty]

Not with a 7x multi are you gonna get 4gig A quad running at 572mhz FSB would be something else, thing is most modern boards cant hit 500FSB on a 45nm quad so prob the best yer gonna see is 3.4 - 3.5gig.....possibly only 3.3gig.

I don't see this reaching 3.2 even on a good board. You'll be baking the thing even at that speed. A Q8200 getting 3.15 @ 450 is just about the same as a Q6600 doing 4.05 @ 450. All 3 of my Q6600s can do 4Ghz so I guess I got the good part of 3 different batches

 

[jydie]

That price is still to high for me, but it is nice to see the prices inching down.

 

[Mussels]

with your northbridge? low multiplier could potentialy be a good thing

my mobo only reaches 430FSB with 65nm chips, and reports of 550 or so with 45nm. but that 550 would require 2 sticks of ram, running at 1.1Ghz - no thanks, i like my 4GB.

higher multis are always a better choice, all things else equal.

 

[niko084]

lower clocks, lower multiplier, lower cache (q6600 is 8MB) higher stock FSB (1333 vs 1066)

also
No virtualisation support.

Next to nothing even supports VT from intel to start with.

As for the chip compared to a Q6600, it doesn't much matter the Q6600 is a few years old and soon wont be available, they are offering a new chip for a mass market of new product, in which case it will compete fairly well, but I would say better against the Phenom Quads then the Tri's.

 

[Mussels]

Next to nothing even supports VT from intel to start with.

all conroes and kentsfields do. i'm sure the E8xx0 series does as well. its only the budget ones that dont... i need it, as i run virtual systems a lot.