Monday, November 3rd 2008

Intel Core i7 Previews/Reviews Posted

Previews, reviews and all kind of write-ups about the new Intel Core i7/X58 platform flooded the network this morning. I'll use this post to add all the links I can find, you can also post your comments here until the official press release statement.

[H]ard|OCP1 | [H]ard|OCP2 | TweakTown | Guru3D | Techgage | Legion Hardware | Benchmark Reviews | HotHardware | PC Perspective | TechSpot | Neoseeker | t-break | OCAU | ExtremeTech | Lost Circuits
Add your own comment

75 Comments on Intel Core i7 Previews/Reviews Posted

#1
farlex85
insider said:
That overclock is from an engineering sample though, may not have the 110A limit ;)
Maybe, but we really can't say, and we haven't heard much about this limit until very recently, and it seems rather unconfirmed atm. It looks pretty promising to me.
Posted on Reply
#2
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
I really do think the limit is BS. Back when the 925/915 chipsets were released, the same type of store was circulating around the internet. Everyone was saying that more than a 10% overclock was impossible with these chipsets. Oddly, all the cheap motherboard makers were releasing boards equiped with these chipsets that couldn't really get more than a 10% overclock on processors that were proven good overclockers.

More higher-end manufacturers started releasing boards with these chipsets, that didn't have this 10% overclock limit. Everyone started saying that they had found a way to get around this overclocking limit, but really they just actually made a good quality motherboard around what was meant to be a budget chipset and the motherboard was capable of better overclocks.

I think this is a similar situation here. People are jumping to conclusions on new technology, that they don't really know about yet.
Posted on Reply
#4
farlex85
truehighroller1 said:
I don't know if this will work or not but, this was spotted by me over at XS,

Max screen on air (maybe a little more because after i hit 217mhz Blck in 12X multi.
http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/divers/000000078326.png


Max prime stable on air.

http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/divers/000000078330.png

__________________



So they are wrong it is just on the Intel Mother Boards "Stupid Intel"

I will be getting a 920.
Yeah see every time actual oc'ing is happening it's looking pretty nice. I don't know where all this naysaying is coming from. After upgraded stepping, improved boards, and better binned ddr3 come around these things will put up some serious oc's I'm thinking.....
Posted on Reply
#5
Fitseries3
Eleet Hardware Junkie
newtekie1 said:
I really do think the limit is BS. Back when the 925/915 chipsets were released, the same type of store was circulating around the internet. Everyone was saying that more than a 10% overclock was impossible with these chipsets. Oddly, all the cheap motherboard makers were releasing boards equiped with these chipsets that couldn't really get more than a 10% overclock on processors that were proven good overclockers.

More higher-end manufacturers started releasing boards with these chipsets, that didn't have this 10% overclock limit. Everyone started saying that they had found a way to get around this overclocking limit, but really they just actually made a good quality motherboard around what was meant to be a budget chipset and the motherboard was capable of better overclocks.

I think this is a similar situation here. People are jumping to conclusions on new technology, that they don't really know about yet.
its not the chipsets. its in the cpu itself. they purposely locked the chips so you are forced to use the extreme.
Posted on Reply
#6
truehighroller1
farlex85 said:
Yeah see every time actual oc'ing is happening it's looking pretty nice. I don't know where all this naysaying is coming from. After upgraded stepping, improved boards, and better binned ddr3 come around these things will put up some serious oc's I'm thinking.....
I am guilty but, only because reading Tom's review led me to believe this. Tom's didn't put that it is only on Intel Mother Boards this limit is present. Stupid Tom's :p
Posted on Reply
#7
Unregistered
truehighroller1 said:
I don't know if this will work or not but, this was spotted by me over at XS,

Max screen on air (maybe a little more because after i hit 217mhz Blck in 12X multi.
http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/divers/000000078326.png


Max prime stable on air.

http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/divers/000000078330.png

__________________



So they are wrong it is just on the Intel Mother Boards "Stupid Intel"

I will be getting a 920.
Again note the (ES), Engineering Sample.
#8
farlex85
truehighroller1 said:
I am guilty but, only because reading Tom's review led me to believe this. Tom's didn't put that it is only on Intel Mother Boards this limit is present. Stupid Tom's :p
It's interesting though on that second link Coretemp reports the TDP as right at 130 watts........

insider said:
Again note the (ES), Engineering Sample.
That really is irrelevant until we know how that differs from the market chips. Could be better, worse, unlocked, locked, we just don't know. The multi is the same as the market, that's all we do know.
Posted on Reply
#9
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
fitseries3 said:
its not the chipsets. its in the cpu itself. they purposely locked the chips so you are forced to use the extreme.
That wasn't my point. My point was that the same false statements have been made concerning Intel and limitting overclocking, I believe there was even something similar said about the Core 2 chips when they were first coming out. All the stories turned out to be BS in the end, just like I believe this one will.
Posted on Reply
#10
mechtech
How much faster will xp boot up and firefox to load.....I wonder if 2k will be worth those 15 seconds, hmmmmm, prob not, I think Techreport said it best, "In fact, for the average guy, the secret hero of our test results was the Core 2 Duo E8600."

A nice chip no doubt, but realworld everyday things are all that matters to me, (xp boot time, css load time, opening office, etc) I could care less if sandrasoft mem bench was 30000 GB/s sorry for the ignorance, but then again this really isnt made for a run of the mill desktop.
Posted on Reply
#11
mullered07
DarkMatter said:
Doing much better on this reviews than it did in the previews, especially on games. It's faster clock for clock now at least AND did you saw this?

http://www.guru3d.com/article/intel-core-i7-920-and-965-review/18

3-way GTX280 SLI on i7 almost tripling performance of 3-way SLI on Core2!!
just goes to show crysis is way more cpu dependant than people had suggested, maybe its not that poorly optimised afterall :D

damn i like the look of these benchmarks and the memory bandwidth is insane, zomg im so gonna want an 17 rig now, but theres not way in hell will i be able t afford one for at least a year the prices are gonna be crazy as theres nothing that can touch that kind of performance, i think amd really should be shitting themselves big time, pffff 4ghz denenb that will get > off this lot :eek:
Posted on Reply
#12
niko084
As of now, I see absolutely no reason to go to the i7 when you can overclock your Core2...

I'm waiting to see results overclocked and what its capable of, along with the ram.
*numbers can always look pretty on paper*
Posted on Reply
#13
niko084
mullered07 said:
just goes to show crysis is way more cpu dependant than people had suggested, maybe its not that poorly optimised afterall :D

damn i like the look of these benchmarks and the memory bandwidth is insane, zomg im so gonna want an 17 rig now, but theres not way in hell will i be able t afford one for at least a year the prices are gonna be crazy as theres nothing that can touch that kind of performance, i think amd really should be shitting themselves big time, pffff 4ghz denenb that will get > off this lot :eek:
No, I think something there is bunk, my chip varies very little in FPS from 2.13 - 3.4.
Posted on Reply
#14
mullered07
niko084 said:
No, I think something there is bunk, my chip varies very little in FPS from 2.13 - 3.4.
varies when ?
Posted on Reply
#15
phanbuey
mechtech said:
How much faster will xp boot up and firefox to load.....I wonder if 2k will be worth those 15 seconds, hmmmmm, prob not, I think Techreport said it best, "In fact, for the average guy, the secret hero of our test results was the Core 2 Duo E8600."

A nice chip no doubt, but realworld everyday things are all that matters to me, (xp boot time, css load time, opening office, etc) I could care less if sandrasoft mem bench was 30000 GB/s sorry for the ignorance, but then again this really isnt made for a run of the mill desktop.
Just because i dont need 500+hp to go to the grocery store doesnt mean i dont want an M5... i would even love a 500HP Golf. Why? because for that split second of :eek::eek::eek: on the highway every once in a while.
Posted on Reply
#16
hv43082
I read THG review last night and just now [H] and these processors are only more beneficial in applications with little to gain in the gaming department (unless you game at low resolution). I am disappointed but glad to see that my Q6600 at 3.6 is still very good for gaming.
Posted on Reply
#17
hv43082
niko084 said:
As of now, I see absolutely no reason to go to the i7 when you can overclock your Core2...

I'm waiting to see results overclocked and what its capable of, along with the ram.
*numbers can always look pretty on paper*
Check out Xtremesystem.org. Their resident guy OC the highest i7 CPU to a whopping 5.4+ Ghz on triple phase. Some crazy result.
Posted on Reply
#18
niko084
mullered07 said:
varies when ?
In crysis.
Posted on Reply
#19
niko084
hv43082 said:
Check out Xtremesystem.org. Their resident guy OC the highest i7 CPU to a whopping 5.4+ Ghz on triple phase. Some crazy result.
More interested in what it will do without extreme modifications to the board and ram, and how about some long term stability and reliability.
Posted on Reply
#21
TheGuruStud
So, when are they going to do real clock for clock results instead of leaving the turbo thing on?

It doesn't look so impressive compared to c2q when that happens.


I'm still awaiting Bulldozer. Now that's a real CPU :)
Posted on Reply
#22
Mussels
Moderprator
My opinion is that the OCing will be crippled on intel chipsets at first, and get better as time goes on.

Asus, gigabyte and DFI wont let us down :)
Posted on Reply
#25
HTC
farlex85 said:
Finally, an official review Oc'ing a 920, and it does indeed still look good.
Which is one of the reasons i looked for it specifically, when i googled. I figure: if i'm ever going to go i7, it will be the 920.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment