• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

2011 Intel Core Processor Pricing and Launch Dates Surface

Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
4,659 (1.31/day)
Likes
1,009
System Name Obelisc
Processor i7 3770k @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard Asus P8Z77-V
Cooling H110
Memory 16GB(4x4) @ 2400 MHz 9-11-11-31
Video Card(s) GTX 780 Ti
Storage 850 EVO 1TB, 2x 5TB Toshiba
Case T81
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Titanium HD
Power Supply EVGA 850 T2 80+ TITANIUM
Software Win10 64bit
#26
I bet motherboard makers will figure out how to control the turbo multi, so even the standard chips should overclock.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#27
core i3 2390T 2/4 2.7/3.5ghz 3MB cache 35W
core i3 2120 2/4 3.3ghz 3MB cache 65W??
I don't understand -.-. I would just get the 35W version then?
 

Fourstaff

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
9,376 (3.19/day)
Likes
2,100
Location
Home
System Name Asus K50-X5DAB \\ Orange!
Processor Athlon QL-65 2.2Ghz \\ 3570K
Motherboard Laptop \\ ASRock z77 Extreme4
Cooling Laptop \\ H100i
Memory 1x1GB + 1X2GB \\ 2x4Gb 1600Mhz CL9 Corsair XMS3
Video Card(s) Mobility Radeon HD4570 512mb \\ Zotac 660Ti OC 2Gb
Storage 250Gb \\ Samsung 840 250Gb + Toshiba DT01ACA300 3Tb
Display(s) 15.6" 1366x768 \\ LG 22EA53VQ
Case Laptop Chassis \\ NZXT Phantom 410 Black/Orange
Power Supply Power Brick \\ Corsair CXM500w
#28
2120 $138, 2390T $195

Tell me again, why would you want to go for the 35w version? Although the power savings will be substantial if you are leaving your computer running 24/7.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#29
yes true, but the difference in watts is almost double. The lower priced- higher power consumption telling me that it is a lower quality chip?

Could it be the turbo? Not all cores would be running entirely at 3.5ghz... hmm
 

Fourstaff

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
9,376 (3.19/day)
Likes
2,100
Location
Home
System Name Asus K50-X5DAB \\ Orange!
Processor Athlon QL-65 2.2Ghz \\ 3570K
Motherboard Laptop \\ ASRock z77 Extreme4
Cooling Laptop \\ H100i
Memory 1x1GB + 1X2GB \\ 2x4Gb 1600Mhz CL9 Corsair XMS3
Video Card(s) Mobility Radeon HD4570 512mb \\ Zotac 660Ti OC 2Gb
Storage 250Gb \\ Samsung 840 250Gb + Toshiba DT01ACA300 3Tb
Display(s) 15.6" 1366x768 \\ LG 22EA53VQ
Case Laptop Chassis \\ NZXT Phantom 410 Black/Orange
Power Supply Power Brick \\ Corsair CXM500w
#30
yes true, but the difference in watts is almost double. The lower priced- higher power consumption telling me that it is a lower quality chip?
Max TDP of 65w does not mean that it consumes 65w, but 99% (or something like that) of all the chips consume less than that amount. And yes, Intel bins their better chips to 2390T, leaves the shittier ones to 2120. You can easily get a more powerful chip with $195 (for example, the i5 760) and downclock it, getting a nice and low power consumption chip.
 
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
110 (0.04/day)
Likes
14
#31
i5-2500T 'vs' i5-2500S

Love the Quad with only 45W power draw! Perfect for a folding farm! :cool:

That is really impressive to have 4 cores running at decent speeds and staying under 45w but you would be far better buying the next CPU up as its the same price and has a higher multiplier clock, if you want lower power then under-volt it and under-clock it, but if you want more power leave it as it is. But with the 45w version you will never be able to increase it's speed.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#32
That is really impressive to have 4 cores running at decent speeds and staying under 45w but you would be far better buying the next CPU up as its the same price and has a higher multiplier clock, if you want lower power then under-volt it and under-clock it, but if you want more power leave it as it is. But with the 45w version you will never be able to increase it's speed.
That's probably the turbo. Only one core will utilized to 100% turbo or 2 core for 80% something like that..
I have seen intel's demo video on this. My i7 on my laptop also only goes 100% on one core
 
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
110 (0.04/day)
Likes
14
#33
That's probably the turbo. Only one core will utilized to 100% turbo or 2 core for 80% something like that..
I have seen intel's demo video on this. My i7 on my laptop also only goes 100% on one core
No that is something different all together. The i5-2500T (45w) has a standard multiplier of x23 and turbo of x33. The i5-2500S (65w) has a standard multiplier of x27 and turbo of x37.

My point was that if they are both exactly the same price then you may as well buy the faster CPU and if you are very power conscience then under-clock and under-volt it. As this way will always leave you the option of having a fast chip if you wanted to, where as the other chip can never run faster than 2.3/3.3GHz.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#34
No that is something different all together. The i5-2500T (45w) has a standard multiplier of x23 and turbo of x33. The i5-2500S (65w) has a standard multiplier of x27 and turbo of x37.

My point was that if they are both exactly the same price then you may as well buy the faster CPU and if you are very power conscience then under-clock and under-volt it. As this way will always leave you the option of having a fast chip if you wanted to, where as the other chip can never run faster than 2.3/3.3GHz.
I like your idea. It is possible to turn the turbo off then overclock all the core all up to 3.3ghz at i3 2120 speed. Without the turbo the power consumption will be around 65watts aswell.
 
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
110 (0.04/day)
Likes
14
#35
That's probably the turbo. Only one core will utilized to 100% turbo or 2 core for 80% something like that..
I have seen intel's demo video on this. My i7 on my laptop also only goes 100% on one core
I like your idea. It is possible to turn the turbo off then overclock all the core all up to 3.3ghz at i3 2120 speed. Without the turbo the power consumption will be around 65watts aswell.

Is that right? I didn't know you could 'force' the turbo on all the cores. Would the balance energy profile in Windows still work so that you don't have to have them on 100% all the time? i.e. still have access to lower p-states while still have access to the higher forced turbo speed on all 4 cores?
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#36
Is that right? I didn't know you could 'force' the turbo on all the cores. Would the balance energy profile in Windows still work so that you don't have to have them on 100% all the time? i.e. still have access to lower p-states while still have access to the higher forced turbo speed on all 4 cores?
no no. you can't. But you can change affinity of a running software to run to 2 cores on task manager. If that was a Game, yes you forced it to run on 2 core, and the chip will run turbo on the 2 cores. You cannot turboed all the core, that would break the power envelope that was design to be at xx watts. If it was 3/4 cores turbo the 3 cores would raised the multiplier by one or 2 will have the same xx watts to 2/4 cored that raised the multiplier by 4 or 5. I hope you gets it. So all 4 cores will never get 100% turbo
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
110 (0.04/day)
Likes
14
#37
no no. you can't. But you can change affinity of a running software to run to 2 cores on task manager. If that was a Game, yes you forced it to run on 2 core, and the chip will run turbo on the 2 cores
OK, so just to be clear. At the moment i have an AMD 620 X4, default of 2.6GHz, i have overclocked it to 3.8GHz. I run my PC in Balanced Mode so that 95% of the time it runs at 1.2GHz but as soon as my CPU gets stressed it boosts it to 3.8GHz which, for me, is a great balance of speed and efficiency.

Can you lock the new i series at their highest turbo mode speed but still have a balanced system profile?
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#38
OK, so just to be clear. At the moment i have an AMD 620 X4, default of 2.6GHz, i have overclocked it to 3.8GHz. I run my PC in Balanced Mode so that 95% of the time it runs at 1.2GHz but as soon as my CPU gets stressed it boosts it to 3.8GHz which, for me, is a great balance of speed and efficiency.

Can you lock the new i series at their highest turbo mode speed but still have a balanced system profile?
Speed-step can be controlled, but you can never control turbo from windows. Hope that is the perfect answer. They are very similar; so I think turbo is just a gimmick advertising actualy saying one of the core goes 100% turbo or xx% turbo balance to the rest of the core with the same xx watts.

Turbo is a hardware thing, some motherboard can alther it in bios. You can still set core affinity for heavy application in task manager , ie 2 core or one to get your turbo 80-100% that way. Normally turbo tries to eliminate non-optimised application that runs on one core by rise specific core multiplier, thus old Intel chip getter bad performance like the core 2 quad :)

With multiplier, you can rise up and down as you want with windows profile, tools, and in the bios ofc. Multiplier affects all cores.


Can you lock the new i series at their highest turbo mode speed but still have a balanced system profile? You gotta to disable turbo in the bios and overclock all the cores. Yes you have to loose turbo
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
129 (0.03/day)
Likes
10
#39
ASUS P8H67 looks kinda cute
I wonder how high intel's IGP performance will go with that kind of speedy memory
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
7,646 (2.71/day)
Likes
1,983
Location
Jakarta, Indonesia
System Name micropage7
Processor Intel G4400
Motherboard MSI B150M Bazooka D3
Cooling Stock ( Lapped )
Memory 16 Gb Team Xtreem DDR3
Video Card(s) Nvidia GTX460
Storage Seagate 1 TB, 5oo Gb and SSD A-Data 128 Gb
Display(s) LG 19 inch LCD Wide Screen
Case HP dx6120 MT
Audio Device(s) Stock
Power Supply Be Quiet 600 Watt
Software Windows 7 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Classified
#40
thought this was about the 2011 chip that will replace the 1366:ohwell:
yeah intel later act strange, how come they replace their own socket just in a moment? They think we have money tree to buy that :ohwell: if we talk about in the name of performance thats OK but in the name of flexibility of course not
 

CDdude55

Crazy 4 TPU!!!
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
8,178 (2.15/day)
Likes
1,269
Location
Virginia
System Name CDdude's Rig!
Processor AMD Athlon II X4 620
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3
Cooling Corsair H70
Memory 8GB Corsair Vengence @1600mhz
Video Card(s) XFX HD 6970 2GB
Storage OCZ Agility 3 60GB SSD/WD Velociraptor 300GB
Display(s) ASUS VH232H 23" 1920x1080
Case Cooler Master CM690 (w/ side window)
Audio Device(s) Onboard (It sounds fine)
Power Supply Corsair 850TX
Software Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit SP1
#41
Sounds great, later on down the line we should be seeing 6 core and even 8 core iterations of Sandy Bridge.

My 920 is more then enough for me though, as games these days can run on a toaster and i don't have much cash for upgrading my system anyways, unfortunately.:(
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.94/day)
Likes
3,682
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
#42
Love the Quad with only 45W power draw! Perfect for a folding farm! :cool:
Or that quad with HT at only 65w. Not too shabby at all. Nice gains, imo. Sadly, it seems the Bclock lock is true. The clock gen is on the chip instead of on teh board. Some mobo makers might be able to get us a few Mhz, but probably not much, as the clock gen also effects things like PCIe and USB and such. I remember having to clock PCI locked mobos back in the s478 days, and could only get around 10% before it went to far out of spec. That saddens me a bit, despite reasonably priced unlocked cpus. I like being to clock whatever chip I have at the time.

But, while this is all well and good, I still just want to know about skt 2011. lol.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
50 (0.02/day)
Likes
8
Location
Malaysia
System Name Ultima
Processor Intel Core i7-980X
Motherboard Gigabyte X58-UD9
Cooling Cooler Master(CM) V10
Memory Corsair Dominator 24(6x4)GB RAM DDR3
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 480 FTW Edition Hydro Copper 4-Way SLI
Storage 4X 256GB WD SSD
Display(s) 3X Acer GD235HZ 3D Ready 120HZ
Case Cooler Master Haf-X
Audio Device(s) X-FI Titanium FATAL1TY Champion
Power Supply 2x Corsair HX 1000W
Software Genuine Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Benchmark Scores I give this The Ultimate Rig Of All Time!!!
#43
wow look at those power consumption. :toast:
CPU in the future will use less and less power :rockout:
but GPU is the other way around :banghead:
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
4,659 (1.31/day)
Likes
1,009
System Name Obelisc
Processor i7 3770k @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard Asus P8Z77-V
Cooling H110
Memory 16GB(4x4) @ 2400 MHz 9-11-11-31
Video Card(s) GTX 780 Ti
Storage 850 EVO 1TB, 2x 5TB Toshiba
Case T81
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Titanium HD
Power Supply EVGA 850 T2 80+ TITANIUM
Software Win10 64bit
#44
Gpus will get better, we're just at a bad spot now cause of being stuck at 40nm. I'm not getting new card till the die shrinks hit and we actually get a power efficiency improvement.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
396 (0.13/day)
Likes
61
System Name Just A Gaming Rig.
Processor AMD FX-8320 @4.1GHz, 1.268V
Motherboard ASUS M5A97 Evo R2.0
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo
Memory 8 GB Crucial Ballistix Sport 1600MHz
Video Card(s) Club 3D R9 280X 3GB royalQueen, @1115/1615MHz
Storage OS+Often used stuff: Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB, Mass storage: WD Blue 1TB
Case Zalman Z3 Plus
Audio Device(s) Integrated
Power Supply Corsair CX600M
Software Windows 8.1 64-bit
#46
Not too impressed. The power consumption on some is pretty nice, but that's it. Also it would be a bad decision to lock the Bclock, considering that most of the people who build their own systems have a certain level of knowledge about computers and would almost certainly like to overclock. So nobody would buy the high-end locked processors, because anyone using that kind of money on it will probably like to squeeze every last bit of performance out of it.

But if they manage to bring a 6-core with 95W TDP in Q3 or Q4, I'd be interested. Otherwise, right now, Bulldozer seems to be the more interesting architecture. Also, all benchmarks "leaked" now should be taken with a big grain of salt. Probably not true.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
4,659 (1.31/day)
Likes
1,009
System Name Obelisc
Processor i7 3770k @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard Asus P8Z77-V
Cooling H110
Memory 16GB(4x4) @ 2400 MHz 9-11-11-31
Video Card(s) GTX 780 Ti
Storage 850 EVO 1TB, 2x 5TB Toshiba
Case T81
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Titanium HD
Power Supply EVGA 850 T2 80+ TITANIUM
Software Win10 64bit
#47
I'd take another crack at it ^. A clock for clock advantage over 1366 and 5-5.5 Ghz air overclocks make this very impressive, truly excessive performance. The unlocked procs are priced right alongside their 1156 counterparts (760/860), which do not have that same overclocking potential. That plus I'm really confident MB makers will get us control of the turbo multi. If AMD can jump past the disparity between phenom and i7, all the way to sandybridge performance and overclocking ability then maybe I'd agree bulldozer is more interesting, maybe even miraculous, but realistically it seems highly improbable at the moment.
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
218 (0.08/day)
Likes
14
#48
Not too impressed. The power consumption on some is pretty nice, but that's it. Also it would be a bad decision to lock the Bclock, considering that most of the people who build their own systems have a certain level of knowledge about computers and would almost certainly like to overclock. So nobody would buy the high-end locked processors, because anyone using that kind of money on it will probably like to squeeze every last bit of performance out of it.

But if they manage to bring a 6-core with 95W TDP in Q3 or Q4, I'd be interested. Otherwise, right now, Bulldozer seems to be the more interesting architecture. Also, all benchmarks "leaked" now should be taken with a big grain of salt. Probably not true.
what we know about Bulldozers tdp is 95w-125w so nothing new there
lets hope for more performance .
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
396 (0.13/day)
Likes
61
System Name Just A Gaming Rig.
Processor AMD FX-8320 @4.1GHz, 1.268V
Motherboard ASUS M5A97 Evo R2.0
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo
Memory 8 GB Crucial Ballistix Sport 1600MHz
Video Card(s) Club 3D R9 280X 3GB royalQueen, @1115/1615MHz
Storage OS+Often used stuff: Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB, Mass storage: WD Blue 1TB
Case Zalman Z3 Plus
Audio Device(s) Integrated
Power Supply Corsair CX600M
Software Windows 8.1 64-bit
#49
I'd take another crack at it ^. A clock for clock advantage over 1366 and 5-5.5 Ghz air overclocks make this very impressive, truly excessive performance. The unlocked procs are priced right alongside their 1156 counterparts (760/860), which do not have that same overclocking potential. That plus I'm really confident MB makers will get us control of the turbo multi. If AMD can jump past the disparity between phenom and i7, all the way to sandybridge performance and overclocking ability then maybe I'd agree bulldozer is more interesting, maybe even miraculous, but realistically it seems highly improbable at the moment.
I guess that's true. But again, all info now is to be taken with a grain of salt. Bulldozer has a stock Turbo frequency up to 4.0 GHz, and looking at the current AMD 6-cores w/turbo, there is about 500-700 MHz overclocking potential above the stock Turbo frequency. That would put it close to 5 GHz, or maybe even at 5 GHz, because it is a new architecture. And I doubt it would have less overclocking potential than the older generation. Plus it supports DDR3-1866 default. About MB-makers being able to unlock the Bclk, I doubt it. Intel has a reason to lock it, and wouldn't just let MB-makers unlock it that easy.

That being said, I'm not a die-hard fanboy. If Sandy ends up wiping the floor with Bulldozer, Sandy will be the one I'd buy. Personally I don't hope that's the case, because tight competition benefits consumers by giving lower prices.
 
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
2,261 (0.72/day)
Likes
171
Location
the uk that's all you need to know ;)
System Name not very good (wants throwing out window most of time)
Processor xp3000@ 2.17ghz pile of sh** /i7 920 DO on air for now
Motherboard msi kt6 delta oap /gigabyte x58 ud7 (rev1.0)
Cooling 1 green akasa 8cm(rear) 1 multicoloured akasa(hd) 1 12 cm (intake) 1 9cm with circuit from old psu
Memory 1.25 gb kingston hyperx @333mhz/ 3gb corsair dominator xmp 1600mhz
Video Card(s) (agp) hd3850 not bad not really suitable for mobo n processor/ gb hd5870
Storage wd 320gb + samsung 320 gig + wd 1tb 6gb/s
Display(s) compaq mv720
Case thermaltake XaserIII skull / coolermaster cm 690II
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply corsair hx 650 w which solved many problems (blew up) /850w corsair
Software xp pro sp3/ ? win 7 ultimate (32 bit)
Benchmark Scores 6543 3d mark05 ye ye not good but look at the processor /uknown as still not benched
#50
well i was thinking of getting an i7 980 x , but it doesn't have EM64T,

thing is would i or do i need it?