Immediate obsolescence is an age old problem in the computer industry, but it doesn't look like the upcoming Core i9 "Gulftown" processor is going to do anything to solve it. Word is from early benchmarks of the upcoming Intel processor is that it bests the current
Core i7 at the top of the heap with speed gains as large as 50% -- directly in line with its addition of two cores on top of the Core i7's existing four. Of course, six 2.8GHz cores aren't quite as exponentially helpful when applied to non-optimized tasks, but with most major modern software development aimed at better utilizing multiple cores, the core overkill of Core i9 will likely prove increasingly useful over time. At the start, however, Core i9's improvements will come at a premium: 130W power consumption instead of 95W in Core i7, and of course a high-end only price tag to match. Word is we'll be seeing these chips hit the market in early 2010, possibly as soon as January.
posted November 24th 2009 1:24AM
@spin cycle
i7 1366 Xeon-brothers are 95w
1366 i7's have always been 130w
1156 i7's are 95w
i9 will be a drop in for the 1366 socket so no real change in power.
Although on a 920 you can hit 4.0ghz on air with ease, I've heard that some have gotten just the sample i9 to 4.3ghz oh air, so there should be some crazy overclocking in the future. ^_^
According to wikipedia, this CPU will cost G. Expected, but still ouch.
@(Unverified)
All of the things about the i9 costing 1.2k stemmed from a single article on a chinese tech site that was later found to have no real "insider info" that it claimed it did. That doesn't mean that I suspect that it will be cheap(There will surely be a >1k EE).
Just trying to say we don't really know what the actual prices are yet, or how many levels of the i9 there will be.(Like the i7 versions: 920[300$], 950[500$], 975EE[1000$])
@(Unverified)
I think as with many previous ICPUs, Intel might release the much pricier extreme version first which could be >1k but it will surely segment the market after that.
Well since it's slightly larger you end up paying slightly more, but since they shrink the process all the time it would be equalized again, but then there's the competition, if there's not sufficient competition they can push the price up.
So I'd say there will be cheap version that will be about 25% to 30% more than the i7 initially, wild guess but it'll sound good when translated to chinese :)
As much as I'd like to build a new PC, I'm not going to until the CPU and chipset support the latest PCIE, SATA and USB. Unfortunately, Intel is purposely gimping their own technology.
130W that will cost u like one euro a day just for electricity .
Im waiting for 10 core 1W CPU each core pumping up 10Ghz of stuff with 10 Gb cash and 50Gb L2 cash where I can park my OS .
RAM is so 2010
@ainsi10
have fun not having a computer for 10 years
I love my core i7 920, and honestly do not need anything faster, but want it! Looks like the core i9's clock at ridiculous speeds, I'll wait till they go plaid.
@Teer1998
Me too. I have the i7-920 running at a conservative 3.2GHz. I can easily run it at 3.5 with some fiddling with memory but never felt the need. Extra couple of cores? No need for what I do...
Wanna see me run Crysis? Wanna see me run it again?
Dear Intel,
Please stop playing with my emotions. Every time I think I have something good you go and take it from me. Please stop.
Your sad consumer,
King
I don't understand why they didn't start with lower numbers so they can use these higher ones when they put out the next generation. Does that not make sense?
Hm, although tempting, I think I'll wait for AMD's response. If they put something within the realm of the i9, I'll pick that up instead.
So they're coming out with a i9? So what if you have an i7? Unless you have the i7 975, you don't have the best anyways, so if the level of performance is quite acceptance for you, there's nothing sad about the i9.
Unless, of course, you have a a 975 or you feel your computer is too slow for whatever task you're putting through, in that case you're too badass to judge ;)
Nice to hear some news about Gulftown. It's been a while. Probably going to get one of these with Fermi next year.
So is this going to utilize hyperthreading? Does that mean we're going to see 12 logical cores? Task manager is going to have to do some rearranging.
@Punchdrunkbrian
actually, 24 cores inthe Mac Pros, and its "activity monitor", not "task manager"... lol
You want an i9?
Buy a Mac Pro... sorry MS fanboys, this one's reserved for Apple!
(you couldn't afford it anyway!)
@dkmix yeah, you're right. everyone should buy a i9 Mac. Because they did such great things with the i7.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/24/core-i7-imacs-showing-up-doa-including-ours/
fail
@dkmix Fail snob is fail
@xkaosu9x (troll)
riiiiiight, because engadget writing about a few cracked screens and DOA's from mis-handling during shipment makes the entire line of core i7 macs "fail" according to your logic.. sheer boy genius you are!
My dual i7 xserves and macpros are running pretty f'ing fast. So yah.. go an hero
@dkmix
yes, let's talk logic. i actually have this conversation with my family on a weekly basis and it still hasn't sunken in. half my family is mac (they actually have a company that sells, installs, and maintains them for government agencies) and the other half is pc. the mac side constantly tries to throw crap in my face about how windows crashes and people have driver issues and blah blah blah. so yeah, when apple screws up i blast the hell out of them. because i look at it this way: microsoft makes an os that attempts to be compatible with millions of pieces of hardware in a septillion different configurations. yeah, it's going to fail on occassion; i admit that. apple makes an os that's meant to be compatible on, what, 30 different configurations of hardware that design and build themselves to rigorous specifications..? so when this magical corporation releases things that screw up exponentially (iphone firmware 3.1, snow leopard) or arrive DOA, yet none of the fanboys want to admit failure while continuing to bash microsoft, then yes i scream fail. so while you continue to take one extreme, i'll continue to take the other.
I say we start reporting everyone who says "first." Chris Z. has started banning people for doing it, so maybe we'll get lucky and he's the one who opens the report.
Since money doesn't grow on tree's, I'll stick with my month old 920 that is OC'd to 3.7ghz.
thanks but no thanks...
my q6600 is more than enough for me...
I had it up to 3.8ghz on air, but brought it back down, theirs no point... I'll upgrade when i really see a reason, and not simply because i can...
My life won't be any better with an i7, but the q6600 made my life alot better than the pentium 4, 512mb of ram... Also a third monitor would be alot more useful than 2 extra cores, sure your cpu being able to multi task is good, but wha'ts the point if you can't?
for someone looking for a new pc, this is great, (if the price is right), but for anyone who owns a q6600 or anything better, it's a waste... (unless you are doing something that really really requires it..)
@Nimer55
I have a q6600 3.72ghz on air, I was so tempted to upgrade to i7 when it came out last november, but I kept telling myself "NO", q6600 is a beast in itself, doesnt need to be upgraded. I am telling myself the same thing again right now... but the effect seems to be weaker :-(
I have a x-25 ssd, dell 2560x1600 res monitor and 1920x1200 samsung monitor, 8gb ram, 4870x2 card, and i'm starting to feel the cpu lag behind. I think it'll be time for me to finally upgrade next spring.
But just to state: Q6600 g0 has been the BEST CPU I have ever owned, hands down, it has lasted me 2.5 years now at 3.72ghz TRUE and I'm only STARTING to see it hiccup. Props to Intel at creating the C2D architecture, arguably the best architecture ever made.
@(Unverified)
Word. Currently have mine at 3.2GHz (1600FSB) and its as smooth as silk. 7.3 on WEI as well.
@(Unverified)
no need to rush, your pc will still be up to snuff on all your needs up to 3 more years. then you can opt to buy the 8 or 12 core cpu for less of what you will pay for an i9 on january.
i have c2d e6600 oc and 8800gts, and the only thing that bothers me is adobe flash 10.1 and nvidia left my gpu in the dark. i long for the day that facebook farmville will be uber fast. oh well might just buy a geforce 9500/9600/9800 budget card for my accelerated flash game fantasies.
so, that means that I should spend my bucks on another proc (like an AMD) meanwhile i9 goes out?
This is ridiculous. i9 is SO beyond any requirements anyone has. Unless you're running Crysis, Maya 3D and then high-demand audio software simultaneously, this is just unnecessary. I can barely afford a used Q6600 G0 in this economy. Wtf are they trying to do to us? AMD is letting us down too by not providing Intel with any competition. The prices will be as high as Intel wants until AMD can challenge them.
Dark times.