New unlocked Intel CPUs hit the market, for cheap

The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg and
TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided. Claims of
4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my grandmother used to say,
"The paper hold still" (her translation from the German).

Jim wrote:
> "Bill Davidsen" <> wrote in message
> news:hu9f3g$j3s$...
>> The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg
>> and TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided.
>> Claims of 4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my
>> grandmother used to say, "The paper hold still" (her translation from the
>> German).
> I wouldn't call 875K for $330 cheap.

The previous unlocked CPU was about $1000, the i5 model is $200. Comparing Intel
to AMD or SPARC isn't really useful in decision making.

> And you can get a Ph2 x4 BE for $125
> which makes the dual core 655K for $210 a terrible value. Getting 4GHZ on a
> 920/930 isn't difficult though the unlocked multi means you can use cheap
> RAM&mobo so total platform cost the 875K probably wins by a little.
> I find the 32nm quad Xeon for $390 that recently showed up on NewEgg more
> interesting though the low multiplier makes hard to reach higher overclocks.
>
>

On 6/4/2010 11:29 AM, Jim wrote:
> "Bill Davidsen"<> wrote in message
> news:hu9f3g$j3s$...
>> The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg
>> and TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided.
>> Claims of 4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my
>> grandmother used to say, "The paper hold still" (her translation from the
>> German).
> I wouldn't call 875K for $330 cheap. And you can get a Ph2 x4 BE for $125
> which makes the dual core 655K for $210 a terrible value. Getting 4GHZ on a
> 920/930 isn't difficult though the unlocked multi means you can use cheap
> RAM&mobo so total platform cost the 875K probably wins by a little.
> I find the 32nm quad Xeon for $390 that recently showed up on NewEgg more
> interesting though the low multiplier makes hard to reach higher overclocks.

Looks like the AMD overclock specials still hold a value advantage
over the Intel ones. You usually get more cores for the same price,
and of course the motherboards are much cheaper usually.

Yousuf Khan

***
Intel Core i5-655K and Core i7-875K Reviewed - Conclusion: You Can't
Beat the Overclock - Reviews by ExtremeTech
"Both CPUs strike us as Intel's attempts to shore up the budget
sectors of its lineup—especially given the inroads AMD has been making
in those areas of late (such as with its promise-packed, yet
relatively affordable, Phenom II X6 six-core processor). We're not
entirely sure Intel will be able to capture it in the long term, but
if the company can price more LGA1156 chips as aggressively as it has
the Core i7-875K, it may have a real chance."
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2364281,00.asp

On Jun 5, 10:15*am, Bill Davidsen <david...@tmr.com> wrote:
> Jim wrote:
> > "Bill Davidsen" <david...@tmr.com> wrote in message
> >news:hu9f3g$j3s$...
> >> The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg
> >> and TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided.
> >> Claims of 4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my
> >> grandmother used to say, "The paper hold still" (her translation from the
> >> German).
> > I wouldn't call 875K for $330 cheap.
>
> The previous unlocked CPU was about $1000, the i5 model is $200. Comparing Intel
> to AMD or SPARC isn't really useful in decision making.

AMD is considerably more relevant to Intel than SPARC is. SPARC isn't
an x86-compatible processor, but both Intel and AMD are.

Yousuf Khan

On Jun 6, 3:42*pm, Yousuf Khan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/4/2010 11:29 AM, Jim wrote:
>
> > "Bill Davidsen"<david...@tmr.com> *wrote in message
> >news:hu9f3g$j3s$...
> >> The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg
> >> and TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided.
> >> Claims of 4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my
> >> grandmother used to say, "The paper hold still" (her translation from the
> >> German).
> > I wouldn't call 875K for $330 cheap. *And you can get a Ph2 x4 BE for$125
> > which makes the dual core 655K for $210 a terrible value. *Getting 4GHZ on a
> > 920/930 isn't difficult though the unlocked multi means you can use cheap
> > RAM&mobo so total platform cost the 875K probably wins by a little.
> > I find the 32nm quad Xeon for $390 that recently showed up on NewEgg more
> > interesting though the low multiplier makes hard to reach higher overclocks.
>
> Looks like the AMD overclock specials still hold a value advantage
> over the Intel ones. You usually get more cores for the same price,
> and of course the motherboards are much cheaper usually.
>

1. Why would someone read comp.sys.intel for advice about buying AMD
processors?

2. For whom is cores/$ a meaningful figure of merit?

3. I'm always curious about what's going on inside Intel's marketing
department, but I don't think I'd read extremetech to find out.

Robert.

Robert Myers wrote:
> On Jun 6, 3:42 pm, Yousuf Khan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 6/4/2010 11:29 AM, Jim wrote:
>>
>>> "Bill Davidsen"<david...@tmr.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hu9f3g$j3s$...
>>>> The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg
>>>> and TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided.
>>>> Claims of 4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my
>>>> grandmother used to say, "The paper hold still" (her translation from the
>>>> German).
>>> I wouldn't call 875K for $330 cheap. And you can get a Ph2 x4 BE for $125
>>> which makes the dual core 655K for $210 a terrible value. Getting 4GHZ on a
>>> 920/930 isn't difficult though the unlocked multi means you can use cheap
>>> RAM&mobo so total platform cost the 875K probably wins by a little.
>>> I find the 32nm quad Xeon for $390 that recently showed up on NewEgg more
>>> interesting though the low multiplier makes hard to reach higher overclocks.
>> Looks like the AMD overclock specials still hold a value advantage
>> over the Intel ones. You usually get more cores for the same price,
>> and of course the motherboards are much cheaper usually.
>>
>
> 1. Why would someone read comp.sys.intel for advice about buying AMD
> processors?
>
Because all Intel-compatible processors are fair game. Also, as good a place as
any, both Intel and AMD have their fanboys here, so there's bilateral partisanship.

> 2. For whom is cores/$ a meaningful figure of merit?
>
I think that fell out of a discussion of computing power/$ and each reader
determines the way in which comments are useful. I personally think that's a bad
nit to pick, being a value judgement based on a hard verifiable ratio. You will
get more people who say "I don't use it" than "it doesn't mean anything."

> 3. I'm always curious about what's going on inside Intel's marketing
> department, but I don't think I'd read extremetech to find out.
>
I doubt that this group is better.

> Robert.

On Jun 6, 8:54*pm, Bill Davidsen <david...@tmr.com> wrote:
> Robert Myers wrote:
> > On Jun 6, 3:42 pm, Yousuf *Khan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 6/4/2010 11:29 AM, Jim wrote:
>
> >>> "Bill Davidsen"<david...@tmr.com> *wrote in message
> >>>news:hu9f3g$j3s$...
> >>>> The new unlocked i5 and i7 CPUs hit the market today on sites like Newegg
> >>>> and TigerDirect. At least on Newegg they are OEM, no cooling provided.
> >>>> Claims of 4GHz with air cooling have been on the net, but as my
> >>>> grandmother used to say, "The paper hold still" (her translation from the
> >>>> German).
> >>> I wouldn't call 875K for $330 cheap. *And you can get a Ph2 x4 BE for $125
> >>> which makes the dual core 655K for $210 a terrible value. *Getting 4GHZ on a
> >>> 920/930 isn't difficult though the unlocked multi means you can use cheap
> >>> RAM&mobo so total platform cost the 875K probably wins by a little.
> >>> I find the 32nm quad Xeon for $390 that recently showed up on NewEgg more
> >>> interesting though the low multiplier makes hard to reach higher overclocks.
> >> Looks like the AMD overclock specials still hold a value advantage
> >> over the Intel ones. You usually get more cores for the same price,
> >> and of course the motherboards are much cheaper usually.
>
> > 1. Why would someone read comp.sys.intel for advice about buying AMD
> > processors?
>
> Because all Intel-compatible processors are fair game. Also, as good a place as
> any, both Intel and AMD have their fanboys here, so there's bilateral partisanship.
>
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips is the home pub for amd fanboys.
Yousuf knows that.

> > 2. For whom is cores/$ a meaningful figure of merit?
>
> I think that fell out of a discussion of computing power/$ and each reader
> determines the way in which comments are useful. I personally think that's a bad
> nit to pick, being a value judgement based on a hard verifiable ratio. You will
> get more people who say "I don't use it" than "it doesn't mean anything."
>
I didn't make any value judgments. Maybe someone wants to test
scaling of algorithms and wants lots of cores and doesn't care about
anything else. As a general comment about the value proposition for
processors (and here is my value judgment), though, it's almost as
lame as thinking that a 64-bit processor is twice as powerful as a 32-
bit processor.

Robert.

Robert Myers <> wrote:
> 1. Why would someone read comp.sys.intel for advice about buying AMD
> processors?

Is comp.sys.intel specifically for discussion of Intel products, or for
broader discussions of the intel-architecture (as sold by a number of
manufacturers in the past, and Intel/AMD/Via today.)

> 2. For whom is cores/$ a meaningful figure of merit?

On its own, nothing, but it's suggestive of looking at some more benchmarks
for someone with a very highly parallelizable workload - currently, the
6-core Phenom II 1090T actually beats the comparably-priced i7s (870 or 930)
for video encoding with some codecs[*].

[* ignoring a few super-cheap deals on those two chips that Microcenter has
had, and also ignoring the cheaper motherboards as compared to the 930]

--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/
preferred email |
is "nate" at the | "I do have a cause, though. It's obscenity. I'm
posting domain | for it."

On Jun 6, 11:38*pm, archm...@sfchat.org (Nate Edel) wrote:
> Robert Myers <rbmyers...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 1. Why would someone read comp.sys.intel for advice about buying AMD
> > processors?
>
> Is comp.sys.intel specifically for discussion of Intel products, or for
> broader discussions of the intel-architecture (as sold by a number of
> manufacturers in the past, and Intel/AMD/Via today.)
>
Historically, AMD fanboy wars have taken place elsewhere. I'd like to
see that pattern continue.

Robert.

On Jun 7, 7:27*am, Robert Myers <rbmyers...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 6, 11:38*pm, archm...@sfchat.org (Nate Edel) wrote:> Robert Myers <rbmyers...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 1. Why would someone read comp.sys.intel for advice about buying AMD
> > > processors?
>
> > Is comp.sys.intel specifically for discussion of Intel products, or for
> > broader discussions of the intel-architecture (as sold by a number of
> > manufacturers in the past, and Intel/AMD/Via today.)
>
> Historically, AMD fanboy wars have taken place elsewhere. *I'd like to
> see that pattern continue.
>
In addition to which, I can't remember seeing a single meaningful
comment here about Intel architecture, which is not the same as AMD
architecture, which, in either case, changes from one model to
another, unlike the Instruction Set Architecture, which is perhaps
what you meant.

If you're a c or asm coder, you may think the ISA is the end of the
story, or even a big part of the story, but that doesn't make it so.

Given that this group has so little to say in depth about Intel
processors, why spread the BS even thinner?

Robert.