Intel to Release Core i7 990X Extreme Edition Six-Core Processor in Q4 2010 - Hardware & Software

"Intel is working on a newer high-end processor SKU based on its 32 nm "Gulftown" six-core design, the Core i7 990X Extreme Edition. It is reportedly slated for Q4 2010. As with most other Extreme Edition SKUs, the 990X will feature a higher default BClk multipler, and a higher resulting clock speed. Like the Core i7 980X Extreme Edition, it will feature an unlocked BClk multipler to help with overclocking. " (I was loling while reading this :)) [Source] [url]http://www.techpowerup.com/124334/Intel_to_Release_Core_i7_990X_Extreme_Edition_Six-Core_Processor_in_Q4_2010.html[/url]

Cool if you're rich I guess :v: Based on the projected prices I'd still grab an i5 750/ i7 920 or 1055T right now, and am considering it.

God, Six core. Can't you imagine the shit you could do with that and a really good Graphics Card?

[QUOTE=CaMpEr_DoOd;22547110]God, Six core. Can't you imagine the shit you could do with that and a really good Graphics Card?[/QUOTE] SOunds useless in terms of gaming

[QUOTE=B1N4RY!;22547230]SOunds useless in terms of gaming[/QUOTE]Well yea. Except for certain games that rely on CPU power.

But what games use even 4 cores?

[QUOTE=ClaBrendon;22547521]Well yea. Except for certain games that rely on CPU power.[/QUOTE] But spanned across 6 cores? At the moment, there are not that many games are optimized for 4 core MC rendering

Most games run better on quad cores right now. Just like how they used to run better on dual cores than quads.

Just because going from Dual to Quad and getting better results in multi-threaded games does not mean that going from Quad to Six will yield the same results. When you go higher than 4 [b]physical[/b] cores, framerate increases become almost completely diminished. The only time you need to go higher is if you are on workstation apps, or video editing, and rendering (3D studio max especially). Hyperthreading alone can increase performance in these apps even more. Not really sure how HT affects gaming, usually it is left off in order to achieve higher clock speeds without having to feed it a hefty amount of voltage, which results in temperature problems. A water cooling system that is properly setup can manage this, but it doesn't come cheap.

the rule is that each core added on top of a multi-core CPU diminishes the effect of the added core

i7 970 looks interesting

[QUOTE=pedroion;22548827]Fuck you Intel, let AMD have it's moment. :colbert:[/QUOTE] Yes. Let's forbid competition and let AMD have a monopoly in the CPU market.

[QUOTE=pedroion;22548827]Fuck you Intel, let AMD have it's moment. :colbert:[/QUOTE] This wont ruin it at all, AMD's 6 core is still going to be much cheaper than the new Intel one being released.

Also forgot to mention the new i7-990X is expected to be around the $1500 mark.

Which basically means that AMD has no competion on the 'Within a budget' level

[QUOTE=Amez;22550245]This wont ruin it at all, AMD's 6 core is still going to be much cheaper than the new Intel one being released.[/QUOTE] Intel already has a hexacore released anyway

I'd rather have them make smaller and faster quad cores, than to just add more cores. Seriously, we don't need more, or we'd get a dual-cpu motherboard.

[QUOTE=B1N4RY!;22548279]But spanned across 6 cores? At the moment, there are not that many games are optimized for 4 core MC rendering[/QUOTE] Yeah...I told myself that a few years back when I bought a Dual-Core and now I regret it. Now everyone is using the quad cores and plenty of games support them, and I'm stuck with worse performance because I didn't think about the future. :gonk: It may be a poor choice if you change your processor like you change your underwear, but for people that try to make a processor last, it may be worth the extra investment. That being said, nothing "Extreme" from intel is ever a sound investment considering their ridiculous price hikes.

[QUOTE=Tools;22557459]I'd rather have them make smaller and faster quad cores, than to just add more cores. Seriously, we don't need more, or we'd get a dual-cpu motherboard.[/QUOTE] Things can't really get faster unless you figure out a way to make liquid nitrogen a cheap component of stock heatsinks. Or figure out how to exponentially decrease memory latency in the CPU.

And since lua doesn't support multi-core processors, gmod would only use one of them :v:

[QUOTE=TrafficMan;22563937]And since lua doesn't support multi-core processors, gmod would only use one of them :v:[/QUOTE] How does a programming language only support one core? The engine determines that. (Hint: the engine (somewhat) supports 4 cores))

[QUOTE=TrafficMan;22563937]And since lua doesn't support multi-core processors, gmod would only use one of them :v:[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.garry.tv/?p=1789[/url] [quote][B]Multicore rendering? Lua isn’t threaded – GMod can’t use it![/B] I don’t get why people keep telling me this. It’s bullshit. The majority of the Source Engine isn’t threaded either. The rendering is.[/quote]

by the time this is gonna get popular, Intel will release 8 core processors.(maybe i9? who knows?) well,you won't be surprised if they do. 1500$ this 6 core costs as Laten said. That cost me my entire build !!!(including scanners,monitors,etc.etc) How expensive could it get? But since I am on topic, who does intel's 6 core costs like 5-6 times the price of AMD's 6 core processors? Is it because intel is better or what? Just curious.

[QUOTE=TankHawk500;22629697]by the time this is gonna get popular, Intel will release 8 core processors.(maybe i9? who knows?) well,you won't be surprised if they do. 1500$ this 6 core costs as Laten said. That cost me my entire build !!!(including scanners,monitors,etc.etc) How expensive could it get? But since I am on topic, who does intel's 6 core costs like 5-6 times the price of AMD's 6 core processors? Is it because intel is better or what? Just curious.[/QUOTE] The intel processors, especially the i7s, have a buttload more features that don't interest the common computer user while AMD keeps it simple. For example, the newer 1156 processors are optimized for 256-bit AES encryption.

[QUOTE=TankHawk500;22629697]by the time this is gonna get popular, Intel will release 8 core processors.(maybe i9? who knows?) well,you won't be surprised if they do. 1500$ this 6 core costs as Laten said. That cost me my entire build !!!(including scanners,monitors,etc.etc) How expensive could it get? But since I am on topic, who does intel's 6 core costs like 5-6 times the price of AMD's 6 core processors? Is it because intel is better or what? Just curious.[/QUOTE] Last time I checked, the 980X costs 3 times as much as the 1090T, not 5 or 6.

[QUOTE=thisispain;22548978]the rule is that each core added on top of a multi-core CPU diminishes the effect of the added core[/QUOTE] critical mass is 64 cores supposedly, so this CPU is all good.

[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;22655567]critical mass is 64 cores supposedly, so this CPU is all good.[/QUOTE] So what about that 100 + core processor they are developing? And i assume that this critical amount of cores does not apply to parallel processors.

I'm talking x86, the same limitations don't apply elsewhere.

[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;22655746]I'm talking x86, the same limitations don't apply elsewhere.[/QUOTE] But who in their right mind would buy a processor this expensive without installing a 64-bit OS?

[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;22656875]But who in their right mind would buy a processor this expensive without installing a 64-bit OS?[/QUOTE] Where do I put palm to my face?