Just in time for the i5's it is the PII 965 X4 ! Hurry while they last! - Hardware & Software

socket only used in one series of chips.

I'm waiting for benchmarks, has anyone seen any?

[url]http://techreport.com/articles.x/17402[/url]

Are these the same chips as the 940 and 955 but with just higher clocks? So a 940/955 with a higher clock would beat it?

[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;16678318]socket only used in one series of chips.[/QUOTE] Who said that the i7 9xx series is the only one to use the 1366 socket?

[QUOTE=Pandamobile;16696154]Who said that the i7 9xx series is the only one to use the 1366 socket?[/QUOTE] It looks like there are going to be [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_future_Intel_microprocessors#Core_i7]two more reasonably priced processors[/url] for LGA 1366 in the foreseeable future. So, pretty much, dead end. I don't see why Intel feels the need to to change sockets so frequently. The C2E definitely needed a completely different socket than the rest of the Core 2 series. The i7 definitely requires dropping all support for LGA 775. Even though the i5 is the same core as i7, it really was necessary to create LGA rand(1000, 1500) to deny those who purchase i5s the ability to upgrade to an i7. AMD's been using the same socket since 2006 and probably won't change it until some time into 2010 and they are still doing well.

[QUOTE=morrowindsky;16696698]Still quite comfortable with my Pentium 4 530 HT. 3.0 GHz, only one core. Except that HT makes everything think you have two.[/QUOTE] Uhh, yeah HT isn't that great it doesn't even compare to 2 physical cores

This is going to be my core of choice on my next build

Ha, some idiot who probably doesn't even own it already posted a 1-star review...Apparently they're "stealing" intel's model names to hide the fact that they're "merely the equivalent of an overclocked previous 65nm architecture" [quote=derp] Pros: -3.4GHz; at this frequency, the only way you'll bottleneck is with quad-GPU's -6MB L3 cache (only a pro when compared to previous AMD processors) -4GHz HyperTransport -Unlocked multiplier (completely unnecessary, but a definite pro for new overclockers) -Good proc if all you do is play GPU-intensive games (and like the "retro" feel) ...and that would just about cover it. Cons: -All this is is an overclocked, overpriced Phenom II X4. Look at those specs. Sure, it's 3.4GHz, a little faster than the 3.2GHz (and $50 cheaper) 955, but then look at the wattage and vcore... 140W at 1.4v. I can easily run my $170 945 at 3.4GHz using about 1.38v... all this is is an overclocked 955, essentially. It can't even overclock higher than that proc, and it's the same stepping. There's absolutely no reason to buy this proc over lower models unless you want to boost its market value with the name -Much, much, much slower than Core i7's (which I'll continue to illustrate), but that's a given... the only place where the Phenom II keeps pace is with non-CPU-intensive gaming -Much slower than any 65/45nm Intel CPU at crunching numbers; it needs to be overclocked to 4.6GHz just to calculate a 1M digits of Pi in the same 15 seconds as a 3GHz stock-clocked Core 2 Duo. This has always been an issue of AMD's, but after several new architectures, they have no excuse Other Thoughts: -Still doesn't overclock as well as Intel competitors! A decent Phenom II on a flagship motherboard will barely be able to hit 4GHz even using obscene voltages (I'm talking 1.5v+)... An i7 920 can hit 4GHz with ease on any X58 using only a little more than 1.3v, and can go a good bit higher too... i7 950 can hit 5GHz -Just overall poor CPU performance... in 3DMark, an i7 will easily triple a Phenom II's CPU score at any clockspeed -6MB L3 cache has only a little more bandwidth than mediocre 1600MHz DDR3 -Memory bandwidth is about as fast as similarly priced Intel's despite memory controller This new processor is obviously a greedy plea from AMD for more sales. They're stealing Intel's i7 model names (920, 940, 965, etc.) to label a "new architecture" (being Deneb), where the new architecture is merely the equivalent of an overclocked previous 65nm architecture... a 3.4GHz Phenom II X4 is no faster than a 3.4GHz Phenom B3 X4, and the B3 in fact has slightly better memory bandwidth [/quote]

i looked at it this morning, started to build a system, and found it was extremely difficult to find an SLI PII X4 mobo. then i remembered AMD now owns ATI, and i moved on to throw together an ideal Intel system. [editline]12:18PM[/editline] i have no problem with ati, i'm not an nvidia fan, though i prefer nvidia. for cpus i swing either way, for the last year or two it's been intel, though.

[QUOTE=M_B;16697193]i looked at it this morning, started to build a system, and found it was extremely difficult to find an SLI PII X4 mobo. then i remembered AMD now owns ATI, and i moved on to throw together an ideal Intel system.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=sli+amd+motherboard&x=0&y=0[/url]

Isn't the i7 920 still going to OC better and even without be a better buy in the long run?

I won one the other day at Quakecon. So fucking awesome. I got selected to go up to the AMD suite and get to look at direct x11 and play wolfenstein with it. Then they gave me the 965 because I knew what ambient occlusion was. I also got a free shit that is numbered out of 100 saying I saw the future :)

[QUOTE=CowGuy;16745075]I won one the other day at Quakecon. So fucking awesome. I got selected to go up to the AMD suite and get to look at direct x11 and play wolfenstein with it. Then they gave me the 965 because I knew what ambient occlusion was. I also got a free shit that is numbered out of 100 saying I saw the future :)[/QUOTE] you got a free shit that was numbered out of 100? lucky you. how was wolfenstein?

[QUOTE=Pixel Heart;16660738]I thought the title meant Pentium IIs, lol.[/QUOTE] Me too. :v: