Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
This seems likely and unsurprising. They are just using the same basic formula with the next generation of Intel processor. Since the I9 is 6 core then they just use 2 chips to get 12 cores. I expect we'll be seeing a dozen gaming machines with that setup next year. If it is actually a I7 instead of I9 then that's a 3 chip setup which is a little weird. What would surprise me is if they actually decide to put in some real graphics hardware for a change.
@Xeno: 2 physical chips is a very unusual setup for a gaming machine; that's more for high-end workstations and servers. It's quite likely that we will see single-chip, six-core gaming systems, though.
As for the branding, I wouldn't be too surprised to see Intel insert a six-core chip into their i7 line; it's not like they were ever very consistent with their product lines, after all.
Edited by HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H. at 12/15/09 11:35 AM
HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H. was starred
HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H. was unstarred
@HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H.: I guess I'm still thinking like it was several years ago when AMD multiprocessor boards were the rage for gaming before the Intel core smackdown.
@Bwehngamun: Originally the core I9's were supposed to be the 6 core and the 7's were to be quad's. It looks like Intel decided to put a 6 core in the I7 range is all. I was originally thinking there was a misprint and this was an I9.
@UnderLoK: Well Intel likes to make distinctions at the begining but things get mucked up all quickly. This motherboard for example will handle two of any socket 1366 processors, including both core I7 and Xeon processors. [www.tomshardware.com]
It would still be nice to see a Mac Pro that hits under 2k, for those that want the expandability, but don't necessarily need the greatest amount of power.
@Kaiser-Machead: What about an iMac Pro. Like a slimline form factor, still upgradeable, can add more ram, more pci-x devices, but someone could JUST buy the tower, and not a monitor as well. It would need to be on par with the iMac, but subtract the price of the display, and building a laptop like sub-structure. Just slim out the mac pro case. I would get it, at the right price of course. Mind you, this would also get a lot more people in the door of a mac. People who don't want a laptop, or already have a mac laptop, but can't spare the extra money for a beasty mac pro. I have one at work, and it's worth it's weight, but at home, I just can't justify it. I have a mac mini as an HTPC box, but I would really like an inbetween box for an editing suite machine in my office. Otherwise it's hackintosh for me, but that more than slightly scares the crap out of me, when it comes to upgradeability on the OS end of things.
@beekerstudios: you are inane and stupid: If you get the proper components, upgrading should be a cinch, or at least this is what I've read. I was actually considering building a Hackintosh desktop, because I don't require anything very substantial, but I just want to replace my old PowerMac G4 with another Mac that I can have as my home base backup system.
@jeffimix: I've been looking around for used Intel macs particularly. I also have a dual 1GHz G4 MDD, and as surprisingly well it runs on 10.5, I want something that I can use to convert large files without giving estimates on a geologic scale.
@Kaiser-Machead: I ran my dually PPro 200 from the year it came out (long story short, I got a 14k Kayak for $1400 due to a typo from HP to my reseller) until about 5 years ago.
It was my workstation and then ran the rest of its days as my file server, firewall (RH), AMP, ftp, and vpn... That was hands down the best box I have ever had.
I was pretty surprised by this (well, by the original announcement last week that effectively admitted it was dead). It was already slightly delayed, true, but they seemed to be making real progress - I wonder if ATI's recent uber-card, the 5970, had anything to do with it? (at 5 TFlops, it's a monster).
@ECAsh - Larrabee wasn't even related to the "standard" Intel graphics (GMA, etc), it was a discrete card with a LOT of x86 cores on it, like 40+ in the demo version I think. I don't know that Intel has ever shipped a discrete graphics card; not lately, anyway. This was (we presume) going to be a PCI-x card that would've competed with AMD's ATI cards, and NVidia's cards.
At least they've got experience with making many-core architectures and CPUs now - should come in handy when I get that 16-core Core i9 chip in 2012 or so !!!
Great plan. Except for the niggling little fact that Moblin kinda sucks. It's completely counterintuitive to the average person who has spent two decades on Windows and/or Mac systems.
And it still sucks that Netbooks with ION processors have to cost more because of the fact that "standalone" Atom procs cost significantly more than the full integrated versions. I hope Intel gets a big swift kick in the ass so this sort of thing can change for the better.
11:43 AM
*zing!
11:34 AM
11:26 AM
11:32 AM
As for the branding, I wouldn't be too surprised to see Intel insert a six-core chip into their i7 line; it's not like they were ever very consistent with their product lines, after all.
02:05 PM
@Bwehngamun: Originally the core I9's were supposed to be the 6 core and the 7's were to be quad's. It looks like Intel decided to put a 6 core in the I7 range is all. I was originally thinking there was a misprint and this was an I9.
02:13 PM
02:33 PM
[www.tomshardware.com]
11:24 AM
11:16 AM
11:59 AM
12:02 PM
12:42 PM
12:43 PM
12:52 PM
02:21 PM
It was my workstation and then ran the rest of its days as my file server, firewall (RH), AMP, ftp, and vpn... That was hands down the best box I have ever had.
12/12/09
12/07/09
@ECAsh - Larrabee wasn't even related to the "standard" Intel graphics (GMA, etc), it was a discrete card with a LOT of x86 cores on it, like 40+ in the demo version I think. I don't know that Intel has ever shipped a discrete graphics card; not lately, anyway. This was (we presume) going to be a PCI-x card that would've competed with AMD's ATI cards, and NVidia's cards.
At least they've got experience with making many-core architectures and CPUs now - should come in handy when I get that 16-core Core i9 chip in 2012 or so !!!
12/04/09
".... but it goes to 11"
12/04/09
12/04/09
omfgwtfbbqepicwinwant!!!!!!!
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/03/09
It seems like we're getting so many its a step back not a step forward.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09