Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Intel

Intel's Core i7-980X Six-Core Benchmarked 179

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the faster-harder-better dept.
Ninjakicks writes "Although they won't hit store shelves for a few more weeks, today Intel has officially unveiled the new Core i7-980X Extreme processor. The Core i7-980X Extreme is based on Intel's 32nm Gulftown core, derived from their Nehalem architecture and sports six execution cores. The chip runs at a 3.33GHz clock frequency, that can jump up to 3.6GHz in Intel's Turbo Boost mode. This processor has a max TDP of 130W, which amazingly is the same as previous generation Core i7 quad-core CPUs. Of course, it's crazy fast too. Some may say that the majority of applications can't truly take advantage of the resources afforded by a six-core chip capable of processing up to 12 threads. However, the fact remains there are plenty of multi-threaded usage models and applications where the power of a CPU like this can be put to very good use."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel's Core i7-980X Six-Core Benchmarked

Comments Filter:
  • by Targon (17348) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @09:41AM (#31436768)

    I know there are SOME people out there who have $1000 to spend on just a CPU, but until these come down a long way in terms of price, it is WAY out of my price range.

  • Cool (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Pojut (1027544) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @09:45AM (#31436802) Homepage

    Now to see what AMDs 6-core offering is like. I know that Intel destroys AMD in performance benchmarks and real-world performance, but AMD is FAR less expensive. If I was pushing an Eyefinity setup or something, then sure, I would go all out and drop a few hundred dollars or more on an Intel CPU. Considering that AMDs current flagship costs $195 [newegg.com] and is still a heck of a performer...yeah, I'll stick with AMD for now.

  • by rotide (1015173) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @09:50AM (#31436842)

    All new bleeding edge CPUs are expensive. That's not the point of the article/submission. The point here is that a very fast 6 core, 12 thread consumer level processor is now on the market.

    Price will come down in due time.

  • Reminds me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gaelfx (1111115) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @10:18AM (#31437038)
    This really reminds me of the recent Ask Slashdot article lamenting the naming schemes being implemented for most pieces of hardware. i7= 4 or 6 cores. Makes sense since the first thing I think when I hear 7 is "must be 4 or 6!" And the '980' really goes a long way towards confirming that initial suspicion. I'm really glad they put the 'extreme' in there, cause I was worried about the numbers being too low. Seriously though, can't they come up with a name that is actually descriptive of the product rather than a bunch of reassurances about the awesome-o amazingness of their processor? It seems to me that most people ask someone who knows something about computers when they need to buy a new one or replacement parts for their old one, and I don't know about the rest of you, but I really hate names that give me no real information about what the heck I'm buying. Yes, I can google the information, but the whole practice seems immature (and sometimes a little insulting).
  • by Vectormatic (1759674) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @10:19AM (#31437056)

    hey, i never said AMD was more expensive then Intel, and i bet you that if they could charge $1000 for their top end, they would (and they should, milking the high end is the easiest way to recoup dev costs)

    personally i prefer AMD because of their price/performance ratio too, and they have consistently kicked intels but there

  • by 91degrees (207121) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @11:50AM (#31438494) Journal
    Really the point is that this isn't aimed at a typical desktop user. A lot of the applications that this will be used for will easily use 12 threads. I know our 4 core i7 is great for compiling and our project is relatively small. Probably pretty good for rendering as well.
  • by Khyber (864651) <techkitsune@gmail.com> on Thursday March 11, 2010 @01:32PM (#31440366) Homepage Journal

    "Rendering farms?"

    Those would be handled by massively parallel GPU clusters, not slower than crap CPUs.

  • Re:Reminds me (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bdenton42 (1313735) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @02:31PM (#31441292)

    i7= 4 or 6 cores. Makes sense since the first thing I think when I hear 7 is "must be 4 or 6!"

    Some of the i7 models for mobile use only have 2 cores, just to confuse things even further.

  • Dude make it into a file server or netbox. no reason to toss when KVMs are dirt cheap, I think I paid $24 for my 4 port at Newegg with cables. I am typing this on a Sempron 1.8Ghz with 1.5Gb of RAM, which makes for a whisper quiet netbox/downloader without needing to fire up my quad.

    So don't toss dude, re-purpose. As long as it still runs good and doesn't throw errors there is no reason you can't still get plenty of use out of it as a file server, netbox, or a dedicated box for downloading large files. Just add a nice cheap KVM and you are good to go and you'll be glad you have it, just as I am glad to have this whisper quiet Sempron for checking my email or downloading files at 3AM.

  • by Zeio (325157) on Friday March 12, 2010 @02:10AM (#31448948)

    I'd buy it on sight if it supported ECC. No ECC support = unstable system. I always have an ECC system, and I always get high "3DMarks" and frame rates and I never get a BSOD or other system errors.

    Without ECC its impossible to know if memory errors are occurring, and 12GB of memory at 1333/1600MHz probably has a single bit event quite often.

Work continues in this area. -- DEC's SPR-Answering-Automaton

Working...