Intel Core i7 for $1075.95 ?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by enVisionGTR, Nov 2, 2008.

  1. enVisionGTR macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    #1
    Found this on engadget:

    http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/02/intels-core-i7-purchased-overclocked-benchmarked/

    [​IMG]

    "Looking for the latest in CPU spice to keep your gaming rig flowing? You'd better go find your wallet/purse and head to your local computer shop for a fresh Core i7 (née Nehalem), because they are apparently available for sale right now -- before most of the major sites have even received theirs. User gooddog over at the Overclock.net forums has flaunted posted this picture of his recently purchased 3.2GHz Core i7 Extreme 965 CPU. Paired with an Asus P6T motherboard and running at the stock clock rate it scored a 5,606 in 3DMark06, in-line with what earlier testers found. O/C'ed up to 3.8GHz it delivered a tidy 6,608, a mark that surely gives it control of all benchmarks and, thus, the PC universe."

    Can't wait to see the new mac pro numbers.
     
  2. Chaos123x macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    #2
    To bad apple does not use desktop chips in any of their products.

    Have to wait for Xeon version for the
    Mac pro.
     
  3. Battlefield Fan macrumors 65816

    Battlefield Fan

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    #3
    I hope apple comes out with the core i7 for the mbp before mid aug. The performence gain from this series is supp to be crazy
     
  4. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #4
    Don't count on it.
     
  5. Aea macrumors 6502a

    Aea

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #5
    This iteration will have a very short lifespan, Intel are releasing it in another slot type within months, all signs point to waiting for that to happen.
     
  6. Blaine macrumors 6502a

    Blaine

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Location:
    Abilene TX
    #6
    eek. Probably not for apple notebooks until something like Macworld 2010.
     
  7. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #7
    You're right, Q3 2009 is a few months. :D

    Would not complain I guess. I couldn't care less about laptops. You're always at most a block away from the internet and a computer. Just have a flash drive (Or an SD card that doubles as my cell phone memory) and do whatever you need to do.

    Also, as someone who thinks portability has 0 value because of the above, it's hard to imagine paying the same amount for something that fails more on average, has more expensive problems on average, and has lower performance numbers. Call me crazy.
     
  8. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #8
    How come we have to wait for the Xeon variant? Can't Apple stick in two of the quad-core version of these babies in their Mac Pros?
     
  9. Aea macrumors 6502a

    Aea

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #9
    Because Intel in all its wisdom decided that if you're going to need more then two processors you're going to pay more since they'll be in a different slot factor, thus releasing the MP compatible Xeon line. I'm sure there are also some architecture differences that don't really warrant the premium cost, although Xeon chips are supposed to be more stable due to more stringent quality control.
     
  10. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #10
    No. Apple doesn't use desktop processors. They won't work in current models because

    1. The socket is different.
    2. The memory is different.
    3. It couldn't work, anyway.

    We have to wait for Gainestown at the minimum.

    Beckton at most. If they use Beckton, say goodbye to a sub $3,000 Mac Pro.
     
  11. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #11
    Well..X58 does come in a dual socket configuration but it is the Skulltrail successor and not Xeon.
     
  12. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #12
    theoretically, between 2 of the desktop quad-core variant, and 2 of the Xeon variant, which would have more performance?
     
  13. Aea macrumors 6502a

    Aea

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #13
    Well, considering if you were to get two of the processors in the baseline $2800 MP you'd need to spend $1500, I'm sure that Apple gets a rather substantial discount from Intel somewhere down the line. I remember at one point you would need to spend over $2000 to get just the CPUs for the baseline MPs. I'm sure Apple could find a way to use premium hardware without a hike in prices.
     
  14. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #14
    The same except there's an additional QPI for the second processor. Expect ECC on the Xeon as well.

    You know there are MSRP $266 Core i7 processors as well. It's launch so expect inflated prices.
     
  15. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #15
    MSRP?

    The amounts on the Intel Price List(s) are typically for quantity purchasers (Q=1000 usually). I hadn't seen retail stated anywhere on the lists, so I'm hesitant to think this will be what end users can get them for. :(

    It would certainly be nice though. ;) :D
     
  16. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #16
    Price per 1000 slipped my mind at the time.
     
  17. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #17
    It's really because they can and the target markets are those using computers as a tool not an entertainment device who can pay the extra costs.

    You're not back on the Beckton thing again are you? Or just hedging your bets? :D There is a 0% chance Apple will use Beckton. Gainstown X and W processors with Tylersburg 36-D single or dual chipsets are for DP Workstations and what Apple will be using.
     
  18. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #18
    I certainly don't want to be; we don't need a four-socket, $3,000 base model, thanks.

    I only bring it up because Apple has done stupid things in the past and we don't REALLY know what they'll be using.
     
  19. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #19
    I understand where you are comming from, but Apple have had the same ideology with the Power Macs and Mac Pros for a long time now. Intel have a workstation platform and processors intended for it so it's safe to say that is what Apple will use.
     
  20. IroquoisPliskin macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    #20
    Why not? I wouldn't mind a 16 core MP.
     
  21. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #21
    Well a 16 core Mac Pro on Beckton would probably cost you $15,000 - $20,000 for the same performance as the current Mac Pro with double the cores. Kind of cheaper just to buy two 8 cores ;)
     
  22. tonyl macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    #22
    That's really expensive! Intel makes lots of money from the high end desktop processors.
     
  23. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #23
    Beckton is a multi-processor server part, so you can get 16 cores with 4 of them. Definitely not cheap.

    Smaller production quantities though, so costs go up. Then they add profit. ;)
     

Share This Page