What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
195 Comments
- korvan504521, on 11/18/2008, -4/+122Remember when processors just got faster, and we could easily compare them?
Good times. - inactive, on 11/18/2008, -2/+63Intel Marketing Guy: Let's call it the Core iProcessor!
Intel Windows Relations Guy: No, how about Core 7!
Intel CEO: No no no, we'll combine the two and call it the Core i7! - alperea, on 11/18/2008, -2/+54"The move puts Intel ahead of its rival AMD by more than a few months....... ago?"
- imasuperDOTcom, on 11/18/2008, -10/+56I stopped caring about processors like 3 years ago.
They're fast now. I don't care anymore. - subliminalurge, on 11/18/2008, -1/+35What he means is that, without following the industry, it's a simple matter to conclude that a Pentium 3 is better than a Pentium 2. It's easy to figure out that a 486 is better than a 386.
But is a Core 2 better than a Core i7? If you don't follow the industry, you can't really tell. And AMD's naming conventions are even worse. - Misterberu, on 11/18/2008, -4/+35When I lick my computer it stings.
- aliguana, on 11/18/2008, -7/+36Remember Pentium I, II, III, IV? I knew what a Pentium 4 2.8ghz was...Then all these Core2 and Corei7 and such, I bet the people at Intel are as confused by it all just as much as we are.
- meatstick, on 11/18/2008, -0/+29Your gonna have to get a new mobo
- Defiant001, on 11/18/2008, -1/+26Lowest Core i7 (920) beats beats the highest end Core 2 (QX9770) in several tests or is equal and is only $400 vs $1800.
"As it turns out, the Extreme Core i7 CPU outperformed both the overclocked and the standard Core 2 QX9770 processor in most benchmarks." (http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-Core-i7-CPU-B ...
Sounds dam good to me. Just waiting for the price to come down a bit, and the motherboards and memory is still expensive for triple channel (although not necessary, but it gives best performance). My old X2 6000+ really needs to be replaced by one of these and a new mobo and ram. - sockpuppets, on 11/18/2008, -1/+21When I was a kid we used our fingers and toes to compute, AND WE LIKED IT!
- Elranzer, on 11/18/2008, -0/+20AMD's next processor is the Athlon over 9000+
- tendonut, on 11/18/2008, -0/+16Eh....as a gamer, processors don't seem to really matter anymore. It's all about the video card. Playing every game I own at max settings with my 8800GTS, my CPU never peaks over 65% usage. It's an Athlon 64 X2 3800+, the old 939 model, I bought it July 2006 when AMD had that crazy price drop just a week before the Core 2 Duos hit the shelf....I have no urge to upgrade my hardware whatsoever.
- sockpuppets, on 11/18/2008, -2/+18You can rename it once you get it home. I call my iron "irony." Sometimes it gets steamed at me.
- Ommatidia, on 11/18/2008, -0/+15Probably ram, too. Core i7 is DDR3 only.
- inactive, on 11/18/2008, -0/+14Damn parallel computing, it really does make it a different game entirely. Throughput is the name of the game, not just raw speed anymore.
- inactive, on 11/18/2008, -3/+16Looking at these comments, esthetically the ones citing "why no 8Ghz single processors?", do some research before posting.
Silicon chips have gone almost as far as they can go with current manufacturing tech, meaning they cannot physically put any more transistors in the space provided. At around 3Ghz it became immensely difficult to produce chips that can go faster and be stable. 8Ghz processors will require a brand new manufacturing and material altogether.
The solution was instead of making a single faster core, use several cores and develop applications that could utilize multiple cores, effectively increasing throughput by processing data in parallel instead of in series.
Crappy naming conventions aside (and really, this is not a new thing), the i7 has shown in benchmarks and real world testing so far that it crushes the Core 2 in several areas.
Of course the newest will be the most expensive at launch, why is this a surprise? The good news is that awesome Core 2's are now getting a lot cheaper because of it. - demosthenes247, on 11/18/2008, -3/+15Intel is not a monopoly.
- Lewie, on 11/18/2008, -0/+12LGA 775 has been around for almost 5 years, which is pretty impressive.
- subliminalurge, on 11/18/2008, -0/+12Yes.
- dfross, on 11/18/2008, -0/+11This has been proven by some with preproduction models to not be the case, it's outdated information.
The actual problem is it states the memory voltage and CPU voltage are linked - so running the ram at say 2.3V would necessarily run the processor at 2.3V also and fry it. This is a chipset issue rather than directly an i7 CPU issue, but seems some vendors may have been able to get round it.
overclockers.co.uk ran a preproduction i7 with ram at 2V with no problems, for several days at a time. I remember readnig that the BIOS had separate values for the CPU and RAM voltage.
I can't quote anything specific except to point at the forums on www.overclockers.co.uk and the older nehalem/i7 threads in the CPU section :)
A lot of existing DDR3 runs at way higher than 1.5V by default. I'm pretty sure there will be a fix to this issue, at least for many motherboard manufacturers if not all. - DrunkenPirate34, on 11/18/2008, -0/+11I lol'ed
- Mejogid, on 11/18/2008, -1/+12Is that a question
- bhuntsbarger, on 11/18/2008, -14/+25will it take an i7 to run windows 7
- lilbitmoreslyk, on 11/18/2008, -0/+10As AMD had showed them before, clock rate isn't everything. So we saw Intel learn and tone down the clock and work on architecture. I think we'll see some more optimizations in architecture and a die shrink before we get up there with clock speed.
- counterplex, on 11/18/2008, -0/+10A minor correction. The first pentium processor was actually known as the P5. So your chronology of processors should something like:
..., 80386, 80486, P5, P2, P3, P4, Pentium-M, ... - flashingcurser, on 11/18/2008, -0/+9I love the nostalgic photo, a BX chipset.
- inactive, on 11/18/2008, -4/+13When have we NOT had to get a new mobo!??!??!??
- Defiant001, on 11/18/2008, -1/+10My friend runs the windows 7 beta on a laptop with a 2.4 ghz core 2 and 3 gb of ram. It runs far faster then vista did on it, and boots in about 15 seconds. I can only imagine how fast an i7 would run it.
- xedd, on 11/18/2008, -0/+8Well, I guess they are behind "by more than a few months ago"...
(Whatever the ***** hell that means.) - trogdor282, on 11/18/2008, -0/+8That was NEVER the case. I remember when you could upgrade from a 486 at 100 MHz, to a 83Mhz Pentium Overdrive.
- inactive, on 11/18/2008, -0/+8Wait till after greedfest to upgrade. Watch the price of DDR3 and motherboards drop after the xmas suckers got theirs.
- crgwbr, on 11/18/2008, -5/+13the win 7 prebeta run well on quite a bit less hardware than vista
- regression, on 11/18/2008, -0/+8definitely for gaming.
- Topher06, on 11/18/2008, -0/+8Wow buddy, they did like a year ago with the Core 2. Also the speed of the processor is of inconsequence to how well it performs, in fact, I am more impressed with the fact that the introductory i7 920 model running at 2.6ghz can outperform Intel's Extreme Edition Core 2 models running over 3 ghz. The fact that Intel has just broken the 3ghz barrier is a testiment to how well they "re"designed their chips considering the Pentium 4 line was cresting 4ghz but performed dismally. The i7 generation will top 4 ghz as they shrink the process even more, but the speed of the processor is not an indication of how well it performs these days. Yes, an 4ghz i7 would be awesome, but it will come..
- nonymous666, on 11/18/2008, -1/+8Umm, i8?
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/18/2008, -1/+8¯(°_o)/¯
- jordn, on 11/18/2008, -0/+7Not sure why you're being buried, the Windows 7 prebeta runs fine on my development machine (AMD Athlon X2 3800+, 2GB RAM, 8400GS, 160GB HDD)
- bjornski, on 11/18/2008, -1/+7You're so cool.
Can I be your friend? - fluxion, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6Phil: Hi..uhh...Phil here from R&D....since the last 2 were Core and Core 2, respectively, me and the guys were thinking maybe we should just call it Core 3? its what we've been calling it internally and it seems pretty clea...
Intel CEO: Phil. you're fired. - geardosdotnet, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6Try rendering and encoding HD video, then you will care. However, for the average computer user, anything from the last few years should be fine.
- fluxion, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6it simply means that they may catch up in a few months ago
- freezerburn666, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6yea i just saw the DDR3 thing, meh. no rush for me, i can still play all the latest games just fine :) perhaps i'll upgrade to the core i7 when xbox 720 comes out
- Twinked, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6This comment is probably not very far off mark. +1 Digg
- inactive, on 11/18/2008, -1/+7Why is it Intel's fault they are good at what they do, and have at the moment no direct competitor besides the trouble AMD which has yet to answer back to Core 2/i7
- TEEMANOID, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6A Core 2 Duo will be good enough for a good while.
- Defiant001, on 11/18/2008, -0/+6More powerful for things like gaming and video editing. As well as being capable of having 6 or more hard drives, burn discs faster, more ports. Laptops are great for portability, but when performance and storage is needed you can't beat the desktop with a laptop (unless its on older desktop and a newer laptop).
- aznhomig, on 11/18/2008, -2/+7Few months? More like a few years ahead from the benchmarks of this processor, it seems.
- ilikeeggs8877, on 11/18/2008, -2/+7@subliminalurge. AMD follows a very nice numbering scheme. In the vast majority of cases, the bigger the number, the better....
- Elranzer, on 11/18/2008, -1/+6Looks like Microsoft and Intel are naming their products together with the "7" theme...
1) Pentium
2) Pentium II
3) Pentium III (Pentium III-M)
4) Pentium IV (Pentium D)
5) Core Duo
6) Core 2 Duo (Core 2 Quad)
7) Core i7 - inactive, on 11/18/2008, -0/+5I bet you could program it to put the word "like" randomly in while you are typing. just think how many keystrokes it would save!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 196 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is