6 Core Intel CPU's

[dawman]

For guys needing the Dual Quad power of the Mac's these new processors are coming out early in 2010 according to " Intel representatives. "
Then I found an article associated to certain Fab plants where these will be made here in the USA, which I found interestring.

I also was especially interested in the 6 Core Harpertown that is due out first ???
I was really curious of why Fabbing a 6 core when you really need these 32nm 8 cores that many people are drueling over? It's much easier to glue 2 i7's together I thought.........A Ha.....
It appears as though the 8 core process isn't perfect, but Intel has perfected the way of keeping a poor 8 core wafer, and disconnecting the cores that are defective ....
That's why we will see the 6 cores first.....
Yeah Nice 'Eh...I always wanted a 700 dollar reject.

This is very smart from a business standpoint, but this is exactly why we need AMD to survive.
Intel really needs to move many CPU's off of their shelves the first half of 2009 so expect to see some great deals on proven current designs, and the first i7's are really great CPU's and will make notebook/mobile computing exciting next year.

Just think what kind of tricks they would be pulling on us if AMD loses even more market share....

[valis]

Intel has been able to disable core resources for a long time (disabling flawed portions of cache & selling as 'cheaper' cpus like celeron). It's just that they're now focusing on doing this to cores now too (as you ascertained) to keep yields up.

AMD in fact has been doing the disabling of cores for a while now too, with their Phenom & PhenomII you can get '3' and '2' core models that are essentially 4 core Phenoms with failed portions. They fry a few circuits so the extra cores can't be accessed and bin them as cheaper parts...

Also Intel just heavily revised their entire roadmap for the next 2 years, after the Nehelem core hits Xeon, the next revision is now Beckton (where the "cache and core recovery" processes will begin). The rest of the desktop line is going to move forward to 32nm and skip an entire "tick" generation as well: usually Intel moves process size with a "tick" THEN with the same process size do a new core design with the "tock". This time they're doing both in one AND tacking on integrated graphics to the core for the entry level (integrated graphics) parts to boot:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/in ... spx?i=3513

[dawman]

I liked my 865 and 965 motherboard and the chipsets were low binned, so there's no problem w/ stability.
I never knew about the core stuff until I read that article.... It makes me wonder if my E8600 was a failed Quad....

[valis]

I liked my 865 and 965 motherboard and the chipsets were low binned, so there's no problem w/ stability.
I never knew about the core stuff until I read that article.... It makes me wonder if my E8600 was a failed Quad....

I think that until now it's been about disabling cache only. Also binning occurs based not just on features that fail completely (flaws in the silicon subtrate etc) but also based on failures at a given voltage/operating frequency/etc, which is how the parts are segregated into price/performance ranges.

Overclockers know that parts are NOT binned individually, but based on lot-testing, so the part you actually wind up with is potentially capable of doing more but sold as being able to do its rated spec with guarantee (& warranty). Personally I enjoy running parts at their rated spec, since even if a part is capable of more silicon fails based on thermal wear over time. Most of my systems FAR outlast their useful lifespan with only fans conking out & the occasional harddrive failure. I know I'm not alone on this in these forums either

[valis]

Yes OC'ing helps me email faster!

I just mentioned it out of hand, as the reasons behind why OC'ing has become popular related. It's a bit of a 'lottery' in that people feel 'good' if they discover their purchased part is magically 'better' than what they paid for. It's also for people that need case-decals, special fan shrouds for their acrylic windows and CFL neon highlights (imo) to consider their machine 'impressive'.

[next to nothing]

Did you see that there is both T9600 and P9600 cpu's for laptops? If you look at the specs, they are identical, only difference is that the T is specced ad 35W while the P is specced at 25W. The price is ofcourse higher on the P model.

From what i have read, the processors are actually identcal. manufatcuring inaccuracies will however make some draw more power than others, ant they end up as "T". This is however, also based on lot testing so if you are lucky your T is actually P (hmm, that sounds a bit weird).