Added: 3 years ago
From: channelintel
Views: 16,675
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (34)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I've met Rajesh...well at least over the phone :)

  • Its the name of a river in Oregon, the state from which the developing scheme for this architecture originated from (rather then Israel, where the previous core architectures originated).

  • i have 2 systems one with the Intel Core 2 Quad Quad-Core Processor Q9650 Socket 775 and the other with the AMD Phenom X4 9550 and they are both realy good at doing every thing now is this cpu going to be better then the extremeIntel Core 2 Extreme Quad Processor QX9775 Socket 771?

  • one i7 975 beats 2 Qx9770's And i can know it. LONG LIVE I7!!!!!! :P

  • 1st intel true quad core

  • the q6600 was the 1st quad core, this what is 8 cores, just 4 of them are virtual cores

  • thanks for the answer

  • they were two core 2 duos together....the i7 is 4 core in a single chip....

  • amd is going to die :( meh

  • why is intel so proud of 150 million tranistors? if i rember correctly nvidia put 1 billion transistors on the 280gt gpu

  • So you think with a GPU you can do without a CPU? Wake up to reality. No CPU, no GPU.

  • what i ment was why inster there that meny transistors on a cpu's? i dont get it

  • The way I see it that every transistor can handle a plus and minus current, eg the 1s and 0s that drive computing. Meaning the more transistors you can pack on without overheating the CPU due to the electrical current, the faster you workload is going to be processed. To my mind, combining a high transistor CPU with a high transistor GPU and proper cooling and memory, you've got the ultimate powerhouse for games. ;>)

  • heres another thing im confused about?

    the processor is clocked at 3.2 ghz

    but the FSb is a 2000 mhz which is 2.0 ghz vs 3.2 ghz wouldnt it be more effecient if the number of memory operations matched the proccessing operations?

  • Nehalem does not use an FSB, it using a serial interconnect. Longer wires, circuits, and transmission limits the overall frequency, so buses generally run slower than the CPU. Memory itself cannot clock as high as a CPU, thus there is always different clock boundaries.

  • It uses QPI, Quick Path Interconnect, which basically means that each CPU has its own memory controller built in to which memory is allocated, making FSB a thing of the past.

  • the cpu needs some extra speed to think out and/or sort out the memory other wise it's just gonna go in circle's...

  • so wait... the larabee is a graphics controller too? lol amazing stuff

  • Don't knock it, Intel has clever people and does a lot of research. My PC is Intel powered and I will never have anything else.

  • this is a load of shit,

    they dont explane anything about any new chip.

  • were the fuck is AMD? wat are they gonna do bout intel

  • Well im not impresed. The cg they showed us looks primitive. Very disapoitning.

  • ♫♫ Larrabee's the way for merging GPU's and CPU's ♫♫

    Whelp, I'm sold.

  • Although I'm more of an AMD user, I like the Nehalem because it brings down the price of Intel's high end quads and it's actually a true quad core. If I had the money, I would buy one purely for the performance, because it's said that the top of the line Nehalem would be $900 and it can easily outperform the top of the line Core 2 Extreme.

  • If I was producing a game utilising such stuff I would be looking at using larabee for Physics. By the my programs still need far more powerful processors than this even when optimised there's only so far I can go with this power. I want more power so that I can render my maths faster than minutes basically.

  • I'm sorry but I reckon still the best performance comes from the GPU and that the best Physics can come from the CPU mixed with a large array of small cores yet your trying to do it the other way round. When you watch water simulations they still look like particles and they can do that much in a game yet.

    However when you look at graphics say in the latest need for speed, the graphics looks well ahead of the physics.

  • Intel, I am made at you for delaying the Auburndale Nehalem cpu's until Jan 2010! I want a laptop with it for college next fall. Guess I will have to keep using my Atom powered EEE 901 till then.

  • I want to hear more about the scalable architecture. Does this mean we will buy getting motherboards with like 5 CPU sockets? COULD IT BE THAT POWERFUL!?!?!? /drool

  • lol, if only we had this technology back in 2000

  • WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

  • he hesistated when saying 2009 and sounded for a second like 2000...thats all....RELAX!! lol

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more