Wow nice reviews, now we all need to sit back and see what motherboard combo with the Core i7 Extreme CPU does the best before we go out and buy it. I really thought it would do much better with the Adobe Premiere Elements 4.0 is performed with a raw two hour AVI file test. But on another note these boards will have SLI/CrossFire ready on them which is a plus. I am really thinking of pulling the trigger on one of these setups.. Of course with the Core i7 Extreme CPU in one. :)

I like the look of these, the motherboard support at launch is a little limited and of course, as you would expect....costly, i will keep my current system until the new year then look to upgrade once the initial limited stock is sorted and availabilty and prices level out.....I already have good DDR3 so at least i dont need to worry about that.

I realize I will upgrade eventually to a Core i7, but not now. Looks pretty sweet. I cannot stomach buying:

DDR3 AND a Mobo AND a CPU...

That is kinda annoying...

Doing much better on this reviews than it did in the previews, especially on games. It's faster clock for clock now at least AND did you saw this?

www.guru3d.com/article/intel-core-i7-920-and-965-review/18

3-way GTX280 SLI on i7 almost tripling performance of 3-way SLI on Core2!!

The memory bandwidth is simply crazy, I'm surprised there aren't more synthetic benchmarks that reflect it as much. None the less, overall it's a clear winner.

From HardOCP:

So is Tom's Hardware right about the chips throttling them selves back after they reach the 130Watt mark if it isn't an extreme model?? If this is true then I say F intel and I shall not buy one until they get that issue resolved or some one figures out how to get around the drawback because I have never spent $1000 on a chip and I never will.....

There are three stories today, i7/X58, 3-channel DDR3 and CPU coolers. How can you miss the CPU coolers?

www.tweaktown.com/articles/1643/all_about_intel_core_i7_socket_lga_1366_cooling/index.html

This is a simply amazing processor, I cant wait till the "budget" varieties of this (like the i7 version of the e7200) come out along with some good and affordable boards. Maybe in a year or so I will upgrade after the Die-Shrink, by then I will might need the performance boost.

The socket will change to 1160 (?) for "mainstream". The rules are changing and you will not like what my crystal ball is telling me.

truehighroller1So is Tom's Hardware right about the chips throttling them selves back after they reach the 130Watt mark if it isn't an extreme model?? If this is true then I say F intel and I shall not buy one until they get that issue resolved or some one figures out how to get around the drawback because I have never spent $1000 on a chip and I never will.....

Any one?? I would think right now this would be all the talk.. If this is true then what will be the limit on your over clocks??

Were i preordered my I7 920 i found wind of a sub 300 dollar sli/xfire compatible dual socket i7 mobo from asus similar to its P6T deluxe this has the ability to support quad graphics from either team www.provantage.com/asus-p6t-deluxe~7ASU90L1.htm

Amd processor anyone?....nah i didnt think so.

Anyone think regardless of all the non oc'ing hype that intel mght pull of another core2 revolution with this.It is looking better and better the more info we get.

truehighroller1Any one?? I would think right now this would be all the talk.. If this is true then what will be the limit on your over clocks??

Yea, just reading that here:
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-7.html

"Apparently, Intel has realized that the good overclocking potential of its processors has led ambitious users to choose less expensive models, relegating the faster (and more expensive) CPUs to the sidelines."

Let's hope some clever engineers at Gigabyte or ASUS, or whereever find a way to circumvent the "hard-wired" limit.

SasquiYea, just reading that here:
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-7.html

"Apparently, Intel has realized that the good overclocking potential of its processors has led ambitious users to choose less expensive models, relegating the faster (and more expensive) CPUs to the sidelines."

Let's hope some clever engineers at Gigabyte or ASUS, or whereever find a way to circumvent the "hard-wired" limit.

Aye, I like that review:

Obviously, Intel wants to prevent customers from buying an inexpensive processor and then overclocking it to very high or even extreme levels.

:laugh:

We all knew it was coming. Intel's been on top for a while, and the Core i7 is so fast it's going to keep them there for a while, so now they're going to start milking us for cash. :banghead:

SasquiYea, just reading that here:
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-7.html

"Apparently, Intel has realized that the good overclocking potential of its processors has led ambitious users to choose less expensive models, relegating the faster (and more expensive) CPUs to the sidelines."

Let's hope some clever engineers at Gigabyte or ASUS, or whereever find a way to circumvent the "hard-wired" limit.

Thank you some one paying attention lol. Right, this IMO will make or break the deal for me because I am not buying a piece o shiat that is limited by the power it consumes. Talk about a joke... I will not spend $1000 to be able to go over 130Watts "or get a good overclock". I am also wondering if this is true,, then what would that option limit the over clock to ??

DarkMatterDoing much better on this reviews than it did in the previews, especially on games. It's faster clock for clock now at least AND did you saw this?

www.guru3d.com/article/intel-core-i7-920-and-965-review/18

3-way GTX280 SLI on i7 almost tripling performance of 3-way SLI on Core2!!

And that core2 is using DDR2 memory... They should have the same speed DDR3 memory and a quad core for comparison. A 680i e8500 vs i7 core on a new x58 is like racing a Toyota Yaris vs Ford Mustang.

Some very interesting quotes from the tomshardware article www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057.html. Nehalem performance is better than I expected, though I suspect overclockers are gonna boycott this processor due to the hardwired limits on overclocking:(

"In our benchmark suite, the Corei7 is 25% faster clock-for-clock than the Core 2."

"The Core i7 is going to leave Intel's rival AMD lagging even further behind. Put bluntly, you'd need two and a half Phenom X4 processors to compete with Intel's current Core i7 flagship model.

"Overclockers shouldn't get their hopes up though: all standard models are equipped with an overclocking lock."

"Thus, it is entirely possible that a lower model Core i7 may offer excellent overclocking potential, but it will be constrained by the Overspeed Protection feature when its power dissipation triggers it. Obviously, Intel wants to prevent customers from buying an inexpensive processor and then overclocking it to very high or even extreme levels. Apparently, Intel has realized that the good overclocking potential of its processors has led ambitious users to choose less expensive models, relegating the faster (and more expensive) CPUs to the sidelines."

Heres an article comparing multi gpu performance between core i7 and core 2

www.guru3d.com/article/core-i7-multigpu-sli-crossfire-game-performance-review/1

jyoung75Some very interesting quotes from the tomshardware article www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057.html. Nehalem performance is better than I expected, though I suspect overclockers are gonna boycott this processor due to the hardwired limits on overclocking:(

"In our benchmark suite, the Corei7 is 25% faster clock-for-clock than the Core 2."

"The Core i7 is going to leave Intel's rival AMD lagging even further behind. Put bluntly, you'd need two and a half Phenom X4 processors to compete with Intel's current Core i7 flagship model. They messed up on this part take out the Phenom X4 part and it is more realistic. The guy who wrote the article has fixed this error now.

"Overclockers shouldn't get their hopes up though: all standard models are equipped with an overclocking lock."

"Thus, it is entirely possible that a lower model Core i7 may offer excellent overclocking potential, but it will be constrained by the Overspeed Protection feature when its power dissipation triggers it. Obviously, Intel wants to prevent customers from buying an inexpensive processor and then overclocking it to very high or even extreme levels. Apparently, Intel has realized that the good overclocking potential of its processors has led ambitious users to choose less expensive models, relegating the faster (and more expensive) CPUs to the sidelines."

Boycott what what.... I wanna see how bad this option criples the chips..

Tatty_One.....I already have good DDR3 so at least i dont need to worry about that.

Yeah I was thinking of re-using my DDR3 as well but...

...A word of warning from Intel is if you plan to use high performance DDR3 modules, you’re going to have to look for ones that use less than 1.65v. If you use memory modules above 1.65v you can burn out the integrated memory controller and the QPI controller on the CPU, as they are on the same core chip,...

Source

My memory runs 1.8V+, so do we have to worry about this ? I seen this mentioned before but really never looked into it much.

truehighroller1Thank you some one paying attention lol. Right, this IMO will make or break the deal for me because I am not buying a piece o shiat that is limited by the power it consumes. Talk about a joke... I will not spend $1000 to be able to go over 130Watts "or get a good overclock". I am also wondering if this is true,, then what would that option limit the over clock to ??

Well they talk about the lower end models that draw 60wat stock, then you've got a theoretical 70w over overhead to reach the 130w limit.

...and like I said "Let's hope some clever engineers at Gigabyte or ASUS, or whereever find a way to circumvent the "hard-wired" limit."

If they can't then gone are the days where you can take a $200 CPU and get $1000+ worth of power out of it :mad:

Jeez, AMD is now back in the dumps, how will Deneb go up against THIS?!

SasquiWell they talk about the lower end models that draw 60wat stock, then you've got a theoretical 70w over overhead to reach the 130w limit.

...and like I said "Let's hope some clever engineers at Gigabyte or ASUS, or whereever find a way to circumvent the "hard-wired" limit."

If they can't then gone are the days where you can take a $200 CPU and get $1000+ worth of power out of it :mad:

At least until AMD uses some of that middle eastern venture capital it just got and produces a worthy competitor, but that could be a year or more from now. :shadedshu

The good thing is that Intel is now so far ahead that I'm betting they're going to slow down R&D a bit, allowing AMD to hopefully catch up -- the Nehalem is going to be the fastest thing from Intel for a while, I'm thinking. But it's going to be a bit of a wait.

oily_17Yeah I was thinking of re-using my DDR3 as well but...



Source

My memory runs 1.8V+, so do we have to worry about this ? I seen this mentioned before but really never looked into it much.

Good find, and yes, I think we do need to be concerned, fortunatly mine will run at 1.5V although at lower speeds and looser timings, at 1.65v I could probably only get about 1400mhz @ 7-7-7-20 :cry:

SasquiWell they talk about the lower end models that draw 60wat stock, then you've got a theoretical 70w over overhead to reach the 130w limit.

...and like I said "Let's hope some clever engineers at Gigabyte or ASUS, or whereever find a way to circumvent the "hard-wired" limit."

If they can't then gone are the days where you can take a $200 CPU and get $1000+ worth of power out of it :mad:

Ok after poking around and using some common sense which I wasn't at first, after looking at the power the extreme pulls at 3.2GHZ stock "100Watts" I am going to guess you will be able to pull between 3.2GHZ- 3.5GHZ with the lower end models at the most. I am guessamating but, I think I will be close to the mark..