Dual Core Intel Core i3, Core i5 Processors Start Getting Listed

[btarunr]

Over a month ahead of its launch, the first wave of Intel's 32 nm based Core i3 and Core i5 series dual-core processors have been listed on German online store HPM-Computer. The pricing and specifications disclosed by these listing confirm the information that surfaced as early as in July, this year. The series starts with Core i3 500 series processors whose clock speeds range between 2.93 to 3.06 GHz, and continue with Core i5 600 series dual-core processors ranged between 3.20 GHz and 3.43 GHz. While both series feature HyperThreading Technology to give the operating system four logical processors (threads) to work with, the Core i3 processors lack the Turbo Boost feature which the Core i5 chips have.

According to the new listing in which the chips are priced in Euros, the 2.93 GHz Core i3 530 processor is priced at 103.90 EUR, and 3.06 GHz Core i3 540 at 120.90 EUR. The Core i5 600 series lineup includes the 3.20 GHz Core i5 650 priced at 160.90 EUR, 3.33 GHz Core i5 660 and 661 priced at 175.90 EUR, and lead by the 3.43 GHz Core i5 670 priced at a premium 252.90 EUR point. All prices include a 19% applicable tax. The IGP clock speed (750 MHz vs. 900 MHz), differentiates Core i5 660 from 661. It is likely that the price of one of those seems to have entered incorrectly. With these processors, Intel may also introduce the Intel H57 Express chipset, and motherboards by various vendors will soon follow. These processors, however, have the same LGA-1156 socket the "Lynnfield" quad-core processors have, which are currently in the market. They may run on existing P55 Express based motherboards too, according to a recent report.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[TheLostSwede]

Did April fools come late/early?
This is a joke, right?
Is anyone seriously going to be willing to pay more for a dual core CPU with integrated graphics over a quad core CPU?

 

[btarunr]

Did April fools come late/early?
This is a joke, right?
Is anyone seriously going to be willing to pay more for a dual core CPU with integrated graphics over a quad core CPU?

Today, people pay more for a Core 2 Duo E8600 than a Core i5 750, so not April Fools yet.

Here's HKEPC's older chart:

 

[TheLostSwede]

Looks like TCMag updated their post, the 661 apparently has a 900MHz GPU over the 733MHz CPU in the other CPUs. Big deal... The TDP is also 87W instead of 73W.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

If i3 means no turbo, i5 means no QPI, i7 means turbo and QPI, does that mean Intel taught i9 a new trick we haven't heard of yet? Surely, just because it has 6 cores doesn't warrant unique branding.

True to its Nehalem/Pentium 4 roots, high clock speeds are the norm. At the same time, I expected higher than 3.46 GHz on 32nm for a dual core and the wattage is a bit steep too consider it is only a dual core.

 

[HalfAHertz]

I think the wattage is great considering this is only the first stepping. Intel have done it again bringing the next manufacturing process over one year earlier than anybody else...Tho I agree about the price. Considering the fact that these are much smaller than the 45nm parts and they are saving alot of moolah on materials and manufactureing, they should at least be equally priced as the last gen parts

 

[phanbuey]

i hope that the mickey mouse igp they put in these doesn't limit their overclocking potential... i am almost sure that there will be issues with it. :/

Hopefully some "reviews" will start popping up soon.

 

[HalfAHertz]

i hope that the mickey mouse igp they put in these doesn't limit their overclocking potential... i am almost sure that there will be issues with it. :/

Hopefully some "reviews" will start popping up soon.

It most certainly will when enabled, just like the PCI-e controller limits the 1156 compared to the 1366, but I can bet you a shiny penny that you could disable it from the bios for some 4,5-5GHz action...

 

[Fitseries3]

TDP includes the integrated GPU so idk why you guys are complaining. these are far less than any other cpu+gpu combo with similar performance.

you also need to think about the fact that most of these have hyperthreading which takes a tad more power. a dualie that performs like a quad and has integrated gfx is pretty nice if you ask me. i'll be considering one of these to trade out my i5 750/p55 rig.

 

[stupido]

what IGP inside?

What type of IGP is in those processors?

 

[Binge]

It's a type I would turn off so I could OC the pee out of that i5

stock 3.0GHz has either a high bclk or a high multi, and I'm thinking it's the multi

 

[phanbuey]

TDP includes the integrated GPU so idk why you guys are complaining. these are far less than any other cpu+gpu combo with similar performance.

you also need to think about the fact that most of these have hyperthreading which takes a tad more power. a dualie that performs like a quad and has integrated gfx is pretty nice if you ask me. i'll be considering one of these to trade out my i5 750/p55 rig.

I'm definitely going to want one. If I can disable the IGP and get one of these little screamers under water at 4.5-5GHz-ish w/ some low latency 1333/1600Mhz DDR3 i think ill be set...

with one of these i can keep the GPU's in the same loop and not worry about poaching them

 

[stupido]

and still... what's the IGP?
4500 or 4500 HD?

I'm thinking HTPC ere and not overclocking...

 

[TheLostSwede]

Core i9 (p)review here http://pclab.pl/art39718.html

It's going to be better graphics than the 4500 series IGP, 733 and 900MHz core speed for the IGP. Do remember that the IGP is at 45nm though, not 32nm...

And FYI, HyperThreading is NOT like having two extra cores.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Did April fools come late/early?
This is a joke, right?
Is anyone seriously going to be willing to pay more for a dual core CPU with integrated graphics over a quad core CPU?

yeah, my e8600 sucks...and quad cores really make a massive difference in gaming at this point don't they? lol, wow plus you can clock the snot out of them and use a hell of a lot less power than a quad as well as not generate so much heat...how hard is that to understand? Plus performance in most things is incredibly good especially if you don't need to do 24/7 encoding or really heavy tasks that actually can use more than 2 cores.

 

[gumpty]

yeah, my e8600 sucks...and quad cores really make a massive difference in gaming at this point don't they? lol, wow plus you can clock the snot out of them and use a hell of a lot less power than a quad as well as not generate so much heat...how hard is that to understand? Plus performance in most things is incredibly good especially if you don't need to do 24/7 encoding or really heavy tasks that actually can use more than 2 cores.

I wouldn't say they make a massive difference in games, but they do make a difference - well, 3+ cores makes a difference compared to dual and single core.

 

[Binge]

And FYI, HyperThreading is NOT like having two extra cores.

Yes, yes it is. It is LIKE, but it is not extra cores. Similar, not the same, but still similar.

 

[Fitseries3]

performance is VERY close.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I wouldn't say they make a massive difference in games, but they do make a difference - well, 3+ cores makes a difference compared to dual and single core.

well, that's lovely, except they're testing amd processors least according to the article! lol I've seen other articles where almost all games show the core 2 duo the same, slightly less, or slightly better than any quad core, with the exception of a few games that do like the extra cores a bit and still it was still a fairly small difference particularly once you cranked the resolution...anyway I have nothing against quads, I just think duos are very underrated and at least for this moment are a great all around processor so that first comment I just found a bit off the mark in my opinion.

 

[mlee49]

If i3 means no turbo, i5 means no QPI, i7 means turbo and QPI, does that mean Intel taught i9 a new trick we haven't heard of yet? Surely, just because it has 6 cores doesn't warrant unique branding.

True to its Nehalem/Pentium 4 roots, high clock speeds are the norm. At the same time, I expected higher than 3.46 GHz on 32nm for a dual core and the wattage is a bit steep too consider it is only a dual core.

How much higher did are your expectations? 4.0Ghz+? Should we see 10Ghz San Andreas' aka "Pentium" within 2-3 years?

 

[1Kurgan1]

Anyone happen to know what the real performance is on these versus the quads out there? How will these run compared to things like the PII 965, or even the i5 750? I think once the price drops on these things they will sell like hotcakes, they look to be a lot of fun.

well, that's lovely, except they're testing amd processors least according to the article! lol I've seen other articles where almost all games show the core 2 duo the same, slightly less, or slightly better than any quad core, with the exception of a few games that do like the extra cores a bit and still it was still a fairly small difference particularly once you cranked the resolution...anyway I have nothing against quads, I just think duos are very underrated and at least for this moment are a great all around processor so that first comment I just found a bit off the mark in my opinion.

The E8x00 processors are great, I don't think anyone is arguing that, but that doesn't make them worth what people are paying for them. Something like a PII 720 BE will net the same, if not better gaming performance, and better performance outside of gaming, and cost quiet a bit less.

 

[skylamer]

32nm?

 

[pjladyfox]

I either missed something somewhere or I'm just plain confused. Do all of the i3 and i5 CPU's have the IGP or is it only particular ones?

I'm eventually looking to try and get one of these for work, whichever one is the slowest, to look at the IGP performance. Has anyone seen benchies yet for the IGP or have any solid details on it yet such as what they are going to call it?

 

[btarunr]

All Clarkdale CPUs have the IGP. Some have their IGP core speed at 750 MHz, while others at 900 MHz. There's a Pentium Dual Core model priced under $90 too, which has a slower IGP.

 

[gumpty]

well, that's lovely, except they're testing amd processors least according to the article!

Whether it's AMD or Intel makes no difference: they're testing cores - not chip architecture. And if you read the conclusion you'll see that they did exactly the same tests with an Intel processor and got the same results.

... and still it was still a fairly small difference particularly once you cranked the resolution ...

Once you crank up the resolution any game benchmark will become GPU-bound - so they'd then be testing GPUs and not CPUs.

...anyway I have nothing against quads, I just think duos are very underrated and at least for this moment are a great all around processor so that first comment I just found a bit off the mark in my opinion.

I totally agree they are underrated, but in terms of the future, with nearly all major games now being coded to make use of as many cores as possible, it will surprise people to see dual-core processors priced near quad-cores.

Anyway this is sliding off topic. Apologies people, move along.