Intel Releases Core i7-2700K Processor

[shb-]

99% of 2600k's will do 3.5Ghz with no bump in Vcore. So I highly doubt these are binned at all.

In this instance most likely you are right, because of the small clock speed bump. But how about i7 920 D0 vs i7 960? Are those are the same quality chips and u can easily add +0.55 GHz to 920 with no voltage adjustments? I tend to think the answer is no.

As i see it, with this move intel just says to itself that yields are getting even more mature, so it is time to boost clock speed a little and discontinue previous sku (and because there is no binning, 2600k is unmanufacturable at this point; only 2700k comes off the lines). Right now the diff between chips intel shipped now and half year ago is almost unnoticeable. But as time goes, quallity delta will become bigger and it will be more noticable.

And of course, upgrade from 2600k to 2700k undoubtedly would be great fail : ).

 

[Maban]

I want it simply because in alphanumeric, i7-2700K looks better than i7-2600K. Is that reason enough?

 

[qubit]

I want it simply because in alphanumeric, i7-2700K looks better than i7-2600K. Is that reason enough?

You're an enthusiast, therefore yes.

 

[MatTheCat]

Married. Farther of 2. Who Gota get the latest happy meal toys.... thinking in. Terms for the whole
family

You feed your kids McDonalds and let them buy into the whole Ronald 'get em hooked young' McPedonald crap?

You should be ASBO'd!

 

[Delta6326]

awesome dude! this means the price of the 2600K should go down sometime!

 

[Jstn7477]

LOL, I bought my 2600K last week. Oh well, 2600K and Z68 strike me as sounding cooler to me than 2700K and Z77 or whatever chipset successor will replace Z68.

Perhaps there will also be a vanilla i7-2700 someday with VT-d and a locked multiplier?

 

[sunil]

Of the reviews I have read AMD FX processors are not crushing Intel CPUs.

 

[the54thvoid]

Harsh language ahead. Do not read at work or in front of little kiddies

Spoiler

fucking disgraceful!!!

In the UK it's listed as £40 ($64) more than a 2600k.

Scan and OcUK can go suck my

Spoiler

motherfucking dick

 

[EarthDog]

In this instance most likely you are right, because of the small clock speed bump. But how about i7 920 D0 vs i7 960? Are those are the same quality chips and u can easily add +0.55 GHz to 920 with no voltage adjustments? I tend to think the answer is no.

Well good thing we are talking about the 2600k ehh?

 

[blibba]

Harsh language ahead. Do not read at work or in front of little kiddies

Spoiler

fucking disgraceful!!!

In the UK it's listed as £40 ($64) more than a 2600k.

Scan and OcUK can go suck my

Spoiler

motherfucking dick

I say!

 

[Darkleoco]

Damn you 2600K why can't you be available for return right now lol but seriously if I could I would return it and pay the 15 extra for the 2700K even if I am going to be overclocking since high numbers in the name and stock clocks just look nice

 

[qubit]

Harsh language ahead. Do not read at work or in front of little kiddies

Spoiler

fucking disgraceful!!!

In the UK it's listed as £40 ($64) more than a 2600k.

Scan and OcUK can go suck my

Spoiler

motherfucking dick

Yup, I noticed that too. The UK is always a rippoff. Expect the price to drop quickly once SB-E is launched, though.

 

[3volvedcombat]

I dont think 2600Kers even need any upgrade for now. Let`s see what Ivy will bring to us - that`s could be the probable path for them.

Also 15 bux price diff is Intel`s recommended, when buying batch of 1000 chips. In reality it`ll be higher @ stock.

P.S. Nor 2500Kers need any upgrades, using rig maily for gaming. )

What he was trying to point out....


This is an extra option for an upgrade PATH, for anybody not on the i72xxx band wagon....

Lets say I sell this q9550 for a little extra buck, get a great combo deal with a 7 series chip-set, and a i72700k(extra buck compensated for q9550), and ill be on one fast upgrade option.

Just widen the scope of what your talking about, we gamers with extreme electrical knowledge could only possibly make 40-35% of the market... And some are still on old platforms.

To be honest, this q9550 has never met a load match other then rpg's and I CANNOT stand rpg anything. for lga 775, thats fuckin pump-in away in my opinion.

 

[3volvedcombat]

.
....Its too bad the 930 actually clocked WORSE than most 920's (D0)....

Ohhhhh yeh I remember that myself... That was actually pretty shocking to, maybe intel got mad @ the i7920 over performing the rest of the first gen i7 line

This probably wont be the case with the 2700k, but you never know..

I remember when those i7 920's were STILL going for 200-300-400 dollars way after release because of the magical overclocking powers. All over Techpowerup's FS forums....... Those d0's were some beast chip's.

 

[Stephen.]

Just as i5-760 replaced i5-750

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Re-mindful info dump since people are all over the place here on this.

The only chips Intel bins are the extreme chips. All 2600ks can do these clocks at that TDP. The increase in max clock on 1366 with higher chips (like 960) was a board limitation. It would take a blck of 220 to hit 4.6 GHz on a 920. That’s at or beyond the limit for most boards. That had nothing to do with chip binning, it was the multi. That situation is irrelevant now with the unlocked k chips. The only chips that showed a consistent overclocking advantage were the extreme chips which just so happen to be the only ones that were binned. If later chips do eventually show increased overclock-ability it would be due to batch improvements or new steppings that the 2600k obviously wouldn’t receive as it’s EOL now that the 2700k has hit. That’s how it’s gone for each of these incremental replacements in the past and there's nothing to indicate anything different is happening here.

I think it's foresight. Having two chips within 100MHz of each other and just $15 cost difference makes one chip redundant. I think maybe the 2600k will slowly disappear from the shelves and the 2700k will be the one left. Similar to the i7 920 and 930 as mentioned above. It makes no commercial sense for two models so close to each other.

I think you quoted the wrong person.

 

[3volvedcombat]

I think it's foresight. Having two chips within 100MHz of each other and just $15 cost difference makes one chip redundant. I think maybe the 2600k will slowly disappear from the shelves and the 2700k will be the one left. Similar to the i7 920 and 930 as mentioned above. It makes no commercial sense for two models so close to each other.

again, would you if you even decided to upgrade to i72xxx series

get the 2700k or 2600k or 2500k?

But zone it down to the 2600-2700k.

for 15 dollars extra I would, its a completely viable choice.

If it was 50-100$ extra then Intel can fuck off, but they needed to create a price difference that was noticeable, and 15$ is about as low as you can go.

 

[Sir B. Fannybottom]

Woo price drops for 2600k! Guess whos gunna get one? :3

 

[newtekie1]

I care not of this 2700K. Please release an i3-2xxxK and I'll be excited.

I'd like an unlocked Celeron while their at it.

 

[xBruce88x]

just thought id point out those spoiler tags dont seem to work when viewing the news on a mobile dev. and clicking the show comments button but they do work after clicking forums and logging in.

from what i can tell this seems to be mainly for new adopters and not for those looking for a step up. would like to see an overclocking comparison but i doubt thered be much diff between the 2600k and 2700k. im sure if it were as big an improvement intel would suggest more than an extra 15. wonder if this is there response to BD, not that they really need one. i think the BD will be more tempting in apu form.

 

[wolf]

just because the TDP is stated at 95w doesnt mean that it consumes less power for the speed it makes or is more efficient in any way, the people that think that have misunderstood.

95w TDP is more of a bracket, like a weight class in boxing for example, just becuase you're a heavyweight, doesnt mean that you're already at the celieng of the weight cutoff for that class.

chances are it uses between 1-5 watts more under load than a 2600K

 

[Jstn7477]

just because the TDP is stated at 95w doesnt mean that it consumes less power for the speed it makes or is more efficient in any way, the people that think that have misunderstood.

95w TDP is more of a bracket, like a weight class in boxing for example, just becuase you're a heavyweight, doesnt mean that you're already at the celieng of the weight cutoff for that class.

chances are it uses between 1-5 watts more under load than a 2600K

Correct. Wattage is a tier-based system when it comes to calculating the power consumption of a processor. Hence, that's why a 2.8GHz Phenom II X4 925 is 95w and a 3.2GHz Phenom II X4 955 BE is 125w, the 955 is greater than 95 watts but under 125w, which is why it's considered a 125w processor. I think my 2600K at 4.6GHz uses roughly 5-10w more than the processor at 4.4GHz (same voltage).

 

[[H]@RD5TUFF]

Seems kinda pointless, but okay, I mean not like BD turned out to be any competition.

 

[TUngsten]

Married. Farther of 2. Who Gota get the latest happy meal toys.... thinking in. Terms for the whole
family

Don't feed your kids that shit

 

[newtekie1]

Finally, someone was thinking in this thread!

99% of 2600k's will do 3.5Ghz with no bump in Vcore. So I highly doubt these are binned at all.

The difference will likely come at the top end, where most users won't likely ever take the chip.

If you look at the extreme overclockers, they go through 2600K chips like crazy, because they all seem to have a wall that they hit, some slightly higher than others.

I'm betting that the average wall on the 2700K is higher than that of the 2600K.

Don't feed your kids that shit

Ya gotta fatten them up, it makes them harder to kidnap.