Intel D975XBX (Bad Axe)

[polonyc2]

Originally Posted by Sandog

LOL You may be disappointed but you can't say your surprised.

You know AMD has a big lead I believe in SMP. Wasn't the newer AMD chips designed from the ground up to do multi-core? In the next few years AMD and Intel will be generating 4-8-16 core chips. AMD's technology is supposedly better suited for this I believe. Anyhow I find it difficult to see how a desktop person will make use of a 16,8, or even quad-core CPU. There is not software to take advantage of this yet is there? I find that a dual-core takes care of any home/gaming business I have perfectly.

dual core applications will start to take off in early 2006...and you're right that the average user will not need multi-core chips...but then again I'm sure AMD and Intel will try to convince everybody that they absolutely positively need it by the time it is released and there will always be people willing to buy it no matter what...a few years ago who would have thought that 512 MB of video RAM would become necessary...

me personally I'm an admitted front runner...I base my purchase decisions on who currently has the best product...my only allegiance is to performance benchmarks...my last P4C800-E system was top notch but for my new build I switched to AMD because they are currently the top dog...same thing with my video card--old one--ATI 9800 Pro...new one--Nvidia 7800 GTX...hopefully Conroe will turn things around for Intel as Prescott really gave Intel a huge black eye in the industry...Intel is poised to make a comeback in 2006 and that is good news for the computer industry

[Intel_User]

Since companies are being majorly profit oriented, and more true as they become bigger, its true with Intel too. Since they have majority of sales still on the desktops, it would have less initial spending by having unified bus architectures. By that, I mean they will be using bus architecture they use on desktop across workstations/servers.

AMD, as the only reason they have market share is because of performance, they have to focus on performance. They are going the most simple, but sophisticated way to increase performance, and that's focusing on memory hiearchy. They put integrated memory controllers for low latency, and as usual with most CPUs that have integrated memory controllers, have scability links to improve performance and scaling in multi-processor systems(not multi-core).

In terms of dual core and multi-core, SMP links and integrated memory controllers shouldn't give AMD an advantage. They still do however, because since Intel was late in the game of multi-cores anyway, they have to bring back the release date to be the first, and sacrifice performance using slap-on cores.

Intel will have quad core first, and that's not good at all. Less than a quarter later AMD will introduce quad-core, and Intel will be behind since Intel will use their Slap-On Technology TM again. If Intel decided to wait and introduce a proper quad core a quarter after AMD, it will be very beneficial in performance, exceeding AMD in performance. However, SOT takes some time too, and the proper quad core will be pushed further than its supposed to be.

[Intel_User]

(Sandog, on my view, if you took time to spend money on Intel 925XE chipset with new Extreme Edition chip using 1066FSB which brought 5% in performance at best(the most disappointing intro after Prescott, maybe even more as Prescott didn't cost $999), Presler is a must-buy for you.)

Presler, in my view, is a more competitive chip than I expected. Of course my expectations were low after hearing that Intel didn't care about Presler anymore. Do you really know what I think why they put two die on a seperate package on Presler to save that little money?? Because there is no need to waste money on a product that's a no-care. After all that, Presler is a much better product than anyone would have guessed. It brings single thread performance of their dual cores from 3.2GHz to 3.6GHz equivalent, better in some cases.

Presler seems to be even better at Hyperthreading then at Smithfield, which after knowing Prescott and Northwood, Smithfield had crappy Hyperthreading implementation.

[Sandog]

Oh yes I like the Presler and it's performance plus it's lower heat generation. It would be a worthwhile upgrade for sure but I see saving my money to get the Conroe in 6mos which I know I am going to get. Some of my misgivings are that the 955 does not have EIST, right now I use stock 3.2GHz clock and it goes to 2.8GHz at idle most times. It also looks better to do a total upgrade at that time also as far as getting a new video card, Raptor 150GB, and lower latency DDR2. Also I want the latest revised mobo when Conroe comes out therefore I am hesitant to get the first D955XBX that is available. There is a caveat though, if I get a free sample of the D955XBX I would go for the 955EE probably. I don't think I will since my new Intel contact probably doesn't have my address and I don't think I will be bothering him for a new board. He asked me to check back in the new year when he should get his allotment but I am not going to do so.

[Intel_User]

Also I want the latest revised mobo when Conroe comes out therefore I am hesitant to get the first D955XBX that is available. There is a caveat though, if I get a free sample of the D955XBX I would go for the 955EE probably.

I thought this forum was about D975XBX .

[Sandog]

Originally Posted by Intel_User

I thought this forum was about D975XBX .

LOL, so I guess your accusing me of talk and no walk huh? Hold on, lemme look in my wallet first, nope, it's empty lol. Would you believe I found this link right before I read your post, I saved it if that helps I got it from Anand's review. Best price out there plus you get a free Steelpad when you buy, whoopee. I might just email my contact about that board tomorrow. I really don't want to go for another hot Prescott especially without EIST but I guess at 3.46GHz it uses less power than the 840EE at 3.2GHz. We'll see. It would make it a lot easier for me to wait out 6+months for Conroe to arrive. Also might want to add that I like to get the latest and greatest always but usually I do it in hopes that others will follow like with the PBZ. Well there isn't much chance that anybody I know here is going for a Presler when Conroe is coming soon and I don't blame them. I might look bad without a Presler 955EE but I won't look foolish (yet)

[TQ]

Originally Posted by Sandog

but I see saving my money

Hell has frozen over.

[Intel_User]

LOL, so I guess your accusing me of talk and no walk huh? Hold on, lemme look in my wallet first, nope, it's empty lol. Would you believe I found this link right before I read your post, I saved it if that helps I got it from Anand's review. Best price out there plus you get a free Steelpad when you buy, whoopee. I might just email my contact about that board tomorrow. I really don't want to go for another hot Prescott especially without EIST but I guess at 3.46GHz it uses less power than the 840EE at 3.2GHz. We'll see. It would make it a lot easier for me to wait out 6+months for Conroe to arrive. Also might want to add that I like to get the latest and greatest always but usually I do it in hopes that others will follow like with the PBZ. Well there isn't much chance that anybody I know here is going for a Presler when Conroe is coming soon and I don't blame them. I might look bad without a Presler 955EE but I won't look foolish (yet)

Bleh, I was trying to point out your spelling mistakes saying D955XBX rather than D975XBX, but yea what you said is true too.

All this thinking about CPUs are hurting my head. I hope Intel doesn't screw up and do well with Conroe to slap AMD on their face back .

If my board supports Conroe, I will probably get the fastest mainstream version, or the second fastest, depending on budget. Anyway it will be a massive upgrade from my Celeron D running at measly 2.53GHz.

[Intel_User]

Wait, Sandog don't you always sell your stuff at like 80% of the original price??

[Sandog]

Usually. Don't know about getting that for an 840EE though. I have to ship out those 74GB Raptors today. Waiting on credit for those. Credit card is $0 at the end of each month but right now $1100+ due to Christmas, etc.

[Sandog]

Originally Posted by Intel_User

Bleh, I was trying to point out your spelling mistakes saying D955XBX rather than D975XBX, but yea what you said is true too.

All this thinking about CPUs are hurting my head. I hope Intel doesn't screw up and do well with Conroe to slap AMD on their face back .

If my board supports Conroe, I will probably get the fastest mainstream version, or the second fastest, depending on budget. Anyway it will be a massive upgrade from my Celeron D running at measly 2.53GHz.

Haha, I missed that misnaming

Even on the first Conroe I am worried. Jumping on the fastest Conroe EE when it comes out might not be wise either. I bet there will be short revisions on the way soon after. Also it is not guaranteed I will get the EE. I might see what the highest non-EE can do compaired to the price. If the Conroe EE is a 667MHz, HT enabled, and unlocked multiplier than I will be all on it.

[Sandog]

Not bad!!!

http://www.intel.com/performance/des...e/industry.htm

This is on the D975XBX of course for the 955EE.

[Sandog]

Not good!!!

Intel Pentium 955 Extreme Edition

[pointreyes]

Originally Posted by Sandog

Not good!!!

Intel Pentium 955 Extreme Edition

Ouch.

If you plan on a dual-core system for everyday use, including fairly serious 3D gaming, the Athlon 64 4800+ is likely a better pick. For certain classes of applications—3D rendering, for example—Intel's new CPU might fill the bill. But you might consider buying a system designed for the CPU, rather than building one yourself. We like the overall performance of Intel's new processor. We just wish it ran a lot cooler.

An AMD recommendation and a typical complaint like I used to see with AMD T-birds but this time on Intel. Here's to the Fall of 2006 , I hope. :sad:

[TQ]

I keep finding reasons to not build a new system. Heck, yesterday I was playing Quake 4 at 1280x1024 with all the candy and it ran fast, smooth and sweet.
Unless something breaks I can see no reason why I shouldn't wait until Conroe.
Well, unless Oblivion really slows things down, much like Morrowind did to my 1 Ghz PIII/ti500 when it was first released....