[kskwerl]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Not many, but as time goes on, more and more will. If you can afford it, why not? Always get the best you can/want afford is my motto

Now you got me thinking this way as well. This build I'm working on is taking forever. I buy one part per paycheck which is every 2 weeks. So far I have the case and mobo. I usually upgrade the pc every 1-2 years not even but due to financial difficulty once I get this up and running I won't be building a PC for a long long time. Mys well get the best I can for the 1155 socket.

[EarthDog]

Well.. just thinking that Ivybridge is a drop in upgrade path for s1155 and z68 mobo's (most I believe). May want to save some coin now, grab a 2500k, then when ivybridge comes out, sell that 2500k and snag an IB?

[Archer0915]

Well what I see here is a step up in clocks because of the BD and an increase in price because they think FlagShip BD will be on par with the current mainstream Intel Flagship (2600K) and they want to keep the lead in performance which means a higher price.

Most of us never bother with anything but air or water for our daily drivers and the fact is even if BD could do 20Ghz on LN it would not matter. What matters in the end to the general enthusiast community is highest speeds with practical cooling. We love to see the high LN clocks and give much credit to those processors that set those records but if we cant run that same CPU on air faster than the competition then we buy the competition.

[Comedie]

sure, I'll take one. Was aiming to build with a 2600K. But if the story is right, that they are cherry picking to get the 2700K, then picking up a 2600K could mean that you are picking up a reject from that cherry picking exercise. So it isn't the promised little bit of extra performance that would have me pick the 2700K, but rather the extra assurance to avoid getting a 2600K that was found to not pass muster. Heck, who knows how long they might have been cherry picking to build up the inventory of 2700K's too.

[kskwerl]

Originally Posted by Comedie

sure, I'll take one. Was aiming to build with a 2600K. But if the story is right, that they are cherry picking to get the 2700K, then picking up a 2600K could mean that you are picking up a reject from that cherry picking exercise. So it isn't the promised little bit of extra performance that would have me pick the 2700K, but rather the extra assurance to avoid getting a 2600K that was found to not pass muster. Heck, who knows how long they might have been cherry picking to build up the inventory of 2700K's too.

this scares me!

[Bisquit]

Hmmm, interesting point. There were already several posts about new 2500k's that needed more voltage than before for a certain overclock. Don't know about the 2600k though.
Could be they pick before putting them on the actual chip with the cache.
Maybe the same as with 2500k and 2600k? Because those seem completely the same, and first ones clocked the same also. It's only recent there are differences in voltages and highest clocks possible.

We will know when the first max clocks of the 2700k are posted, then we can compare that with the 2600k's. Should be the same in that scenario.

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by Comedie

sure, I'll take one. Was aiming to build with a 2600K. But if the story is right, that they are cherry picking to get the 2700K, then picking up a 2600K could mean that you are picking up a reject from that cherry picking exercise. So it isn't the promised little bit of extra performance that would have me pick the 2700K, but rather the extra assurance to avoid getting a 2600K that was found to not pass muster. Heck, who knows how long they might have been cherry picking to build up the inventory of 2700K's too.

Cherry picking? Its one bin up. I would venture to say 95%+ of all 2600k's will run at 2700k speeds without breaking the TDP envelope they have set (meaning no voltage increase).

Ive probably ran through only 5-7 2600k's and none of them needed a voltage bump to hit 4Ghz (which is above the turbo of a 2700k).

[Brolloks]

When is this bad boy hitting the stores? I'm ready for an upgrade

Hope the multi wall has been moved a few bricks as well.

[Ivy]

Originally Posted by SteveLord

But not many programs or games show dramatic performance increases when using them. Especially 4+ cores.

6 core is now advisable at the current time and especially in the future. In fact more and more games do fully support 6 cores as of today, but not much more than that, so keep it at 6 cores for now, thats the probably best spot for the near and even far future. HT can safely be disabled, gamers dont need it. But i can even afford to enable it, still to much overhead power left, and some programs may run even faster having it. In fact, for anyone having SB or Gulftown, the CPU is no limitation at all, not even in 1-2 years. Thats because nowadays games mainly focus on consoles and they arnt above those CPUs in power and uses similiar engines (the devs cant afford to create new engines all the time, its very pricy). The GPU is the bigger limitation in term every setting is at the max (which is never the case on a console) and then, dependable on the setting, it can still be a good GPU leecher. That was ofc totaly different many years ago but it has changed and now the timeline between updated and outdated, for performance reason, is much larger than many years ago. In many term, even if the CPU is twice that strong, just barely any FPS increase can be noticed, thats a completly new condition, which was totaly unknown in the past... and guess why, a over-aged engine is a good guess, and aswell because the CPU does overpower it.

But again, 6 threads will be pretty much standart soon. Have to consider that the Xbox360 is aswell having 6 threads (3 cores and every core got 2 threads). And even the PS3 is massively multithreaded, however, thats some special cell CPU which is a bit a difficult design. Still, because of that fact its a clear sign that 6 cores are the future for the "all in one CPUs". I remember, 4 years ago in the year 2007, when i told others that i want to get a quad core for games.. everyone was laughing at me and told me that it is completly useless. Then i got me a C2D, and 3 year after.. i was very mad that i didnt get a quad because i would have had massive use of it, since the games started to support 4 cores initialy. Lesson learnt...

[Sentential]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Cherry picking? Its one bin up. I would venture to say 95%+ of all 2600k's will run at 2700k speeds without breaking the TDP envelope they have set (meaning no voltage increase).

Ive probably ran through only 5-7 2600k's and none of them needed a voltage bump to hit 4Ghz (which is above the turbo of a 2700k).

To be fair back in the prescott days of the 670 and 650 the bins did make an enormous difference. For me there appears to be a hard multiplier wall around 45x - 47x that others don't appear to have on my 2500k and it seem that whole "batch" of chips started just shortly after launch.

It wouldn't suprise me at all if the 2700ks do significantly better on their multiplier wall than the ones below it.

To sum it up nicely Intel just released an overclocking chip knowing full well that the majority of their sales are going to come from people pissed at bulldozer. Had I not already bought a 2500k honestly looking back I would have gone for this instead

[bmwbaxter]

any update on when this is being released?

[bennoculus]

Nope. I'm sure it'll be announced and you wont miss it...

[wingman99]

I don't need a i7 2700k im doing fine at 5.0Ghz for $200

[bennoculus]

Originally Posted by wingman99

I don't need a i7 2700k im doing fine at 5.0Ghz for $200

Yeah...

I'm down for a 2700k. I want to see what they can do.

[wingman99]

Originally Posted by bennoculus

Yeah...

I'm down for a 2700k. I want to see what they can do.

That cool i can't wait to see what they can do, i'm just not going to participate with the upgrade. Are they going to have the same multiplier limit?

[bennoculus]

Originally Posted by wingman99

That cool i can't wait to see what they can do, i'm just not going to participate with the upgrade. Are they going to have the same multiplier limit?

Yes...

I don't see why they'd raise it now. Makes no sense.

[Brolloks]

The multi limit is moving to 63, cant remember where I read that

[MattNo5ss]

Originally Posted by Brolloks

The multi limit is moving to 63, cant remember where I read that

That's Ivy Bridge.

[Tspek]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Not many, but as time goes on, more and more will. If you can afford it, why not? Always get the best you can/want afford is my motto

I've been hearing this since HT first came out on the P4's

[Archer0915]

Tspek and Ivy I do apologize for my error. If you did not see the post it was a question about post 29 and 39 and the apparent contradictions but I screwed up reading who posted what. Again I am sorry.