E8500 Wolfdale Preview... WOW!!!

[hUMANbEATbOX]

Actually MadMad, Intel's ES chips have notoriously clocked worse than retails. Sure the initial ES e6600's that were floating around in the very early days clocked real nice, but it didn't take long before retail CPU's were taking all of the top spots.

 

[hokiealumnus]

Holy hell. I would just want 4.0...4.75 would just be icing on the cake. These chips are insane. Great find.

 

[Elluzion]

wow than E8500 loks really nice... I might have to get that over the Quad

 

[Blackmage]

These are very nice results, just what i wanted to see i owe myself a brand new mobo and cpu

 

[Nebulous]

Dayum! Now this would help me make the jump over right off the bat! Now the million dollar question is: How much these puppies cost?

 

[dominick32]

Dayum! Now this would help me make the jump over right off the bat! Now the million dollar question is: How much these puppies cost?

Nebs,
As I previously stated earlier in this post. "dont quote me on this but I think I read $315 somewhere."

 

[satandole666]

I'm getting this over the quad for sure. The multis and my inexperience over 450fsb is a really pushing me towards duals I'm afraid.

 

[MadMan007]

Actually MadMad, Intel's ES chips have notoriously clocked worse than retails. Sure the initial ES e6600's that were floating around in the very early days clocked real nice, but it didn't take long before retail CPU's were taking all of the top spots.

Maybe ES tend to go toward the top of the range? Then with the much larger number of retail chips they get equalled or surpassed by some but many don't clock to the same level, and too many people expect ES speeds to be typical or easy but they're really on the higher end of the retail chip range. Because I do rememebr it happening with more than the e6600.

 

[Gautam]

Maybe ES tend to go toward the top of the range? Then with the much larger number of retail chips they get equalled or surpassed by some but many don't clock to the same level, and too many people expect ES speeds to be typical or easy but they're really on the higher end of the retail chip range. Because I do rememebr it happening with more than the e6600.

My best ES Conroe did SuperPi 1M at 4100MHz on air. It was about 50-70MHz worse than my two X6800 retails. It was also worse than plenty of the L628B and L629B's. I also had another that was absolute garbage from the same week; 3500 was about all it could do. The only reason that ESes look good is because the initial retails are usually worse. (Good silicon goes to the extremes) But newer retails always surpass ESes. ESes are often slower clock for clock because Intel disables some minute features in them...ESes literally are beta CPUs much of the time. Inferior if anything.

 

[MadMan007]

Ok then. I always just take ES results with a grain of salt anyway maybe it's because many of the results are SPi results which aren't as useful as more complete stability tests. Or because I won't be getting an ES chip retail chips are more real world. Variables too between each individual tester which throws another wrench into comparing results. Or I just don't pour ovre results over time.

There is another trend about newer CPUs which seems consistent across the C2D CPUs though. Barring other changes such as stepping the early-ish chips are sometimes the best. Remember how late B2 and L2 C2Ds were doing worse than earlier ones? Maybe Intel learns how to bin CPUs better with time.

 

[Gautam]

Yep definitely, and that ties into why ES E6600's might have been that good; for retail similar grade bin would've turned to an X6800. But I feel that ESes have little to no binning at all since their main purpose is to demonstrate functionality and scaling. Intel arbitrarily stamps "E6600" or "E6700" on them, but I doubt they concern themselves much on how what they brand ESes as as they're not meant to hit the retail market anyways. That's why some of them are amazing, and some are horrible, and you can have some really bad X6800 ESes and some really good E6600 ESes; the speed bin is probably arbitrary and meaningless as far as Intel is concerned.

So...on the same token, I'd agree that if we see E8400 or E8300 ESes screaming; those should be taken with a grain of salt, since most chips like those would likely become E8500s in retail.

 

[Evilsizer]

i knew we would be seeing high clocks on the dualies... we havent even seen what the retails will do.

anyone want to preorder?
BLT E8500 = $291 retail boxed
http://www.google.com/product_url?q...rodjfjz4gLHsWwAAAAAAAAAA&gl=us&hl=en&sa=title
expect to see these go for over $300 at newegg...

BLT E8400 = $206 retail boxed
http://www.google.com/product_url?q...E51zhv1foE5-dQAAAAAAAAAA&gl=us&hl=en&sa=title
nice price imo... i might go for the E8400 at that price, an extra $85 for another 133mhz and .5 multi dont seem right.

 

[Sgt_Pinto]

screw the new quads... these will be like OMG OMG Omg OmG bang for buck ++, i think i might get an E8300 for the extra security, I wanna get 4.0ghz 24/7

 

[vixro]

Release date? December or January?

 

[JustChill]

I need to get one of these Q's or E's under phase.......

 

[satandole666]

i knew we would be seeing high clocks on the dualies... we havent even seen what the retails will do.

anyone want to preorder?
BLT E8500 = $291 retail boxed
http://www.google.com/product_url?q...rodjfjz4gLHsWwAAAAAAAAAA&gl=us&hl=en&sa=title
expect to see these go for over $300 at newegg...

BLT E8400 = $206 retail boxed
http://www.google.com/product_url?q...E51zhv1foE5-dQAAAAAAAAAA&gl=us&hl=en&sa=title
nice price imo... i might go for the E8400 at that price, an extra $85 for another 133mhz and .5 multi dont seem right.

The sad part is...without the extra .5 multi some of us won't max the chip out. I've always been happy with a 9 multi (AMD64 3000+, Opty165, E6600), but now to max a chip out we might need a 10x multi or a mobo/ram than can do some work on the positive side of 500 fsb.

I'm definitely going to be FSB limited by the 45nm process. I doubt my ram can run past 450mhz, I've actually never ran it that high. So 450x9 gives me 4ghz. That should be a breeze on air cooling, let alone water. I might end up selling my watercooling and combining that with my upgrade budget to get a 10x multi. Who knows...

 

[Evilsizer]

The sad part is...without the extra .5 multi some of us won't max the chip out. I've always been happy with a 9 multi (AMD64 3000+, Opty165, E6600), but now to max a chip out we might need a 10x multi or a mobo/ram than can do some work on the positive side of 500 fsb.

I'm definitely going to be FSB limited by the 45nm process. I doubt my ram can run past 450mhz, I've actually never ran it that high. So 450x9 gives me 4ghz. That should be a breeze on air cooling, let alone water. I might end up selling my watercooling and combining that with my upgrade budget to get a 10x multi. Who knows...

umm, what 10x multi? the highest dual core is 9.5x there is no 10x yet unless you plan on waiting till about june-08. by then you might as well wait for the socket b platform.

 

[philp]

Damn Intel is genius. I tried talking my friend into getting a new processor since his sister works for Intel and hooked him up with a QX6700 pre-release. No luck

 

[satandole666]

umm, what 10x multi? the highest dual core is 9.5x there is no 10x yet unless you plan on waiting till about june-08. by then you might as well wait for the socket b platform.

That was my point. Only 10x is in quad form (QX) right now.

 

[El<(')>Maxi]

All we need is the extreme version