 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> (You have no idea how many different sources I had to consult to piece
>> this information togather...)
>
> Isn't it all on this page?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_microprocessors
No. Actually this doesn't describe *any* Core i3, Core i5 or Core i7
processors, only the older Core 1 and Core 2. The requisit pages are
linked at the bottom.
Even here, the information isn't in a particularly easy form to
assimilate. This table summarises it at a glance.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 06.05.2010 11:20, schrieb scott:
>> Complicated enough??
>>
>> (You have no idea how many different sources I had to consult to piece
>> this information togather...)
>
> Isn't it all on this page?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_microprocessors
Did you actually bother to /read/ the article? There's exactly /one/
single place where it mentions i3, i5 and i7 respectively: The "see
also" section :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Complicated enough??
>
> (You have no idea how many different sources I had to consult to piece
> this information togather...)
Damnit, and I *still* forgot to include the required RAM types... *sigh*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Damnit, and I *still* forgot to include the required RAM types... *sigh*
Fixed.
Now all I need to do is stare at 20,000 benchmarks and slowly go mad...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'intel cpu v1.png' (18 KB)
Preview of image 'intel cpu v1.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Isn't it all on this page?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_microprocessors
>
> Did you actually bother to /read/ the article?
No :-)
> There's exactly /one/
> single place where it mentions i3, i5 and i7 respectively: The "see
> also" section :-P
Well there you go!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 06 May 2010 11:16:36 +0200, Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Complicated enough??
>
> (You have no idea how many different sources I had to consult to piece
> this information togather...)
Core i7 980X Extreme Edition
*drool*
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nekar Xenos wrote:
> Core i7 980X Extreme Edition
> *drool*
http://uk.insight.com/apps/productpresentation/index.php?product_id=ITOA06ZGW
Drool all you want, you can't afford it. ;-)
Then again, several of the benchmarks I've looked at have the 2-core
Core i3 chips at the top of the table, with the 6-core EE chip several
seconds slower. (Multithreaded, MUCH?)
The real question, of course, is whether the triple-channel RAM (which
makes the motherboard 120% more expensive) is actually worth it... This
seems to vary by benchmark.
I wonder how long it will take for hexacore to become cost-effective?
(Or how long before software starts using it - most software I've seen
is still doggedly single-threaded!)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo On Thu, 06 May 2010 10:33:27 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
spake thusly:
> Invisible wrote:
>
>> Damnit, and I *still* forgot to include the required RAM types... *sigh*
>
> Fixed.
>
> Now all I need to do is stare at 20,000 benchmarks and slowly go mad...
Tcch where are the frequency ranges and the L3 cache sizes?
I know the feeling though as DaBoss is throwing in the towel with Windows
and PC's and wants to go down the dominatrix route with Apple. So i7 or i5
processor, which ones are they using - doesn't say. Well how many cores
does it have - doesn't say. Okay something simple, he complains about the
weight of his laptop so roughly how much does each 'size' weigh - doesn't
say.
Digging around beyond the configuration screen it states they're using the
32nm dual cores, tying that to the speeds and the 2xRAM sticks means the
i5-540M and the i7-620M, still can't find weights except "light" and still
no built-in Blu-ray option, go figure.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Now all I need to do is stare at 20,000 benchmarks and slowly go mad...
>
> Tcch where are the frequency ranges and the L3 cache sizes?
The main point of interest is which motherboard to get.
A board with dual-channel RAM costs about £65+, whereas for
triple-channel RAM it's £145+. Slight difference there. I also want to
know how many cores I'm getting. Other than that, processors come and
go; if you've got the right board, you can change CPU later. But get the
wrong board and you've got a problem...
In some respects, the i3/i5/i7 is a nice idea. But when the i7 is
available in two different socket configurations, suddenly you *do* have
to care whether it's Lynnfield, Bloomfield or Gulftown. (Although
frankly, if it's Gulftown, you can obviously afford to buy three
motherboards of each kind anyway because you have *far* more money than
sense!)
> I know the feeling though as DaBoss is throwing in the towel with
> Windows and PC's and wants to go down the dominatrix route with Apple.
You've got to admit, it *is* shiny.
I was almost tempted by a PowerMac with it's two quad-core Xeons. (Until
I saw the price, obviously.)
> So i7 or i5 processor, which ones are they using - doesn't say.
I would guess it's Core 2 rather than Core i7 or Core i5.
> Well how many cores does it have - doesn't say.
If it's a laptop, you can almost guarantee it's dual-core. Remember that
"mobile" CPUs are different to desktop ones; few quad-core mobile CPUs
currently exist, AFAIK.
> Okay something simple, he
> complains about the weight of his laptop so roughly how much does each
> 'size' weigh - doesn't say.
Now that I would have thought would be documented somewhere...
How heavy is "too much" though? ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo On Thu, 06 May 2010 16:36:28 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
spake thusly:
>> I know the feeling though as DaBoss is throwing in the towel with
>> Windows and PC's and wants to go down the dominatrix route with Apple.
>
> You've got to admit, it *is* shiny.
It is very shiny.
>> Okay something simple, he complains about the weight of his laptop so
>> roughly how much does each 'size' weigh - doesn't say.
>
> Now that I would have thought would be documented somewhere...
If it is it's not obviously placed.
> How heavy is "too much" though? ;-)
His laptop is heavy, then again it is a gaming rig because he wanted the
POWER and it is 3 years old.
It's just a 'my mate's got one and he likes it'; and 'it will handle
emails better' yes because it won't be using the crap-tastic Outlook 2007
with it's Word HTML engine that we had to install so as to get your mobile
contacts to sync with the crappy mobile software; and 'my mate just opened
it and it was ready to use' well yes yours can do that to you just close
the lid then open it again and tap in your password ya know like you do
every damn day; and 'it will work better with my iPhone' gosh will it an
Apple iPhone and an Apple iMac both with their strictly controlled
software ya might be right there I'd never have guessed that; and 'it will
talk to the internet and the printer and everything better' yes because
it's magic.
Sigh.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
