Desktop Clarksfield/Auburndale?

trivial

[H]ard|Gawd
2FA
Joined
Jul 14, 2001
Messages
1,424
Will manufacturers bother with enthusiast mobos for mobilified Nehalem chips? I like quiet, but I lost touch with Intelsville four years ago.
 
Probally not, there is no reason unlike the P4 poorly performing furnaces which had a moble sibling that was a better design. That better mobile design evolved into the C2D so in a "long road taken sorta way" one could say all current intel enthusiast desktops are running mobile cpus. So now that I have said that, someone will make one.
 
totally agree about c2d. but nehalem reintroduces a significant disparity in transistor count between desk and lap, old top. :)

it may re-cease to matter with 32nm. that'd be great, but I don't want to wait. I guess I just don't see my own uses for quadcore, since games started being written for 60Hz displays. It's all too slow-paced these days.
 
where do you see a transistor count difference?

The quads should be the same between desktop and mobile (Lynnfield/Clarksfield respectively) as should the duals (havendale/auburndale). There wont be a mobile octo nehalem, but as of right now we dont know of a desktop octo either (server "Beckton" only from what Ive seen), All 4 of which will probably be on the same socket LGA1066 AFAIK.
primary source
 
yeah, wikipedia was what I based my surmises on, too. Notice the power consumption on Havendale. The < symbol could mean a lot of things, but it made me wrongly assume that all desktop nehalem chips were quad-core.

Thread over to you, Gunhaver Dale Gribble. :D I think I'm going crazy.
 
Back
Top