• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Nehalem to become Core i7 processor

DemonDiablo said:
No way it would be called i7, Apple would throw a shit frenzy over it. They'd prepare their army JiHadist Lawyers to sue Intel to the death for "copyright infringements". Now if it was I7 that'd be a different story...
Click to expand...
Considering there will be Intel i7 CPU's in macs, I don't see why they would be mad :p
 
My guess is that with "i7" they're kind of going after i286, i386, i486, i586, i686, i7

That would indicate that they're trying to communicate a huge change in architecture to anyone listening. We've been in "i686-ish" land for a very long time. Personally I would have called the Core and Core2 a huge enough change.

Intel was doing 'i' stuff long before Apple was.
 
Surly73 said:
My guess is that with "i7" they're kind of going after i286, i386, i486, i586, i686, i7

That would indicate that they're trying to communicate a huge change in architecture to anyone listening. We've been in "i686-ish" land for a very long time. Personally I would have called the Core and Core2 a huge enough change.

Intel was doing 'i' stuff long before Apple was.
Click to expand...

Actually, Pentium 4 was a huge departure from the i686. But it sucked too. Core 2 was a return to P6, sort of like wiping the slate.
 
ryan_975 said:
Actually, Pentium 4 was a huge departure from the i686. But it sucked too. Core 2 was a return to P6, sort of like wiping the slate.
Click to expand...

The P4 did not suck. When the Northwood architecture was introduced, it wiped the floor with anything AMD had to offer. The major downfall of the architecture is that it was designed to run at super-high speeds (especially Prescott with its 31-stage pipeline), but Intel wasn't able to push the architecture to the kind of levels it needed to get the maximum efficiency out of it. The original plans called for an eventual clock speed increase to 10GHz with the architecture, and although it sounds silly now, if they had actually pulled it off, we would have seen some very impressive performance out of it. In its day, the P4 was a pretty kickass chip.
 
Zero82z said:
The P4 did not suck. When the Northwood architecture was introduced, it wiped the floor with anything AMD had to offer. The major downfall of the architecture is that it was designed to run at super-high speeds (especially Prescott with its 31-stage pipeline), but Intel wasn't able to push the architecture to the kind of levels it needed to get the maximum efficiency out of it. The original plans called for an eventual clock speed increase to 10GHz with the architecture, and although it sounds silly now, if they had actually pulled it off, we would have seen some very impressive performance out of it. In its day, the P4 was a pretty kickass chip.
Click to expand...

When Netburst was introduced with Willamette. A Pentium 3 at the same clocks outperformed it. But you're right, a P3 would have never clocked high enough to maintain the lead, and with Northwood, things got a lot better. But a Core 2 at the same clockspeed is faster and cooler than the P4 or PD, so yeah, it sucks... now.
 
The P4 Northwood was pretty sweet, especially with Hyper-threading. It made everything much much smoother, especially when multitasking.
 
ryan_975 said:
so yeah, it sucks... now.
Click to expand...

It sucks now, but it didn't suck then, which was my point :).

Anyway, back on topic. I'm not that enthusiastic about the i7 name, but I'll get used to it eventually. I'll probably just end up calling them Nehalem chips anyway.
 
ryan_975 said:
Really?


Maybe not to the same extent, but looks like it's in the same fashion.
Click to expand...

I was hoping they'd call Nehalem the i786 DX9.

I was wondering if they'd differentiate with the name Duo and Quad like they did with the Core 2. The name i7 seems fine to me. I couldn't care less what the name is as long as it performs well. It's not like I'm going to get laid more often because the name of my processor sounds prettier than something else. I haven't read too much into this but I wonder what clock speeds this i7 will debut with.
 
I was also expecting Core 3, going from Core 2 to Core i7 is an interesting, if confusing, choice.
FM 3370 said:
I was hoping they'd call Nehalem the i786 DX9.
Click to expand...
[troll voice]
Don't buy a Nehalem, they only support DirectX 9! AMD's chips support DirectX 11!
[/troll voice]
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
I was also expecting Core 3, going from Core 2 to Core i7 is an interesting, if confusing, choice.[troll voice]
Don't buy a Nehalem, they only support DirectX 9! AMD's chips support DirectX 11!
[/troll voice]
Click to expand...
Somebody would say it, and then too make it even more sad, they would also try to argue their point.:rolleyes:
 
these names are honestly confusing to me and will probably be more confusing to the average joe sixpack.
 
native just means they are on one piece of material as opposed to the twin dies of a yorkfield/kentsfield. Nehalem/i7 IS native, the current quads are not. QPI has nothing to do with that.

Was expecting core 3 as well.
 
I don't like i7.... I was hoping for Core 3 or anything better or more descriptive than i7.... wtf ?
 
They should have just named it the Core 2 Double Duo, for additional redundancy.
edit: or what about the iCore? to make everyone feel extra warm and special inside.
 
ryan_975 said:
I've always thought all Intel and AMD processor names sounded stupid.
Click to expand...

I don't mind Core Duo, or Core 2 Quad, or Core 2 Extreme Edition. I never cared for Core 2 Duo. Athlon was always fine, Duron was kind of lame, and Sempron was retarded. I've always liked the name "Opteron" as well.
 
Brashen said:
Who gives 2 craps as long as it's a good product!!
Click to expand...

A product's name should give a sense of what the product is. It should deliver an idea of what it offers in regards to what it's replacing. Now we have to explain what an i7 to those we try to sell systems to, or convince our families that an i7 beats a 2, yet we don't know what the fuck i7 means.
 
Dan_D said:
I don't mind Core Duo, or Core 2 Quad, or Core 2 Extreme Edition. I never cared for Core 2 Duo. Athlon was always fine, Duron was kind of lame, and Sempron was retarded. I've always liked the name "Opteron" as well.
Click to expand...

Athlon 64 X2 is a clusterfuck though. As is AMD's current naming scheme (Phenom X3 8750? WTF is that supposed to mean?).
 
Zero82z said:
Athlon 64 X2 is a clusterfuck though. As is AMD's current naming scheme (Phenom X3 8750? WTF is that supposed to mean?).
Click to expand...

I've never cared for either Intel or AMD's model numbering schemes. They have become quite confusing.
 
they should just call it by its ghz like
Phenom X3 2.0
Phenom X4 2.6
Phenom X4 2.8
model, core, ghz
 
shraz said:
they should just call it by its ghz like
Phenom X3 2.0
Phenom X4 2.6
Phenom X4 2.8
model, core, ghz
Click to expand...
no, because if they did that a 2.66 e7300 would be listed as the same as the e8200, despite the e7xxx having half the cache as the e8xxx
 
They need to have a model number that tells what the features of the chip are. or at least can be decoded back to a main feature set.
Code: 
2.00GHz 65nm 1MB 800FSB E1101
2.33GHz 65nm 2MB 1066FSB E2082
3.00GHz 45nm 4MB 1333FSB F3093
3.20GHz 45nm 8MB 1600FSB F4085
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top