IntelCore i7-970 discontinued due to lack of demand

[tweakboy]

http://www.guru3d.com/news/intelcore-i7970-discontinued-due-to-lack-of-demand/

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

You know that we just released the Intel® Core™ i7-980 this is not the Extreme it is just a replacement for the Intel Core i7-970. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-402-_-Product.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

 

[AdamK47]

I usually like Guru3D. I'm not sure why they would spin a story like that.

 

[toyota]

You know that we just released the Intel® Core™ i7-980 this is not the Extreme it is just a replacement for the Intel Core i7-970. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-402-_-Product.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

a $600 cpu to "replace" a $300 cpu??

 

[pantsaregood]

a $600 cpu to "replace" a $300 cpu??

What are you talking about? The i7-970 was $600 as well. Now it's fallen to $579. The i7-990x is going to be replaced by the i7-995x soon, as far as I know. It is scheduled to be the final LGA 1366 SKU released.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Kinda hard to sell a chip for $600 when the new platform's top end sells for $325 and benches better in just about every test.

 

[nenforcer]

"Lack of Demand" may simply mean that Socket 1155 Sandy Bridge processors are now available.

I'm sure they are still selling quite a bit of these otherwise they wouldn't introduce another one on the same socket.

 

[Arachnotronic]

The i7 970 was discontinued to make room for the i7 980...

 

[toyota]

What are you talking about? The i7-970 was $600 as well. Now it's fallen to $579. The i7-990x is going to be replaced by the i7-995x soon, as far as I know. It is scheduled to be the final LGA 1366 SKU released.

oops I thought it said 920

 

[StrangerGuy]

Kinda hard to sell a chip for $600 when the new platform's top end sells for $325 and benches better in just about every test.

Kinda hard to sell a desktop chip for anything more than $220 for 99.99% of people out there.

The replacement i7 980s will be sitting on shelves, waiting for the end of time.

 

[Rifter]

I usually like Guru3D. I'm not sure why they would spin a story like that.

me either, they just went down a few pegs on my trusted website list this is a complete BS spin on the story.

 

[Ben90]

Kinda hard to sell a chip for $600 when the new platform's top end sells for $325 and benches better in just about every test.

On the extreme high end, x58 is really the only option if you want to stay with x86.

 

[3DVagabond]

Kinda hard to sell a chip for $600 when the new platform's top end sells for $325 and benches better in just about every test.

Depends on how many cores/threads you need. Do any rendering and the 970/980 are better. Gaming? Or even multithread operations that only take seconds, or a few minutes even, the 2600k is probably still better bang 4$.

 

[Rifter]

On the extreme high end, x58 is really the only option if you want to stay with x86.

yeah, its to bad 2011 is not out yet but really you cant blame intel for delaying and milking 1366 for all its worth cause its not like AMD can hold a candle to anything intel has in the top end entusiast market right now. We really need AMD to step it up with BD to push intel to release 2011 faster/cheaper.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

yeah, its to bad 2011 is not out yet but really you cant blame intel for delaying and milking 1366 for all its worth cause its not like AMD can hold a candle to anything intel has in the top end entusiast market right now. We really need AMD to step it up with BD to push intel to release 2011 faster/cheaper.

There's only one problem with that: Sandy Bridge-E has no competition. Bulldozer competes with Sandy Bridge for the Performance market, while Sandy Bridge-E is left alone in the Enthusiast sector.

I think it's been pretty clear from some years to now that AMD is not interested anymore in releasing ultra high-end CPUs. The reason is that they don't sell in large volumes, plus making such a CPU would necessitate an R&D budget they don't have.

Let's be honest: even here, on a technology forum, most people aren't gonna care for $500+ CPUs and an Enthusiast platform that will be VERY expensive. The Performance market is where most of the money comes from in the high-end, and even then it's a niche in comparison to the Mainstream and Essential markets. With AMD recovering now financially it wouldn't make much sense to spend it all on R&D for the CPU which will give them the least profit.

 

[tynopik]

I think it's been pretty clear from some years to now that AMD is not capable anymore in releasing ultra high-end CPUs.

FTFY

 

[Rifter]

There's only one problem with that: Sandy Bridge-E has no competition. Bulldozer competes with Sandy Bridge for the Performance market, while Sandy Bridge-E is left alone in the Enthusiast sector.

I think it's been pretty clear from some years to now that AMD is not interested anymore in releasing ultra high-end CPUs. The reason is that they don't sell in large volumes, plus making such a CPU would necessitate an R&D budget they don't have.

Let's be honest: even here, on a technology forum, most people aren't gonna care for $500+ CPUs and an Enthusiast platform that will be VERY expensive. The Performance market is where most of the money comes from in the high-end, and even then it's a niche in comparison to the Mainstream and Essential markets. With AMD recovering now financially it wouldn't make much sense to spend it all on R&D for the CPU which will give them the least profit.

I agree its probaby not going to compete with SB-E. But some of the leaked performance info has it beating a 2600k, which would place it in direct competetion with at least the lower end SB-E chips, if the leaked info is true or not time will tell.

Personally i dont think it will be competative with a 2600k or higher end chip but i can hope it is if onyl to get intel out of a monopoly situation on the high end entusiast market.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

FTFY

Yes and no. Yes, because they'd probably have the money to engineer it. No, because even if they had the money, they'd be left with essentially none. It wouldn't be a good decision now that AMD is recovering and getting good profits from Fusion. If you have only $100 to spend on food for the week it wouldn't make much sense to eat out and spend $50 on one night, right?

This is about them trying to make the best thing they can with the little money they have. If they spend the little money they have on making a SB-E competitor, they'll be back in shambles.

I agree its probaby not going to compete with SB-E. But some of the leaked performance info has it beating a 2600k, which would place it in direct competetion with at least the lower end SB-E chips, if the leaked info is true or not time will tell.

Personally i dont think it will be competative with a 2600k or higher end chip but i can hope it is if onyl to get intel out of a monopoly situation on the high end entusiast market.

I think it'll probably have higher multi-threaded performance and lower single-threaded performance than Sandy Bridge. Given the fact that most everything is going multi-threaded, I think they may have a winner because of it. In gaming, since it only takes advantage of 3-4 cores for most, it'll be slower or comparable. In audio encoding it should definitely be slower. In everything else, though, I'm counting on it being either the same speed or faster.

 

[JoJoman88]

I could only hope that the i7 970 or the i7 980 would drop to $300, it would be a nice upgrade from the i7 920 on my Sabertooth X58 board.

 

[GrumpyMan]

I could only hope that the i7 970 or the i7 980 would drop to $300, it would be a nice upgrade from the i7 920 on my Sabertooth X58 board.

Yeah, good luck with that.....

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I could only hope that the i7 970 or the i7 980 would drop to $300, it would be a nice upgrade from the i7 920 on my Sabertooth X58 board.

Maybe used... maybe. New, doubt it. Intel is not gonna lower the price so that a CPU that's faster than the 2600K costs the same. It makes no sense financially.

 

[Redshirt 24]

...and for a couple of hours I was considering buying a 970 just to push off having to do a full system makeover that much longer (yay 6-core).

 

[StrangerGuy]

...and for a couple of hours I was considering buying a 970 just to push off having to do a full system makeover that much longer (yay 6-core).

By the time we really need 6 cores there will be better choices for the money...Which will be a very long time indeed considering dual-cores have been here for 6 years and still ain't going away.

 

[Arkaign]

By the time we really need 6 cores there will be better choices for the money...Which will be a very long time indeed considering dual-cores have been here for 6 years and still ain't going away.

On the professional end of things, 6 cores (or more!) can be very very good. For home users/gamers at the moment, yeah not so much.

I don't think these are big volume parts, but I'm sure they are highly profitable anyway. Even if they sell 200 i3s for every 980, that's still another sale, and somebody has to supply the high-end workstation market. The kind of systems that run the pro video cards, dual PSUs, etc, etc, those are the ones that use these kinds of chips. Mac Pro even uses them IIRC.