Is intel dropping the Q9300 and keeping the Q6600?

[dug777]

...as well as a crappy multiplier for ocing

Seems like the ideal replacement from intel's point of view, is it really going/gone? Noticed it dropping oos at a few places here recently at least...

Perhaps it's just Aus, but quad prices are whacked:

There's a vast gulf between the Q6600 ($195AUD) and the Q9300 ($294AUD) and Q6700 ($295AUD), which makes the price/performance ratios of the latter two chips laughable.

The 9450 is languishing at $359AUD, which is bloody tough sell too, imo at least...

Where is this proposed Q8200 supposed to sit? On paper it looks like it will have trouble matching the Q6600 at stock, won't overclock as well, and from the preliminary pricing in USD looks like it will be more expensive

 

[Keysplayr]

And you would think the prices would be lower on a smaller manufacturing process, less cache, and only 100MHz faster for the Q6600 to the Q9300. I mean, clock for clock, Penryn cores are a bit faster, but not 70 bucks faster especially with 2MB less cache.
Q6600 is/was a great CPU, I have one here that runs a consistent 3.0GHz on stock cooling and stock voltage 24/7 stable. A G0 I believe.

 

[Idontcare]

Its all about dollars and cents, and 65nm capacity exists and is depreciating whereas 45nm capacity is expanding and costs top dollar.

If they did not already have the 65nm capacity and the choice was buy more 65nm capacity versus buy more 45nm capacity then the "45nm is cheaper to produce when yields reach entitlement" is a proper conclusions.

Intel has plenty of 65nm fab capacity and thanks to the competition that 65nm fab capacity can still produce products with substantial gross margins.

45nm capacity costs money at this time because Intel still has to purchase equipmnent to increase capacity.

Why do that just to make more of your lowest 45nm margin chip if you have a nice opportunity to keep making your low ASP chips on a depreciated toolset already sitting in a fab?

This is one of the reasons to keep your lead over the competition in process technology, you have more options (as management) in determining how you are going to maximize gross margins.

 

[Foxery]

Q6600 is also an "old" product, which they want to sell out of, and not get stuck with a large stock sitting around when they're trying to kill (replace) the product line. Q9300, as IDC said, is the newest tech, and you always pay a premium for "new."

The 8000 series baffles me too, though.

 

[aka1nas]

I thought they were replacing the Q9300 with a Q9400 at the same price point during the next price drop?

 

[nyker96]

I understand it, the Q6600 is there to soak up 65nm pipelines intel still operates. when they shift to 45nm completely, they'd probably end q6600 entirely.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: nyker96
I understand it, the Q6600 is there to soak up 65nm pipelines intel still operates. when they shift to 45nm completely, they'd probably end q6600 entirely.

Yep, its a fairly generic model for node transitioning for all IDMs.

What makes this one seem like something special is because the Q6600 is still capable of besting nearly the top of the line SKU's from the competition.

This is atypical but makes the model work ever more to Intel's benefit.