Why werent there any quad core westmeres?

[Maximilian]

??

 

[TuxDave]

Then what's this thingy?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819117234

 

[Maximilian]

Yeah i thought someone might post a xeon

I mean a proper replacement for the i7 9xx and i7 8xx or even the i5 7xx series, they never had any real follow ups.

Cores die shrink perynn had quads.
Sandy bridges die shrink ivy bridge will have quads.
Why didnt nehalems die shrink get any affordable consumer quads?

 

[Don Karnage]

Yeah i thought someone might post a xeon

I mean a proper replacement for the i7 9xx and i7 8xx or even the i5 7xx series, they never had any real follow ups.

Cores die shrink perynn had quads.
Sandy bridges die shrink ivy bridge will have quads.
Why didnt nehalems die shrink get any affordable consumer quads?

Bloomfield was on top of the world. Why change things up?

 

[Gillbot]

I had a L5609 nd despite it's low clock and lack of HT, it was a beast of an overclocker on water.

 

[Idontcare]

I dunno but I bet it resulted in a lot more 2500K's being bought...translating into a lot more LGA1155 mobos being sold, more low-Vdimm DDR3 being sold, etc. Whole supply chain benefits if everything in your box can kinda become obsolete nice and convenient like.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Intel's obviously selling most of these "high end" socket chips in the server/workstation market. Hell, the top end i7 LG1155 lineup in the Xeon world still is much richer than the i7 lineup on desktop.

The mainstream desktop user buys an i3 or an i5. Hardcore enthsusiasts & professionals buy i7's and Xeons.

 

[TuxDave]

Yeah i thought someone might post a xeon

I mean a proper replacement for the i7 9xx and i7 8xx or even the i5 7xx series, they never had any real follow ups.

As long as you don't take my word with any capacity, I can offer lots of speculation:

Back then we kind of sucked at making lots of varieties of chips. So a 2-core, 6-core, 4-core all required a good amount of effort to get done. When Westmere came out, we desparately needed a 2-core and so they went out first. And then a 6-core for the hgih end/server segments.

Now as for why we didn't get time to get a 4 core it could be a couple reasons. Maybe finance decided that for the consumer market we wouldn't make much additional money when compared to the existing lineup and the effort we would have to put into it. Maybe project management figured that by the time we finished a 4-core westmere, 4-core Sandybridge would be rolling around and so there's no point.

At least that's how I saw it as an outsider to the decision making process.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Why waste valuable 32nm capacity for Westmere quads when SB is just around the corner?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I dunno but I bet it resulted in a lot more 2500K's being bought...translating into a lot more LGA1155 mobos being sold, more low-Vdimm DDR3 being sold, etc. Whole supply chain benefits if everything in your box can kinda become obsolete nice and convenient like.

this

there are still quite a few enthusiasts still toting 4+GHz i7 920s from 2008, and I don't blame them, I wish I had grabbed my first i7 then instead of hanging on to my Yorkfields until 2010 as I might have instead grabbed an i7 970 instead of a 2600K.

original 4+GHz i7s are still very much well ahead of the CPU curve for the vast majority of processing tasks despite being so old

had intel released affordable native Westmere based quads for the 1366 crowd as an easy drop-in, 1155 would have been no where near as successful in the enthusiast realm and really would have cemented X58 / 1366 as one of the all-time greatest platforms (arguably already is even without)

 

[StrangerGuy]

this

there are still quite a few enthusiasts still toting 4+GHz i7 920s from 2008, and I don't blame them, I wish I had grabbed my first i7 then instead of hanging on to my Yorkfields until 2010 as I might have instead grabbed an i7 970 instead of a 2600K.

original 4+GHz i7s are still very much well ahead of the CPU curve for the vast majority of processing tasks despite being so old

had intel released affordable native Westmere based quads for the 1366 crowd as an easy drop-in, 1155 would have been no where near as successful in the enthusiast realm and really would have cemented X58 / 1366 as one of the all-time greatest platforms (arguably already is even without)

I disagree.

Most Bloomfield owners didn't find SB a worthy upgrade, why would they even find a weaker 32nm quad attractive? New users would naturally gravitate towards S1155 because it was better in every single way save 6-cores and triple-SLI, none of which matters for 99.9% of them.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Why waste valuable 32nm capacity for Westmere quads when SB is just around the corner?

SB is ALREADY out.

Westmere is a good chip, but you know intel, they like you buy new stuff.

 

[StrangerGuy]

SB is ALREADY out.

Thanks, captain obvious. I'm sure the OP made this thread didn't knew that in 2012.

 

[Don Karnage]

Why waste valuable 32nm capacity for Westmere quads when SB is just around the corner?

Westmere was released in Q1 of 2010. Sandy Bridge was released in Q1 of 2011.

As for if they were any better then bloomfield? The power consumption was amazing even when overclocked and the IPC was 1-2% better.

 

[Ajay]

had intel released affordable native Westmere based quads for the 1366 crowd as an easy drop-in, 1155 would have been no where near as successful in the enthusiast realm and really would have cemented X58 / 1366 as one of the all-time greatest platforms (arguably already is even without)

Oh yeah. I would have been all over this. 4.5-4.6GHz on air w/lower power, ~5GHz on custom water. Plus a small bump in IPC = win. I would be fine with the fact that I need to wait another year b/4 I can build up a new mb/CPU/ram & SSD for my system. With my my old i7-920, I'm not so happy about waiting. But a new vid card in June (bday) will soften the wait a bit.

 

[bryanW1995]

Intel's obviously selling most of these "high end" socket chips in the server/workstation market. Hell, the top end i7 LG1155 lineup in the Xeon world still is much richer than the i7 lineup on desktop.

The mainstream desktop user buys an i3 or an i5. Hardcore enthsusiasts & professionals buy i7's and Xeons.

While this is mostly true, I did step down to an i5 2500k this round b/c the deal was just too good to pass up.

 

[rgallant]

sb-e has a 4 core coming , so have they learned by past mistakes[lost income ] or do they feel ib will not be that great.

I would have jumped on a $300.00 4 core 32nm for the 1366.

-might go for the sb-e 4 core once the retail chips [w\new stepping not es] get benched with ib. will be looking at the 24\7 max. oc of both.
-4.6 on the es samples look lame on the beta bios.

-I don't like the x4,x4,x4 [pci-e 2.0]on ib if I add a 3rd. card down the road.
I don't feel that having to buy $1 k+ of 3.0 cards to run on a $600.00 platform makes for a good cpu upgrade or downgrade.