Yes, but why pay for an IGP and not use it?Really, now, that's good news for P55 owners. I thought they were an evolutionary dead-end. Nice to know.
I'm not exactly an Intel/P55 proponent, so I can't say I can defend this with a passion. My comment was merely saying at least it wasn't a complete dead-end as I assumed it to be. Perhaps the only saving grace here is if someone bought the lowest i5 (no HT), and eventually wanted to upgrade to a decent i3 that is comparable in speed and has HT as well? I have no idea at all if that's even in the roadmap.Yes, but why pay for an IGP and not use it?
Far as I understand from Intel's current platform strategy, i3 is going to come with its own board and won't be compatible with lynnfield, in the same way that lynnfield came with its own board and wasn't usable in bloomfield boards.
I don't really know the whole situation either, but, to me, it would seem foolish to pay for an IGP and not use it. Maybe they will release i3's that don't have the IGP. Either way, considering what's currently available on socket 1156, any one of the proposed new chips seems like a downgrade, so it seems almost useless to keep them socket 1156, expecting people to upgrade (who knows, we shall see).I'm not exactly an Intel/P55 proponent, so I can't say I can defend this with a passion. My comment was merely saying at least it wasn't a complete dead-end as I assumed it to be. Perhaps the only saving grace here is if someone bought the lowest i5 (no HT), and eventually wanted to upgrade to a decent i3 that is comparable in speed and has HT as well? I have no idea at all if that's even in the roadmap.
Well, why sell only a new CPU when you can sell a chipset as well? Also, I'd imagine releasing a new motherboard/chipset with a CPU removes some design constraints which would save time and money. You have the right idea though, Intel owns the market and can dictate what they want.thanks for clearing that up for me. I just hate it when Intel make people buy new boards for each processor category. don't we have enough already? 1366 boards, 1156 boards, now new boards for i3s. not to mention new coolers for each socket size. but what can you do, they got the best cpu currently and that give them the power to dictate the market.
If they can offer ~$1000 i7's, not even bothering to atleast brand them a Xeon, and expect you to like them, it's ridiculous, you can bet they can sell you a whole CPU+chipset combo and expect you to keep piling money into their reservoir filled with billions.You have the right idea though, Intel owns the market and can dictate what they want.
Competition will surely shake things up, but it Intel isn't stupid. They've been the boss for years (the Athlon64 vs. Pentium 4 shake-up did knock them on their asses for a bit, but not for long) and they know they're really competing with themselves. I really can't complain about Intel's pricing - an i5 750 for <$200 offers tremendous value and performance.If they can offer ~$1000 i7's, not even bothering to atleast brand them a Xeon, and expect you to like them, it's ridiculous, you can bet they can sell you a whole CPU+chipset combo and expect you to keep piling money into their reservoir filled with billions.
I'm sure I'm not the only one wishing Bulldozer would be a steal from behind, to knock some sense of realism back into Intel's pricing. Actually, I don't even care if Bulldozer forces Intel to lower their prices. As long as Bulldozer delivers the goods, and is priced reasonably, Intel can keep their prices high, and I can buy a good Bulldozer.
New age? We've had unbelievably overclockable budget CPUs for years.