Rumors: Intel to launch flagship i7-3970X processor in Q4 2012

vbimport

#1

Rumors: Intel to launch flagship i7-3970X processor in Q4 2012.

[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2012/07/VzDILB.jpg[/newsimage]Rumors on the internet say that Intel will release a new flagship CPU in Q4 2012


Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/rumors-intel-to-launch-flagship-i7-3970x-processor-in-q4-2012-62610/](http://www.myce.com/news/rumors-intel-to-launch-flagship-i7-3970x-processor-in-q4-2012-62610/)


Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Awesome. A $1000 processor released in the middle of a recession (don’t kid yourselves, we’re still in it). I understand that this isn’t for your everyday Joe. It’s for the speed freaks. Still, seems like we’ve lost our way, doesn’t it? Let’s build things that use more electricity, make plastic water bottles that use more water to make them than what they hold, make more stuff that’s a product of oil. Sadly, the list goes on. What the world needs is a reality check.

They’re doing some great things with solar panels. Just imagine a world where EVERYONE was off the electricity grid (no more coal) by having solar panels on their roofs and homes were heated/cooled using water piped 50 feet below the earth. We could stop killing so many tress by eliminating toilet paper. Maybe we could try that “3 seashells” thing from Demolition Man. Wait… I think my train of thought just went off the rails.


#3

cough And where is AMD? * cough*


#4

[QUOTE=Bakst0ne;2645378]cough And where is AMD? * cough*[/QUOTE]
AMD has become an after thought. Sure there were alot of people looking forward to the Phenom-II X6-1090T but it didnt live up to its billing and neither did the Liano for notebooks. They are fine for people who are not real " enthusiasts" but Intel has cornered the market for high end gaming rigs. Although there are still some AMD loyal people and I respect them for their loyalty but AMD has yet to put forward a processor that compares to Intel. ( Pricing aside). LOL.:slight_smile:


#5

[QUOTE=Bakst0ne;2645378]cough And where is AMD? * cough*[/QUOTE]

AMD gave up competing with Intel on November 29, 2011.


#6

[QUOTE=DukeNukem;2645377]Awesome. A $1000 processor released in the middle of a recession (don’t kid yourselves, we’re still in it). I understand that this isn’t for your everyday Joe. It’s for the speed freaks. Still, seems like we’ve lost our way, doesn’t it? Let’s build things that use more electricity, make plastic water bottles that use more water to make them than what they hold, make more stuff that’s a product of oil. Sadly, the list goes on. What the world needs is a reality check.

They’re doing some great things with solar panels. Just imagine a world where EVERYONE was off the electricity grid (no more coal) by having solar panels on their roofs and homes were heated/cooled using water piped 50 feet below the earth. We could stop killing so many tress by eliminating toilet paper. Maybe we could try that “3 seashells” thing from Demolition Man. Wait… I think my train of thought just went off the rails.[/QUOTE]

Why not just emigrate to places where they remove your rights to burn coal and kill trees? For now, the best candidates are North Korea and Mali.

John Bruno of AMD now works for Apple. Some news sources are saying he’s responsible for the larger die size of A5X due to its powerful graphics on the third-generation iPad.


#7

I’m happy with my AMD 1090bt -_-. AMD should just focus on providing budget friendly CPU’s for the moderate user.


#8

I have the Phenom II X6 1100T and I consider myself a hardcore gaming enthusiast. Now if you want to spend $1000 to get the best processor then that is your business, but for me, spending 300% more money to get an 8% boost in productivity does not make economical sense to me. I think it is ignorant to boast that only serious enthusiasts buy Intel. If that is the case, I can say the same thing about those of you that prefer to buy AMD cards as opposed to Nvidia.


#9

[QUOTE=CharmedonWB;2645464]I have the Phenom II X6 1100T and I consider myself a hardcore gaming enthusiast. Now if you want to spend $1000 to get the best processor then that is your business, but for me, spending 300% more money to get an 8% boost in productivity does not make economical sense to me. I think it is ignorant to boast that only serious enthusiasts buy Intel. If that is the case, I can say the same thing about those of you that prefer to buy AMD cards as opposed to Nvidia.[/QUOTE]I’ve always been under the impression (from people I know who are gamers - I’m not), that they prefer AMD processors because they’re less expensive, they’re easier to overclock, and they can be overclocked more than Intel processors. My son is somewhat of a gamer, he has an AMD Bulldozer FX 8120 Black Edition 8-core CPU, and he absolutely loves it. But, what’s not to love with an 8-core CPU?

I find it kind of curious, but I kind of get the impression that not hating on Microsoft or AMD just isn’t the popular thing to do these days.


#10

This 2007+ recession killed moore’s law… also, a weak AMD didn’t help matters!
About a year ago, I was in the newegg’s forum chatroom trying to speak good about the AMD FX processors, and some “KID” was adamant that sandybridge processors were the way to go… albeit at 70% higher pricepoints than amd FX processors & m/b’s… sigh…

Innovation is not getting these chips to do much more than be overpowered calculators… You could argue that gaming, web browsing, torrent apps, and even your word processor would choke on processors from 2005 in multi-tasking environment, but let’s look at this from another perspective… in the 80’s & 90s programming code was written to get all you can get out of the hardware-- BUT, nowadays, code is written BLOATED to justify the $1k chips… not to get all you can get ouf of them… we’re not exactly going in the direction of efficient innovation here since 2007…

true innovation is 60-watt incadesant bulb, 13 watt CFL, 6 watt LED bulb…
I’ll give the tech industry credit for respecting moore’s law upto 2007 (barely), Since then, tech is in a holding pattern… In Moore’s law, we’d see 6ghz 8 core processors for $299 by now (NOT $1499)… do we? Hell no!


#11

[QUOTE=tmc8080;2645748]This 2007+ recession killed moore’s law… also, a weak AMD didn’t help matters!
…[/QUOTE]

I once posted about something called Hwang’s Law. I actually liked it more than Moore’s Law, but it was right when the South Korean government was trying everything to destroy Samsung. He first worked at Stanford and Intel, later lead the development of some of those ‘world’s first’ chips from 1989 to 2009 at Samsung Electronics.

Ivy Bridge is good enough for 2012. DRAM and NAND technologies are still advancing rapidly. AMD share is not at its peak, but it’s still alive, not making a lot of profits, but selling enough CPU’s and GPU’s.

If you think $1K is too much, there are always alternatives: Sandy Bridge G620, G840… Intel faces more competitions: ARM, Apple, Samsung…


#12

I will likely stick to Intel from now on.

I have 980x and paid much for it and am not sure I would again. But it overclock and run to 4ghz very easy for over year now.

If you plan to use onboard Intel video on new Ivy boards I would not pay for beyond 3770k. If you use other ATI or Nvidia board, I would consider to pay extra for extreme.