1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hardware Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition Review

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by arcticstoat, 23 Mar 2011.

  1. Hakuren

    Hakuren What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    X68/78 (Patsburg) will be released around Q4 2011 - Q1 2012. Previous CPU releases from Intel usually started in November.

    990X is pretty much useless now because of:
    - for home there is LGA1155 for those who don't want to wait or are not interested in LGA2011
    - price is atrocious even for serious business & industry
    - Patsburg will come as standard [probably] with minimum 6 cores (12 HT) and 8/16 for top of the line models - depends on a source

    It is better to start saving $$$ now for all-brand-new-spanking-system around December/January than investing in i7 X-series. In truth that 990X BT acquired looks like it is some relatively poor one. On many sites 990X running stable at 5GHz on air.
     
  2. sWW

    sWW Minimodder

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2010
    Posts:
    173
    Likes Received:
    3
    Bargain! Could build an entire gaming PC for the same price as this CPU ^^
     
  3. crlyhair

    crlyhair What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    8 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best. Review. Ever:rock:
     
  4. tristanperry

    tristanperry Minimodder

    Joined:
    22 May 2010
    Posts:
    922
    Likes Received:
    41
    +2

    I wouldn't buy this CPU, but I'm happy that BT review this and similar items.
     
  5. Kúsař

    Kúsař regular bit-tech reader

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    317
    Likes Received:
    4
    Just kidding - write ES on some random CPU and pretend its real and send it back, maybe they won't notice anything...well, forget it.
     
  6. Tech NoOb

    Tech NoOb What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    12 Feb 2011
    Posts:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    People who work in video editing and thread intensive programs would probably buy this chip.

    I think it's interesting to see how the top chip performs to our 'regular' versions.

    Of course we could wait for AMD bulldozer and the 2011 i7 'rumoured' replacement and then whine about that too ;) I mean critically evaluate.
     
  7. murraynt

    murraynt Modder

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    4,234
    Likes Received:
    128
    6 was a tad low really.
    50 pounds isn't much when the chip is as good as 800 pounds.
    TBH if had the money to buy this or the 980 for the sake of 50 pounds I would probally go for the 990X just to have the fastest Intel chip.

    Bad hu?:lol:
     
  8. Landy_Ed

    Landy_Ed Combat Novice

    Joined:
    6 May 2009
    Posts:
    1,428
    Likes Received:
    39
    :duh:
     
    Last edited: 23 Apr 2011
  9. Farfalho

    Farfalho Minimodder

    Joined:
    27 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    427
    Likes Received:
    2
    Nope, There's no proof of a review and so it will lack credibility. As a conclusion, it's near perfect but as a review, it's a fail. Just because we can't buy it, doesn't mean we can't know how it performs, maybe there's 2 or 3 consumers that like to spend money this way.

    Let the professionals do their work and who hasn't really something interesting to say, comment or say nothing.

    I was thinking it would get a better value but since the SB are taking the world by the nuts, it's understandable. Just looking forward to AMD's bulldozer so I can decided whether to go 1155 i5-2500K or 2012 something-K or Bulldozer value for money product
     
  10. frontline

    frontline Punish Your Machine

    Joined:
    24 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    825
    Likes Received:
    12
    There is always an over-priced chip at the top end to make you feel good inside about buying into the latest products at the mid-range. Instead of wishing that the i7 2600K retailed for £180, you feel great that you only paid £250 for it. Nice bit of marketing :)
     
  11. Pookie

    Pookie Illegitimi non carborundum

    Joined:
    4 May 2010
    Posts:
    3,515
    Likes Received:
    132
    This chip is pretty pointless now,the 980x had the lga1366 platform nicely coverd as its flagship cpu.The best thing intel can do for this platform is to drop the price of the I7 970 to around the £300 mark,this would clear out old X58 stock from retailers and keep lga1366 customers happy.
     
  12. Jhodas

    Jhodas Theorist

    Joined:
    4 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like that BT have reviewed this, but I honestly wonder if Intel's departments ever communicate. There's no reason to buy this for anyone that I can see.
    Enterprise? Xeons.
    Workstation/rendering? It's actually about the same price (on scan) to buy a dual CPU mobo and slap a pair of 960s in, giving you 8 true cores.
    Nobody in their right mind would buy this for a home setup when you can buy TWO full SB systems for the same money.

    It's not even a branding exercise, since the i7 name spans 1155, 1156 and 1366 :confused:

    Cake for the person that can justify buying this.
    Cheesecake for the person that can explain what Intel's marketing department is up to.
     
  13. GeorgeStorm

    GeorgeStorm Aggressive PC Builder

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    6,767
    Likes Received:
    439
    From an overclocking point of view if you get a decent one it's still probably the best chip o go for.
    It offers better performance when looking at properly multithreaded applications, the top end always demands a crazy premium.
     
  14. Guest-44432

    Guest-44432 Guest

    I would have like to have seen both the 2600k clock the same speed as the 990x so you can really see the differences. As 4.9ghz vs 4.6hgz is a bit unfair. (Put my 5Ghz 990x against it!).

    Anyway, until 6 core processors become more mainstream, and apps and games can benefit from the extra cores, then the 990x will leave the 2600k in the dust.

    Cheers,

    Simon.
     
  15. xaser04

    xaser04 Ba Ba Ba BANANA!

    Joined:
    27 Jun 2008
    Posts:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    277
    IIRC you can't run desktop X58 chips in a dual socket motherboard (I am assuming the SR-2) - well technically you could run one but not two in tandem.

    The desktop Bloomfield chips only have one QPI link whereas the Xenon chips have two. The second QPI link is what lets the two CPU's communicate with eachother without having to take the much slower route of through the NB.

    EDIT: Just to correct myself a little bit. The Desktop Bloomfield chips technically have 2 QPI links but only one is active. I assume this latter point is how Intel can sell seperate Xenon and I7 chips to different markets.
     
    Last edited: 24 Mar 2011
  16. Lizard

    Lizard @ Scan R&D

    Joined:
    17 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    37
    That's right, but the pre-fetchers in Xeon chips are also optimised for different software (server and workstation) than Core i7 chips, which are optmised for consumer apps and games. From the testing we've done before this optimisation does make a small performance difference.
     
  17. microsoftPerson

    microsoftPerson What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    27 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    614
    Likes Received:
    15

    LAWL +1 Agreed 2nd that etc
     
  18. GunsAblazin

    GunsAblazin What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    10 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    9 + 9 + 3 = 21
    21/3 = 7 Overall score, not 6.
     
  19. perplekks45

    perplekks45 LIKE AN ANIMAL!

    Joined:
    9 May 2004
    Posts:
    7,131
    Likes Received:
    1,152
    Who said it's 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3?
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page