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

News Intel quietly releases three new processors

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 5 Sep 2008.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. naokaji

    naokaji whatever

    Joined:
    8 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    1,879
    Likes Received:
    10
    E5200 Cheesecake... all hail the new budget king:rock: fast, cheap and low power consumption, the Q8200 however is pointless in my opinion, Q6600 forever (does not apply to america where Q9450 and Q9550 are priced reasonably).
     
  3. pistol_pete

    pistol_pete Air Cooled Fool

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    815
    Likes Received:
    29
    If my maths is right, the Q8200 will have a multiplier of 7?

    That means to get to the 3.6Ghz a Q6600 should usually be able to reach, the FSB will need to be 514Mhz? That's pretty high, overclockers will struggle unless they've got the best of boards.

    So why not just get the Q6600?
     
  4. Paradigm Shifter

    Paradigm Shifter de nihilo nihil fit

    Joined:
    10 May 2006
    Posts:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    30
    That 7x multi on the 8200 is going to limit it to all but the most FSB happy boards... at least if you want it clocked fast. On the other hand, that 5200, with a 12.5x multi (presumably unlocked downwards) looks awful nice for a budget chip. Makes me tempted to get one to put in my HTPC.
     
  5. Cupboard

    Cupboard I'm not a modder.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    30
    I can't imagine why you would want the Q8200 unless you aren't wanting to overclock it and just want a processor that runs cooler than the Q6600. It has a lower stock clock, a higher stock fsb and is more expensive. Doesn't really make sense!
     
  6. p3n

    p3n New Member

    Joined:
    31 Jan 2002
    Posts:
    778
    Likes Received:
    1
    The poor schmucks who buy celerons based on the clockspeed :<
     
  7. Tulatin

    Tulatin The Froggy Poster

    Joined:
    16 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    3,161
    Likes Received:
    7
    At least these aren't as bad as the Q9400 that I've seen around lately. They quietly snuck it in in place of the 9450 in most places, it's like $5 cheaper, and has half the cache. ****.
     
  8. DaMightyMouse

    DaMightyMouse New Member

    Joined:
    1 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    49
    Likes Received:
    2
    Q6600 for eva :D
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page