According to VRZone, Intel's upcoming Core i7-2700K expected to cost more than the 2600K.

Over here, we have some of the cheaper prices. Do expect launch prices to be higher at first, and may drop later.

VR-Zone trolled me. They should have released their statement a day earlier or else my statement would be true. Now it is only partially true.

It would be nice if the cherry picked ones have reasonable voltages at 4.5GHz for a 24/7 OC. That way can increase the ceiling by another 200MHz to 4.7GHz maybe.

4.5ghz is easy me and oki are both running over 5ghz. Now if 2700k can hit 5.5-5.7ghz for 24/7, I'm sold

2700K is pretty much a CPU to turn the attention away from BD launch. Nice move Intel.

Now AMD, itsnt it the time to show off what u got officially? or you have nothing to show.

12 Oct hurrmmm...?

Hopefully , this is the final date.

Very sien already with numerous delays!

Rumorville or definite news? Check this out: Hardware.info > News > AMD FX Dozer is shipped from today...

Other news: Anandtech: CPUs:Products Group GM Rick Bergman Leaves AMD...Another one from HardOCP chief editor says he was fired?

This post has been edited by lex: Oct 2 2011, 05:37 PM

It's an open secret that AMD is not satisfied with GloFo's supply capability, given all the news of poor Llano yields.

Sos : Fudzilla
A8-3820, A6-3620 and A4-3420
AMD plans to do a little refresh of its desktop A-series Llano APUs that will include three new APUs, the A8-3820, A6-3620 and the A4-3420. As you could have guessed from the names, we are talking about two quads and one dual-core APU that will replaced the A8-3800, A6-3600 and the A4-3400.

The new APUs are pretty much the same as the ones that they are meant to replace but with a slightly higher clock. The A8-3820 will be clocked at 2.5GHz with a 2.8GHz Turbo and will have the same HD 6550D GPU part. The A6-3620 ticks at 2.2GHz with a 2.5GHz Turbo and has the same HD 6530D GPU part, while the A4-3420 works at 2.8GHz and has the same HD 6530D GPU part. All three new parts have the 65W TDP, same as their predecessors.

The A8-3800, A6-3600 and the A4-3400 will coexist with the new ones until the end of Q2 2012. After Q2 2012, AMD won't be having any more orders for these. Of course, we expect the mentioned trio to have a slight price drop as soon as the refresh shows up in the market.

It is also important to know that Q1 2012 is the launch timeframe of the A6-3670K, while the A8-3870K is scheduled to ship in Q4 2011.

" guru3d shows some benchmark for AMD FX 8150

http://www.guru3d.com/news/amd-fx-8150-clo...core-i7-2600k-/

claim to be on par with i7980x and i72600k

?

70$ cheaper than the Intel Core i7 2600K and as fast / faster? If this is confirmed then I don't mind postponing my upgrade plans to a later date in October .

Some of those questionable slides (from Donanimhaber again, are these real?) are pretty odd. Especially when comparing system prices with a Core i7 980X setup rather than a Core i7 2600K or Core i5 2500K setup. And then comparing multi-threaded benchmarks with a Core i7 2600K and Core i5 2500K only, while leaving out the Core i7 980X?

Even a few of the percentage scores in those benchmarks are wrong, in particular wPrime 32m for Core i7 2600K is around 42% to 48% faster than Core i5 2500K (references: HardOCP, Legit Reviews and Bittech). Another one is ABBYY Finereader 10 results (reference Tom's Hardware).

This post has been edited by lex: Sep 25 2011, 11:07 PM

. Going by my calculations and according to [H]ARDOCP, an Intel Core i7 2600K is about 29.88% or 30% faster than an Intel Core i5 2500K . Perhaps I have gotten my calculations wrong?

Anyway, even if it's not 42% faster the benchmarks do indeed seem rather suspicious with those mistakes .

For time-based values, it is inverse (1/t) and wPrime 32m results are usually in seconds. Therefore difference between Core i7 2600K and Core i5 2500K from HardOCP review is (10.37 / 7.27) x 100% = 42.6%

As for 7-Zip, that seems to be based on internal MIPs benchmark which is roughly correct, around 35% (although at least one review from TechReport shows 40%). However can't comment much on the others since testing parameters and software versions are unknown. For example, POV Ray can vary from 25% to almost 42% (references Hardware Canucks and Anandtech). Another example, WinRAR in most reviews usually do not exceed 20% between Core i7 2600K and Core i5 2500K, although this slide shows nearly or almost 30%.

This post has been edited by lex: Sep 26 2011, 12:22 AM

(10.37 / 7.27) x 100% = 42.6%. It is 142.6%.
But the value is based on i7 2600K already.
Since you said xx is faster than i5 2500K, the value should be based on i5 2500K, right?

This post has been edited by kingkingyyk: Sep 26 2011, 12:32 AM

Yups, should have subtracted 100% from the result. And yes, as the slide shows Core i5 2500K as 100% then it should be based on Core i5 2500K.

looks like cherry picked.

& notice how it doesn't pit gaming performance against 2600k.
we know that 2600k beats 980x in terms of gaming performance.

bear in mind, that FX 8150 has much higher default clock compared to 2600k.
it shud not just barely beating it, FX 8150 shud utterly annihilate 2600k, but it dint.
this don look so promising.

not just higher freq, higher TDP too lolz, 95W VS 125W, 2600K basically fighting handicapped. I don't have high hope on Bulldozer if Intel decide to slash price during they launch, Intel gonna hit Bulldozer real hard, but I liked Bobcat

This post has been edited by Kizarh: Sep 26 2011, 06:31 PM

Erm... Intel and AMD have their own ways in counting TDPs...

16 days left before the official stuff comes out...

Still 40 days late though.