Anybody else DISAPPOINTED by i7?

[imported_Scoop]

Originally posted by: Phynaz
I'm disapointed that a 600HP Corvette ZR1 will not get me to work any faster than a 110HP Cobalt.

Could be that driving to work isn't an "application" that will benefit from 600HP.

Just like games are not an application that will benefit from i7.

This was actually very well put

 

[bharatwaja]

Architecturally, the i7 is a different approach for Intel isn't it? I mean, its the architecture that defines the chip, so we can expect good performance increases down the road, as refinements are brought about to this chip....

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

I'm not disappointed at all!

I didn't buy one, PPPFFFFFFFFT

 

[bharatwaja]

Originally posted by: BTRY B 529th FA BN
I'm not disappointed at all!

I didn't buy one, PPPFFFFFFFFT

neither did I, but ppl don't stop wishing they'd have the world's fastest processor crammed into their little beige boxes, just to do their word processing and internet browsing....

oh forget it, i've had a lotta beer tonight...

 

[JMapleton]

When AMD first took it's fall when Conroe was released everyone was saying if AMD did not exist we'd all be using P4's that cost $1000. Given Intel is so far ahead of AMD I'm just glad they are continually trying to push the envelop and develop significantly faster processors, for that alone I'm not disappointed.

 

[Sentry2]

Originally posted by: Phynaz
I'm disapointed that a 600HP Corvette ZR1 will not get me to work any faster than a 110HP Cobalt.

Could be that driving to work isn't an "application" that will benefit from 600HP.

Just like games are not an application that will benefit from i7.

...But we all NEED a new ZR1 to drive to work in...well I think so anyway...maybe if we all had one then the drive to work would be quicker? That new Vette is bad ass. Oh right, we're talking about i7 here...

I want one...but I know I don't need one.

At this time I'd probably only buy an i7 just so I'd have an excuse to pick up an X58 board. SLI/CFX on an Intel chipset sounds good to me...DDR3 prices on the other hand don't.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Sentry2
...But we all NEED a new ZR1 to drive to work in...well I think so anyway...maybe if we all had one then the drive to work would be quicker?

You know that won't work that way. There will always be that one dude driving 5mph under the speed-limit (in the ZR1 no less) looking around like they can't figure out where the hell all them youngsters think they need to be going so quickly at such a late time in the mid-morning.

BTW I know I'm surrounded by the right kind of people when we are talking about needing hardware (cars/computers) to get to work sooner versus talking about using the same hardware to get home from work sooner. Bunch of workaholics

 

[AdamK47]

That's why I have a Core i7.

 

[Markfw]

Addicted to speed ? see sig....

 

[myocardia]

I'm actually disappointed in Nehalem, but not for any of the reasons that have been mentioned so far. I'm disappointed that they released it with 256KB/core of L2 cache. What's sad, in my opinion, is that I'm almost positive they'll be releasing an "updated" model with 4x512KB of L2 in the next 6-12 months, making all of the early adopters screwed, as usual.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Adam. I have a friend who says he is the first person in the states to officially put a Super or Turbo charger on his GT6. I guess. He says he works at a car dealership. But is this possible?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: myocardia
I'm actually disappointed in Nehalem, but not for any of the reasons that have been mentioned so far. I'm disappointed that they released it with 256KB/core of L2 cache. What's sad, in my opinion, is that I'm almost positive they'll be releasing an "updated" model with 4x512KB of L2 in the next 6-12 months, making all of the early adopters screwed, as usual.

Tighten that timeline to 11-12 months and call it Westmere...

I'm confident though that future i7 owners have the same thing to look forward to that late Penryn buyers did, i.e. future stepping with improved power consumption and OC headroom.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Originally posted by: Phynaz
I'm disapointed that a 600HP Corvette ZR1 will not get me to work any faster than a 110HP Cobalt.

Could be that driving to work isn't an "application" that will benefit from 600HP.

Just like games are not an application that will benefit from i7.

I don't think a Penryn would equal a cobalt in your analogy, it's more like... a V8 new Camaro
Cobalt=3.2Ghz Presshot

 

[tim924]

Meaningless thread started by OP,if he did a little bit research about what kind of improvements he would get with i7,he shouldnt be dissapointed at all,however if he knew nothing about it,and just bought it to play games(with a single gpu most likely),and now starts complaining just because he's getting nearly the same frame rates like his c2q or c2d did,I can only say that sorry bro you didnt do your homework before hand to understand what you are getting,if you were looking plainly for gaming performance,you shouldnt bother with i7(yet),since at this point,it's the software programming bottlenecking
i7's potenial to fully show its capability,but anyways even if you are a gamer,try to play with some sli/crossfire set-up ,it will definitely show you the improvements then,if not it's rather you are not utililizing its potenial,cause it's gpu bottleneck there.

 

[Barfo]

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax

Originally posted by: Phynaz
I'm disapointed that a 600HP Corvette ZR1 will not get me to work any faster than a 110HP Cobalt.

Could be that driving to work isn't an "application" that will benefit from 600HP.

Just like games are not an application that will benefit from i7.

I don't think a Penryn would equal a cobalt in your analogy, it's more like... a V8 new Camaro
Cobalt=3.2Ghz Presshot

Prescott = gas guzzling and slow Hummer

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: TidusZ
But even pentium 2 -> pentium 3 -> pentium 4 was a bigger leap forward then core 2 quad -> i7.

I guess you don't remember when Pentium 4 was first introduced? The big complaint was that it performed no better - and in some cases, worse - than Pentium 3

I was just thinking that myself.

The northwood (130nm) to prescott (90nm) P4 upgrade led to lower performance clock for clock due to the longer pipeline.

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: tim924
Meaningless thread started by OP,if he did a little bit research about what kind of improvements he would get with i7,he shouldnt be dissapointed at all,however if he knew nothing about it,and just bought it to play games(with a single gpu most likely),and now starts complaining just because he's getting nearly the same frame rates like his c2q or c2d did,I can only say that sorry bro you didnt do your homework before hand to understand what you are getting,if you were looking plainly for gaming performance,you shouldnt bother with i7(yet),since at this point,it's the software programming bottlenecking
i7's potenial to fully show its capability,but anyways even if you are a gamer,try to play with some sli/crossfire set-up ,it will definitely show you the improvements then,if not it's rather you are not utililizing its potenial,cause it's gpu bottleneck there.

The thing is I have done my homework and I haven't bought an i7. My main usage is for gaming, I don't do 3d rendering or encoding. There's been some good comments here and I mean, if I was working for a render farm or something I'd be singing the i7's praises, but I'm just a hardcore gamer who mostly plays rts.

I'm going to have to skip on i7 for now, its just not worth it, and that disappoints me that my options right now for upgrading from my e4300 @3.15 aren't as great as I had hoped they'd be. I may just wait another 6 or even 12 months, since getting a wolfdale isn't really a big enough upgrade to me at this point either (close though).

 

[Drsignguy]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: myocardia
I'm actually disappointed in Nehalem, but not for any of the reasons that have been mentioned so far. I'm disappointed that they released it with 256KB/core of L2 cache. What's sad, in my opinion, is that I'm almost positive they'll be releasing an "updated" model with 4x512KB of L2 in the next 6-12 months, making all of the early adopters screwed, as usual.

Tighten that timeline to 11-12 months and call it Westmere...

I'm confident though that future i7 owners have the same thing to look forward to that late Penryn buyers did, i.e. future stepping with improved power consumption and OC headroom.

All the more reasoning to wait it out. You see what is on the horizon, and I will choose at the right time....lower cost for performance will happen in do time....again. Besides, I have enough to keep me busy until then

 

[marsrunner]

Why the need to exaggerate the cost? You can get the ASUS P6T Deluxe, the i7-920 and 6GB of DDR3-1333 G.Skill RAM for $790.70. Is that a lot of money? Perhaps, but its also 21% less than the OP's statement.
And honestly, if you are going to drop $800 on motherboard/cpu/memory, why would you only buy 1 card? The performance increase in gaming comes when you SLI them anyway.
Personally, I bought the above setup because I want to do some heavy-duty home video editing/encoding with my new Canon HG20 HD camcorder. And there's definitely an increase there.
Plus, I threw two XFX GFX 260 Black Editions in there, so it fairly screams in gaming.

 

[JPB]

If it is quicker than Deneb, I will be impressed If Deneb is faster than Core i7 *which I doubt* I won't be impressed with i7.

I'll hold off my judgment until Deneb hits.

 

[tim924]

Originally posted by: JPB
If it is quicker than Deneb, I will be impressed If Deneb is faster than Core i7 *which I doubt* I won't be impressed with i7.

I'll hold off my judgment until Deneb hits.

Quite hard to believe Deneb to bring anything more than the core 2 really,i mean it's just a die shrink after all,and there's absolutely none official reviews so far,Phenom's expectation was set so high and proven much exergerated,so personally I lost my faith in AMD for quite a long time,given Intel's solid performance over the last few years,it's just harder to make believe that AMD can actually get back on top,a little catch up to match with the core 2 family is all I can pray for AMD realistically.

 

[sgrinavi]

Originally posted by: Soccerman06
It shines in Encoding and 3D Rendering so don't be mislead.

Why did you have to show me that?.... now I have to have one.

 

[JMapleton]

Originally posted by: marsrunner
Why the need to exaggerate the cost? You can get the ASUS P6T Deluxe, the i7-920 and 6GB of DDR3-1333 G.Skill RAM for $790.70. Is that a lot of money? Perhaps, but its also 21% less than the OP's statement.

Cost per performance is somewhat high when you can get an e8400 for so cheap and then overclock it.

 

[marsrunner]

Not relevant and not the point of my post. No one is going to argue that the E8600 isn't a better "value" for your money for gaming, at least single-card, but there is no comparison in the use case I mentioned, and the reason I upgraded. It wouldn't matter if the E8600 was free if it didn't do what I wanted it to do in anything resembling a reasonable amount of time.

 

[formulav8]

Similar to Phenom, Intel was focusing more on designing for server platforms with i7. Opterons (Phenom equiv) is a server beast, but not a desktop beast. i7 will end up being a server beast next year when Intel starts shipping server versions. But the desktop versions won't take advantage of the new features for the most part, especially when a program or app is only running single or a couple threads. When its multiple threads, then i7 will show its strength.

So basically for the desktop based computers its strength's will not be evident. But with certain specific apps, like 3D and Encoding type programs that use multiple threads, i7 will definitely perform higher than Conroe/Penryn.

Thats just my opinion on the matter.


Jason