QX6700 at NewEgg and TigerDirect

[chubbyfatazn]

$700+? The guy said it was just $1099 OEM...

No CPU drops to $400 dollars from $1100+ in 6 months.. Intel and AMD would be out of business. Duh.

The facts? Seems to me like your opinion. Don't want to butt in, but that's how I'm seeing things.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: chubbyfatazn
$700+? The guy said it was just $1099 OEM...

No CPU drops to $400 dollars from $1100+ in 6 months.. Intel and AMD would be out of business. Duh.

The facts? Seems to me like your opinion. Don't want to butt in, but that's how I'm seeing things.

1) I never said it was $700 I was referring to someone saying to wait until it drops to 700 which is still too much

2) and who gives a damn if it's my opinion? Oh sounds like you do right? lol

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: chubbyfatazn
$700+? The guy said it was just $1099 OEM...

No CPU drops to $400 dollars from $1100+ in 6 months.. Intel and AMD would be out of business. Duh.

The facts? Seems to me like your opinion. Don't want to butt in, but that's how I'm seeing things.

1) I never said it was $700 I was referring to someone saying to wait until it drops to 700 which is still too much

2) and who gives a damn if it's my opinion? Oh sounds like you do right? lol

Simple answer to this pissing match, just don't buy it if you think it's useless and costs too much. Don't come crapping on the thread because the product doesn't interest you, it may interest others.

 

[chubbyfatazn]

yeah im the only one. of course. thats a no brainer

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: chubbyfatazn
$700+? The guy said it was just $1099 OEM...

No CPU drops to $400 dollars from $1100+ in 6 months.. Intel and AMD would be out of business. Duh.

The facts? Seems to me like your opinion. Don't want to butt in, but that's how I'm seeing things.

1) I never said it was $700 I was referring to someone saying to wait until it drops to 700 which is still too much

2) and who gives a damn if it's my opinion? Oh sounds like you do right? lol

Simple answer to this pissing match, just don't buy it if you think it's useless and costs too much. Don't come crapping on the thread because the product doesn't interest you, it may interest others.

I agree...To each his own....


I would not be interested in it until it is under 2x the cost of the E6700....The fact that most apps other then F@H will even use 4 cores and that is cause you are running 4 instances it should not even be worth 1.6-1.8x the cost of the dual core chip...

I will jump on an Q6600 once it hits 400-450....The I will plop them into my current 965p's and phase the C2D's out over a period of time

 

[krotchy]

Am I the only one really upset with newegg here? They are by far the most expensive seller according to froogle and pricegrabber, gouging 10-20% is normal, but 50% more than other retailers at launch is pure shenanigans.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: krotchy
Am I the only one really upset with newegg here? They are by far the most expensive seller according to froogle and pricegrabber, gouging 10-20% is normal, but 50% more than other retailers at launch is pure shenanigans.

Nope they have been really a bunch og gouging fvckers for awhile...I never buy early stuff through them. They get much better if not the best after a product has been out for a month or 2...

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Once they hit $700, I am all over it !

This processor won't hit 700USD as it's an EE, and those lawyas remain 999USD regardless, if your willing you can wait till Intel launches the Xeon 3210, which is around 690USD for 4 Cores at 2.13GHZ.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: nyker96
hot very hot, but I think you guys may wanna wait to Q3/2007 to check out AMDs native quad. Could be better and probably cost the same.

By that time your looking very close to the 2nd revision of Intel's Quad Cores as well for the desktop so might as well look at what they got then as well.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
How about you STFU...I'm not the only one who says it's useless and especially so since it's $700+ now and then 6months later it's going to be what $400? And then you'll probably rush out to buy the next $1k CPU too.

I think you should just face the facts...it's too expensive for what you get. That's all.

Just because "everyone" else can't find a use for it, doesn't mean it's useless. And if you think a depreciation of $300-400 in six months is a lot, stay out of the avsforums. I'm sure you're the type of guy that would respond in the following manner on display devices section:

avsforum poster - "Hey guys, I just bought my brand new Panasonic 65" plasma. I'm so excited, and it looks beautiful."

cmdrdredd - "That is the dumbest thing you could have done. That thing is $10,000! Why get something like that, when you know it's going to depreciate thousands of dollars in 6 months to a year? You could have gotten a really cool $800 HD LCD. I wouldn't spend $10,000 on a TV."

That is the most annoying attitude. It screams one of three things (or all of them):

1. I can't afford it, so I'll talk sh!t about it since I can't have it. (And if you are able to buy it, doesn't necessarily mean you can afford it)
2. Everyone has the same income I do, so obviously the dollar has the value to everyone else. And if $1000 is a lot to me, $1000 is obviously a lot to someone else.
3. I can't see the value in it, so it obviously has no value to anyone else.

Just a freakin' annoying attitude. If someone wants to buy it, there is definitely a performance gain going from a dual core processor to a quad core. Now is the extra performance worth it? Well that question can only be answered by the person buying the chip.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
4xF@H... saves space around here. Check my stats, and you will see why I would like the room. 12 boxes, all dual-cores still takes space. 6 boxes would be much nicer.

And 2x6600 ~600, its worth the extra to save the space.

Or you can wait for Apple to release their dual quad core machine and just get three of those. Going from 12 to 3? Man, talk about space saving.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Once they hit $700, I am all over it !

This processor won't hit 700USD as it's an EE, and those lawyas remain 999USD regardless, if your willing you can wait till Intel launches the Xeon 3210, which is around 690USD for 4 Cores at 2.13GHZ.

Although he didn't say it (in this thread), Markfw900 is talking about the Q6600, which will be @ or, most likely, well under $700 in less than a year, I can guarantee you.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: chubbyfatazn
$700+? The guy said it was just $1099 OEM...

No CPU drops to $400 dollars from $1100+ in 6 months.. Intel and AMD would be out of business. Duh.

The facts? Seems to me like your opinion. Don't want to butt in, but that's how I'm seeing things.

1) I never said it was $700 I was referring to someone saying to wait until it drops to 700 which is still too much

2) and who gives a damn if it's my opinion? Oh sounds like you do right? lol

Simple answer to this pissing match, just don't buy it if you think it's useless and costs too much. Don't come crapping on the thread because the product doesn't interest you, it may interest others.

No Thread crapping is telling ME to STFU for MY opinion. If you get that pissed when someone doesn't like your $1k CPU you need help.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
How about you STFU...I'm not the only one who says it's useless and especially so since it's $700+ now and then 6months later it's going to be what $400? And then you'll probably rush out to buy the next $1k CPU too.

I think you should just face the facts...it's too expensive for what you get. That's all.

Just because "everyone" else can't find a use for it, doesn't mean it's useless. And if you think a depreciation of $300-400 in six months is a lot, stay out of the avsforums. I'm sure you're the type of guy that would respond in the following manner on display devices section:

avsforum poster - "Hey guys, I just bought my brand new Panasonic 65" plasma. I'm so excited, and it looks beautiful."

cmdrdredd - "That is the dumbest thing you could have done. That thing is $10,000! Why get something like that, when you know it's going to depreciate thousands of dollars in 6 months to a year? You could have gotten a really cool $800 HD LCD. I wouldn't spend $10,000 on a TV."

That is the most annoying attitude. It screams one of three things (or all of them):

1. I can't afford it, so I'll talk sh!t about it since I can't have it. (And if you are able to buy it, doesn't necessarily mean you can afford it)
2. Everyone has the same income I do, so obviously the dollar has the value to everyone else. And if $1000 is a lot to me, $1000 is obviously a lot to someone else.
3. I can't see the value in it, so it obviously has no value to anyone else.

Just a freakin' annoying attitude. If someone wants to buy it, there is definitely a performance gain going from a dual core processor to a quad core. Now is the extra performance worth it? Well that question can only be answered by the person buying the chip.

first things first it's called a damn opinion. If my opinion offends you get the hell off the internet.

It's overpriced PERIOD. Intel knows it and they don't care. They don't even probably care if they sell a ton of em because it's not their mainstream line.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
first things first it's called a damn opinion. If my opinion offends you get the hell off the internet.

It's overpriced PERIOD. Intel knows it and they don't care. They don't even probably care if they sell a ton of em because it's not their mainstream line.

First off, opinions don't offend me. Now narrow minded opinions irritate me, but they definitely don't offend me.

How is it overpriced? Yes, at $1499 the sellers are gouging, but that should level off at $1000 shortly and that is typical for the flagship processor. How is this new to you? This has been the case for a loooong time. I remember the PII450 selling for $800+ and that was waaaaay back then. Only now you get four high end processors for $1000.

And no it is not overpriced. It's priced at what the market would allow. If no one bought it at $1000, it would be priced lower. So obviously it's priced right, PERIOD. Just because YOU think it is expensive, doesn't make it overpriced.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
first things first it's called a damn opinion. If my opinion offends you get the hell off the internet.

It's overpriced PERIOD. Intel knows it and they don't care. They don't even probably care if they sell a ton of em because it's not their mainstream line.

First off, opinions don't offend me. Now narrow minded opinions irritate me, but they definitely don't offend me.

How is it overpriced? Yes, at $1499 the sellers are gouging, but that should level off at $1000 shortly and that is typical for the flagship processor. How is this new to you? This has been the case for a loooong time. I remember the PII450 selling for $800+ and that was waaaaay back then. Only now you get four high end processors for $1000.

And no it is not overpriced. It's priced at what the market would allow. If no one bought it at $1000, it would be priced lower. So obviously it's priced right, PERIOD. Just because YOU think it is expensive, doesn't make it overpriced.

I am buying one at $1500. I would have bought one at $3000. Hell I would have bought it at $4500.

For me I am simply elated that I can buy one at any price.

Why? Because in my business I make money depending on CPU power at my disposal. 8 years ago I was building 12-node Beowulf's with 800MHz Athlons to get stuff done. Now I can put all that horsepower in one box. Priceless. Economies of scale at work.

Don't tell me it is overpriced, I'll make $100k's from one chip. Don't tell me I am a "niche" user. I work in an industry of folks who will make $100k's off of the numbers these chips will grind thru. Just because folks in my industry don't come to AT forum and talk about our life as end users doesn't mean 10's of thousands of us aren't out there.

And I am not so arrogant as to assume my industry is the only one who will see a 4X increase in productivity with this chip. Too many folks on this forum live in one hell of a small fishbowl, its sad to read, mostly, but alas I am off to continue making my fortunes with my "way overpriced" CPU. Whee!

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
4xF@H... saves space around here. Check my stats, and you will see why I would like the room. 12 boxes, all dual-cores still takes space. 6 boxes would be much nicer.

And 2x6600 ~600, its worth the extra to save the space.

Not to mention the electricity!!!

<--misses his F@H crack rack

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Once they hit $700, I am all over it !

This processor won't hit 700USD as it's an EE, and those lawyas remain 999USD regardless, if your willing you can wait till Intel launches the Xeon 3210, which is around 690USD for 4 Cores at 2.13GHZ.

Although he didn't say it (in this thread), Markfw900 is talking about the Q6600, which will be @ or, most likely, well under $700 in less than a year, I can guarantee you.

It's hard to draw that conclusion from reading what he said in this thread isn't it.

Hmm, that would depend on what kind of pricing AMD's Quad Core come in at wouldn't it. For the moment since Intel has no competition, well unless you count AMD's soon to launch expensive 4x4 platform, Intel can charge what it wants, I am not going to pretend to know what the price will be on these babies in 1 yr, but I will agree as there shouldn't be an excuse to cahrge so much on these things in 1 yr as Intel is likely going to have the 45nm revisions out by then as well as competition by AMD.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I am buying one at $1500. I would have bought one at $3000. Hell I would have bought it at $4500.

For me I am simply elated that I can buy one at any price.

Why? Because in my business I make money depending on CPU power at my disposal. 8 years ago I was building 12-node Beowulf's with 800MHz Athlons to get stuff done. Now I can put all that horsepower in one box. Priceless. Economies of scale at work.

Don't tell me it is overpriced, I'll make $100k's from one chip. Don't tell me I am a "niche" user. I work in an industry of folks who will make $100k's off of the numbers these chips will grind thru. Just because folks in my industry don't come to AT forum and talk about our life as end users doesn't mean 10's of thousands of us aren't out there.

And I am not so arrogant as to assume my industry is the only one who will see a 4X increase in productivity with this chip. Too many folks on this forum live in one hell of a small fishbowl, its sad to read, mostly, but alas I am off to continue making my fortunes with my "way overpriced" CPU. Whee!

You are a niche user. Will Intel sell millions of these quad-cores to corporations, both large and small? You bet. But, if crunching numbers was making you $100k's, I can assure you that you would own 10's, if not more, of quad-core boxes that have been available for the last ~2 years. I mean, there's a member of these forums who runs a business out of his home, who has two quad-core systems, plus a dual-core system, and he's had them for a year or more. And since a quad-core is going to quadruple your productivity, that means you've got a pretty slow dual-core system now, huh?

edit: If crunching numbers, and only crunching numbers, was my business, I can guarantee you that I'd have an entire fleet of 2P Opteron 185 systems already. Well, assuming they were actually making me $100k's, anyway.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: coldpower27
It's hard to draw that conclusion from reading what he said in this thread isn't it.

Hmm, that would depend on what kind of pricing AMD's Quad Core come in at wouldn't it. For the moment since Intel has no competition, well unless you count AMD's soon to launch expensive 4x4 platform, Intel can charge what it wants, I am not going to pretend to know what the price will be on these babies in 1 yr, but I will agree as there shouldn't be an excuse to cahrge so much on these things in 1 yr as Intel is likely going to have the 45nm revisions out by then as well as competition by AMD.

I never said that you should have already drawn that conclusion, I was merely letting you know. And as far as being able to predict prices on Q6600's on Nov. 15th of 2007, all we have to go by is Moore's law, and the past, right? Well, according to Moore's law, the price on a Q6600 will be less than $600 on that date (since 12 months is 2/3 of 18 months).

And Intel's non-EE chips have dropped roughly in half in the last 12 months, have they not? I see no reason why an $850 chip would be able to sustain any price above $700 12 months from now, seeing that they will already be shipping 45-nm by then, I believe. My *guess* would be that a Q6600 will be going for roughly the same price on 11-15-07 as an E6700 goes for today.

 

[hardwareking]

@idontcare-U could get ur self a 2p clowertown server.Thats still one box but u get 8 cores worth of number crunching power.
But since u already bought the kentsfield,its pointless in me talkin.Maybe next time.
And what exactly do u do?(just curious,u don't need to reply)

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: coldpower27
It's hard to draw that conclusion from reading what he said in this thread isn't it.

Hmm, that would depend on what kind of pricing AMD's Quad Core come in at wouldn't it. For the moment since Intel has no competition, well unless you count AMD's soon to launch expensive 4x4 platform, Intel can charge what it wants, I am not going to pretend to know what the price will be on these babies in 1 yr, but I will agree as there shouldn't be an excuse to cahrge so much on these things in 1 yr as Intel is likely going to have the 45nm revisions out by then as well as competition by AMD.

I never said that you should have already drawn that conclusion, I was merely letting you know. And as far as being able to predict prices on Q6600's on Nov. 15th of 2007, all we have to go by is Moore's law, and the past, right? Well, according to Moore's law, the price on a Q6600 will be less than $600 on that date (since 12 months is 2/3 of 18 months).

And Intel's non-EE chips have dropped roughly in half in the last 12 months, have they not? I see no reason why an $850 chip would be able to sustain any price above $700 12 months from now, seeing that they will already be shipping 45-nm by then, I believe. My *guess* would be that a Q6600 will be going for roughly the same price on 11-15-07 as an E6700 goes for today.

Allright, thanks for informing me.

In 10 Months after the Q6600's exisitance, there is good probability that the Q6600 will drop at least 1 pricing Tier though I am hoping for 2, which would place it below 700USD.

I doubt you can use the last 12 months as a guideline as Intel has been slashing prices on it's Presler's to bring them much more competitive with AMD, there is not that much reason to do so with Quad Cores, as it's more costly for AMD and Intel to do so as the 65nm process only makes Quad Core feasible but not economical.

A possiblity is that the Dual Die Q6600's will remain fairly high like Smithfield, and the 45nm Quad Core versions will be the ones to bring prices down for Intel. It's not certain as looking into the past you need to take into account other factors as well.

Though I concur in that the Q6600's should be below 700 USD 10 Months after it's introduction as that is only a reduction of less then 20% in order to satisfy that requirement.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: coldpower27
Though I concur in that the Q6600's should be below 700 USD 10 Months after it's introduction as that is only a reduction of less then 20% in order to satisfy that requirement.

Right. What I forgot to say in that last post was that if the price on 65nm Q6600's doesn't go down, the prices of 45nm Q6600's would have to be higher, or there would never be another 65nm Q6600 sold again, ever, after the introduction of the 45nm Q6600. Anytime any company wants to get parts out the door (think Presler), then they have to either raise the price of the new part, or drop the price of the older part. There's really no other way.

 

[VooDooAddict]

A little price hiking is one thing ... I think newegg.com has gone a bit too far though. I refuse to buy anything substantial from Tiger. I used to live very close to their warehouse/storefront... the number of times management level people would try to bait and switch items on me while at the warehouse store was disgusting. True this was years ago and things might be better now. Tiger lost this customer for life.

Newegg's price and shipping cost hikes over the last 18-24 months have caused me to make ZipZoomFly my preferred vendor for small orders. I'm hoping when/if they get in the Quad cores they won't get too greedy. (Slight premium price hikes are one thing. But eBay 360/PS3 level gouging will make me investigate new vendors.)

As for a use... no it's not for everyone. But for me...

Lets see, the dev system I'm on right now is running 4-5 VMware virtual machines at any given time along with MS Visual Studio and SQL Server on the host system.

I think I'll see some major speed improvements with a Quad Core that might even lead to increased productivity (and at least a snappier more pleasant experience.)

Why don't I just setup multiple systems? I need to keep the VM systems in a localized sandbox to not effect the production systems on the network. While still giving my Host system access to the production network. The networking infrastructure here would make it very difficult (read costly) to do that with multiple systems.

Quad Core still useless? Anandtech is a general enthusiasts sight ... not only gaming.
(Though I'm sure it will be a fun system to run "Crysis" and "Alan Wake" on during off hours.)

Looks like I'll be waiting for the non Extreme Edition Quad core though if the price stays at that level.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: hardwareking
@idontcare-U could get ur self a 2p clowertown server.Thats still one box but u get 8 cores worth of number crunching power.
But since u already bought the kentsfield,its pointless in me talkin.Maybe next time.
And what exactly do u do?(just curious,u don't need to reply)

strategy backtesting for automated forex trading

4 cores clocked to 4GHz (phase-change) will satisfy my needs for now in terms of time-to-answer (scales with MHz) versus number of answers (scales with # of cores).