Intel to intro a cheaper quad-core chip at CES

Back last September, rumors said that Intel would launch a cheaper version of its $999 Core 2 Extreme QX6700 quad-core processor in the first quarter of this year. According to a new report by eWeek, which quotes an anonymous industry source, Intel plans to launch this processor next week at CES. eWeek says details about the chip’s specifications are “sketchy.” However, older rumors claimed the upcoming processor would run at 2.4GHz with 8MB of cache (or 4MB per dual-core die,) and that it would be dubbed Core 2 Quad Q6600. More recent rumors echoed the same information and added that the chip would launch at $851, and that its price would drop to $530 in the second quarter of this year.

Comments closed
    • Forge
    • 13 years ago

    I could maybe justify a 500$ CPU, especially if the Q6600 specs are right and it OCs anything close to the e6600, but 850$ is way too much. I’d love to skip right over C2D and go straight to C2Q, but price is a sensitive area.

      • moose17145
      • 13 years ago

      haha, im sittin in the same boat right now. Still workin with a P4C trying to hold off till i can get a quad core for a decent price.

    • droopy1592
    • 13 years ago

    This 3800×2 is going to last me for a good long time. With a lot of RAM, i don’t see the need for quad cores. Not with Vista/XP or anything that i use/will use.

    • moose17145
    • 13 years ago

    Both are overpriced. They need to release a quad core for around 300~400 price bracket imo. The 2nd quarter price looks more reasonable than release price, but still too expensive to see wide spread adoption… but you know what they say about small steps and all that…

      • Sargent Duck
      • 13 years ago

      Both are overpriced? You’re getting FOUR cores! 4! Seriously, remember when we used to pay that much for one. Stop whining.

      Some people are so ungrateful…..

        • indeego
        • 13 years ago

        I just won’t buy it.

        4 cores is for the server/workstation realm, not the end-user desktop, for now and the forseeable futureg{<.<}g (read 1 year 🙂

      • Inkedsphynx
      • 13 years ago

      I don’t think these chips are MEANT to be widespread yet, or even for the next long while.

      Look at the usual comments any time quad-core is brought up on TR.

      What exactly are they good for? Video encoding, compiling maybe…. that’s about it really.

      Again, the average user won’t have a use for a quad-core for a good long while, so they aren’t priced or marketed to the average user.

      They are priced for business people (who will pay 600$ for 4 cores without batting an eyelash), and power-users/tech savvy/bleeding-edge people, who also won’t bat an eyelash at spending 600$ on a processor.

      Hell, I bought my C2D for 400$ in October. 200$ more for double the cores? … not that big a stretch.

        • moose17145
        • 13 years ago

        Yes i know they are not meant to be full wide spread yet, and i do understand that they are rockin for video editiing and 3D rendering (both of which i do, hence my interest in them and desire for a cheaper one).

        Yes i also notice that they are about 2x the price (little under it appears) of a similar dual core cpu, and realize that should make sense since ur basically getting two of the same thing. BUT never the less, making cheaper quads available could help push multithreaded software into the market sooner as there would be more incentive to do so beyond just the normal 2 core limit that is imposed right now.

        Also, not all tech savvy people have money to simply piss away 600+ on a cpu, i sure don’t. I know many people many times smarter than i, and many of them also do not have money to throw around like that. If you have the financial backing to do something like that, then no, you won’t bat an eyelash, but when 300 for a cpu is a financial hit, then 600+ suddenly becomes something that just is not feasible. That is the reason i was posting that i would like to see a quad in the 300 dollar price range, as i am currently holding off on a new build until i can get a quad at a mid range price (ala approximately the E6600 current price)

        Also, you are COMPLETELY right, they are NOT useful for the average user… BUT there in lies the problem… i am not the average user 🙂

          • Inkedsphynx
          • 13 years ago

          Well, have patience. These things JUST came out. You can’t expect a new CPU core-count/architecture to debut at 200$. Look at the first C2Ds, they were expensive. Intel always follows the same pattern.

          If you want the bleeding edge without cutting into your wallet, wait 6 months or a year. They’ll come down in price, just like all CPUs before them have done.

          (And of course I didn’t mean that all tech-savvy people don’t bat an eyelash at spending 600$. I meant those that can afford it, or those who put their priorities in the proper fashion, which is the category I fall into. I don’t make a lot of money, but my computer is high on my priority list, so I don’t mind spending a fair amount of cash on it).

          • Wajo
          • 13 years ago

          You’re just complaining because you can’t afford one (me neither by the way, but I welcome the development).

          Anyway, you speak of “multithreading software” as it were easy. You don’t realise how complex it can be, specially with several types of workloads that just don’t make parallelism “easy”.

          Software is actually a lot more multithreaded that you seem to believe, most of the professional applications that can actually benefit from several cores already do.

            • moose17145
            • 13 years ago

            Oh i full y understand the complexities behind it, i am taking programming classes right now and looking into how they make this stuff. Don’t take it as if i believe you can poop this stuff out overnight, i know that is simply not the case. What i was merely trying to say was that it could help push the development along some since there would be more incentive to do so and thus we would all see benefits from it soon. Also i know that workstation applications already take advantage of this, as most commercial level software does. What i was referring to though was consumer level software that you see on the average home PC and games. As mentioned, i full well understand the issues and complications involved with making an application heavily threaded like that, but all i was saying was that having a cheap widely available quad core would more than likely help push things along.

            Also i too welcome the advancement of technology even when i can’t afford it, but i am still free to say that i think they should release a cheaper version. Personally i wouldn’t mind seeing a quad with the clock speeds stepped down another notch and in that in the ~300 dollar range i was talkin about.

    • Shintai
    • 13 years ago

    150$ more for the QX6700..thats a nobrainer. Not really worth buying before Q2, cept perhaps for its alot lower TDP.

      • Proesterchen
      • 13 years ago

      Agreed, the Q2 price seems much more reasonable.

      • Kunikos
      • 13 years ago

      The Q4 price will be under $350 for the Q6600.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This