Skulltrail CPUs to cost a grand and a half

We already brought you pictures and performance numbers for Intel’s upcoming "Skulltrail" enthusiast platform, which will combine dual 45nm processors and as many as four graphics cards. Now, the folks at DigiTimes claim to have information about the first "Skulltrail" chip Intel intends to roll out.

The processor will be dubbed Core 2 Extreme QX9775, the site says, and it will run at 3.2GHz with a 1600MHz front-side bus and an LGA771 package. In other words, the chip will be more Xeon than Core 2, despite the branding. More interestingly, DigiTimes quotes a launch price tag of $1,499 for the QX9775—that’s $500 more than the list price(PDF) for existing Core 2 Extreme chips. At $1,499 per CPU, a dual-processor Skulltrail rig would cost nearly $3,000 for the processors alone.

According to a related report by The Register, Intel plans to launch the Core 2 Extreme QX9775 some time in the first quarter of 2008. The chip will be accompanied by another Core 2 Extreme, the QX9770, which will supposedly feature the same specs but with an LGA775 package and a $1,399 price tag. Intel showed off the QX9770 at its Intel Developer Forum in Taiwan yesterday.

Comments closed
    • Krogoth
    • 14 years ago

    What is the point?

    Intel is very stupid to marketed a platform that is clearly meant for professional users as an “enthusiast” platform. At least its performance is not as embarrassing as AMD’s ill-fated 4×4.

    Skulltrail (cool name) = the aura platform that only professional users and tiny minority of fools that have way more $$$$ than sense will get.

    /me hugs his “$299 Q6600”

      • TRS-80
      • 14 years ago

      When I read the name I see ‘skullfuck’, which is what should happen to anyone insane enough to actually plonk down the dosh for one of these.

    • crazybus
    • 14 years ago

    Intel seems to be trying really hard to make the Phenom FX look like the sane choice.

    • evermore
    • 14 years ago

    So…what exactly do you get from having an LGA771 socket instead of 775? Aside from limited motherboard compatibility, and non-enthusiast design of the ones that do exist.

    Multi-socket support is all I can think of. Even if I had wads of spare cash I don’t think I’d bother with multi-socket.

      • tfp
      • 14 years ago

      Dual socket support

      • MadManOriginal
      • 14 years ago

      And FB-DIMMs (maybe). I’d say the only reason this is on LGA771 is because that’s what the 400MHz FSB Xeons will be on as well.

        • tfp
        • 14 years ago

        In regards to ram, that has nothing to do with the socket and everything to do with the northbridge.

    • JoshMST
    • 14 years ago

    Geeze, reminds me of when the Pentium 2 266 was released. It was a $1500 part as well at introduction (though it did drop in price rather quickly).

    This is what scares me about Intel when they feel they don’t have any competition in a certain market. They are a well run business, and if they see the opportunity to increase their margins, they will not hold back. Luckily we do have other performance parts that are not so highly priced, such as the C2D 6850 and a pretty affordable quad core.

    Still… that’s quite the sticker shock.

      • 5150
      • 14 years ago

      Well yeah, but it had MMX so it was infinitely faster.

    • deepthought86
    • 14 years ago

    Just a hint of what’s to come if AMD falls further behind in the high-end segment. The ugly Intel is back

      • SPOOFE
      • 14 years ago

      Ludicrous. The existence of expensive high-end parts doesn’t magically raise the price on the low-end. When Intel has a lack of affordable parts, then you might have a point.

        • continuum
        • 14 years ago

        Agreed, and well said. The high-end in the last few years, be it Intel, AMD, or nVidia, only keeps getting more expensive.

        • flip-mode
        • 14 years ago

        It may not raise the price of the low end, but it certainly stagnates the “trickle down”. If AMD had a competitive part then it’s not unlikely that these enthusiast CPUs would be priced at $1000 and all the other chips would drop.

        Your persistent argument that a lack of competition from AMD is not a net negative is far more ludicrous than any assertion to the contrary.

          • SPOOFE
          • 14 years ago

          Your trickle down notion would have merit if we hadn’t seen remarkable price drops all year round, from both sides of the fence.

          Your silly, petty, and wrong-headed summation of my “position” is just plain laughably inaccurate. You’ll be hard-pressed to find any quotes from myself to support it.

            • flip-mode
            • 14 years ago

            Petty? Hmm, I’m positive that I wasn’t being petty. You tend to get pretty personal with these comments pretty quickly.

            You have to remember that you are making an assertion that contradicts accepted knowledge – you’re asserting that a lack of competition will have no adverse effect on prices. Barring useless terms like silly and wrong headed, such an assertion has the burden of proof. So when I counter with an assertion that reflects the commonly held postition I don’t understand how it gets labeled silly, petty, or wrongheaded. I’d be willing to listen to your reasoning though.

            • SPOOFE
            • 14 years ago

            You accuse me of getting personal with comments immediately after getting personal with your comments? Don’t start nothin’ if you can’t handle the heat, young child.

            “you’re asserting that a lack of competition will have no adverse effect on prices.”

            I’ve never asserted that, and once again I challenge you to find a quote of mine to support this completely baloney summation you’ve provided. Your accusation of what I “believe” is designed to serve yourself and support your own insecurity; you’ve lost arguments to me and so you need to distort what I’ve said in your own mind in order to justify disliking me so much, when in reality all I’ve done is beat you, fair ‘n square, with facts and logic that you can’t match.

            Don’t come back ’til you have a cite, little boy.

            • flip-mode
            • 14 years ago

            Um, yeah anything you say. I lose, you win.

            • bthylafh
            • 14 years ago

            You’re cute when you’re bitchy.

            • PetMiceRnice
            • 14 years ago

            No doubt, you’d think that someone was insulting someone else’s mother when reading responses (in general) sometimes. I don’t know why the personal side of things has to come out. We’re just debating some flippin’ hardware. I’m surprised the TR staff doesn’t step in when these sorts of things happen.

        • PetMiceRnice
        • 14 years ago

        I’m not so sure about that because AMD already has a lot of low-cost offerings and Intel has to stay competitive in that market. The fact that AMD no longer has the “knockout punch” at the high-end of the spectrum currently leaves Intel free to do what they want in terms of pricing for high performance CPU’s.

        I remember full well of the days when Intel had their P2-450 processor in late 1998 selling for over $1000. Within two years, prices really started to come down thanks to the original Athlon processor.

        It is a reminder to the fanboys in general out there who want to see one competitor or another suffer. We would all lose in that case.

    • willyolio
    • 14 years ago

    4×4 definitely doesn’t look so silly any more.

    • Chairman_Now
    • 14 years ago

    So, is AMD’s 4×4 platform alive or dead at this point? Anyone know if AMD is going to ship consumer socket F CPUs beyond the current models (as in, quad core)?

      • Lord.Blue
      • 14 years ago

      The Phenom FX procs are supposed to be on socket F+

    • d0g_p00p
    • 14 years ago

    This is what we are going to see if AMD fails. Ahh, back to the good old days of Intel ruling all.

    • flip-mode
    • 14 years ago

    LOL @ lack of high end competition.

    • StashTheVampede
    • 14 years ago

    Intel is positioning it’s enthusiast platform on the Xeon socket? The line between enthusiast and server is … always blurry.

      • indeego
      • 14 years ago

      Enthusiasts don’t care as much about redundancy or reliability.

      Server buyers care about reliability and redundancyg{<.<}g

    • wingless
    • 14 years ago

    For a pair of those I can buy a great set of coil overs, a turbo kit, a fully built long block, or a big brake upgrade + Nismo S.S.S. 2-way LSD for my 240sx….

    When computer parts cost as much or MORE than “expensive” mods for cars then they cost too damn much. I do not believe those processors have enough performance to justify that kind of price.

      • Kharnellius
      • 14 years ago

      Of course they don’t!!! It’s called bragging rights. You want the ultimate best, you pay.

      I’m always for the rich paving the way for the poor.

        • wingless
        • 14 years ago

        I’ll build an AMD system with 8 Phenom cores and four RV670 or 680 GPU’s for the price of two of these Intel processors alone. I was looking forward to building an Intel system in 2008 but that won’t happen now, especially since Nehalem has slipped to Q4/08 or Q1/09. If AMD is smart they’ll keep playing the price game and win over some hearts (wallets).

    • Jeffery
    • 14 years ago

    Since they are using LGA771, I do wonder if lower clocked Xeons will boot with the Skulltrail board? If so, two $500 E5430s (2.66Ghz/12MB/1333Mhz) should overclock nicely.
    What is more, two E5472s (3Ghz/12MB/1600Mhz) would
    perform almost identically for $1000 less per pair.

    –If not, I think AMD will have a much more accessible 8-core, uber-multi GPU enthusiast platform.

    It would be interesting to see how the Xeon parts overclock as compared to their desktop brethren.

    • Lord.Blue
    • 14 years ago

    chaching?! more like pirates of silicon valley….

    • JJCDAD
    • 14 years ago

    Enthusiast? More like moneytoburniast. 😛

    • 5150
    • 14 years ago

    Yes, this seems very logical.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This