Core i5 will launch in early September, report says

More affordable Core i7 derivatives will start popping into retailers’ stocks in late August, and they will finally launch in early September. So says DigiTimes in a new report, citing the usual "sources at motherboard makers."

Last we heard, Intel was planning to ship its new quad-core Lynnfield CPUs (a.k.a. Core i5) and matching P55 chipsets in July. DigiTimes also names July as the original launch schedule, but it goes on to say Intel postponed the rollout so that stocks of current 4-series chipsets would have more time to clear.

Supposedly, Intel has three Lynnfield CPUs lined up for the launch: a 2.66GHz model priced at $196, a 2.8GHz part priced at $284, and a 2.93GHz flagship with a $562 price tag. This information almost matches what the rumor mill spat out last month, although DigiTimes quotes a lower clock speed for the fastest offering. (Incidentally, last month’s report also said the 2.66GHz part would lack Hyper-Threading support.)

Comments closed
    • maroon1
    • 14 years ago

    As far as I know the only advantage i7 has over i5 is Triple-channel memory, which doesn’t make much of difference

    So, I expect i5 to be almost as good as i7 clock for clock

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 14 years ago

    There also may be an X58 price cut coming. The P55 chipset is $40, just like the P45, so they’ll be $100+, and likely more at launch, while X58s will just keep getting cheaper as time goes on.

    There’s really not going to be much difference in Core i5 and Core i7 pricing by September. You will be able to get the cheapest Core i5 for $200, but it doesn’t have hyper threading. The other two are at the same price points as the lower 2 Core i7s.

    It almost defeats the purpose of it existing, but I think they’re really just doing this to get that socket type going ahead of time for Westmere.

    • loophole
    • 14 years ago

    Because the i7s connect to their chipset with QPI and the i5s use DMI you won’t find the two platforms sharing the same chipset (although the X58 connects to its southbridge with DMI so in theory you could have the X58 northbridge connected to an i5 PCH…).

    As far as I know Intel will continue to use the LGA 1366 socket with the 32nm six-core Gulftown, but whether or not existing motherboards will support the chip will probably end up in the motherboard maker’s hands…

    • stmok
    • 14 years ago

    Unless you can convince Glenn Henry of Centaur Technology that cheap, low power x86 processors that provide “adequate performance” isn’t the way to go; you ain’t going to have much luck with VIA.

    Their whole perspective in designing their processors are based on those ideas. They really have no intention of producing a performance part to compete with Intel or AMD in the mainstream.

    • pogsnet
    • 14 years ago
    • moose17145
    • 14 years ago

    Ah I see. Thank you! It will be interesting to see how those changes impact performance in various areas.

    Edit: On a side thought Intel will be continuing the i7 line from what i have heard, correct? If that is the case will the P55 chipset meant for the i5 also support the i7’s? Or will the two series of chips end up basically being completely separate from one another? As an i7 owner i would hope that intel plans on still supporting and advancing and supporting the i7 / LGA 1366 line up.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 14 years ago

    Don’t take it personally. It’s like people disliking a country’s government but not disliking the citizens.

    • data8504
    • 14 years ago

    You _really_ don’t like us, do you?? 😉 I’m just an engineer, so don’t dogpile me, but sheesh… cut us some slack!

    I’m speaking for myself not Intel at large, but I must urge you to realize that we work awfully hard and are very proud of our products. We’re a company, not a big ugly monster.

    I don’t have a problem with your opinion – you’re definitely entitled to it; I just wish you wouldn’t vilify us quite so much… please?

    • FuturePastNow
    • 14 years ago

    That little Ibex Peak chip may cost the same as the old MCH/ICH, but going to a single chip greatly simplifies the board design and cooling. And P45 mobos can be had for well under $100.

    There will be expensive P55 boards to overlap the “cheap” X58 boards, but there will also be cheap ones that perform essentially the same.

    • UberGerbil
    • 14 years ago

    The i5 design has a controller for 16 lanes of PCIe 2.0 directly on the die (in addition to the DMI interface for the southbridge chip; no QPI on the i5). That should offer lower-latency access to system memory for the GPU (or dual GPUs, if the mobo maker decided to configure it as two x8 slots) vs the i7 (somewhat mitigated perhaps by the lower overall bandwidth available). How that all washes out we won’t know until we see the benchmarks.

    • Ushio01
    • 14 years ago

    The Core i5 also has an integrated PCI-Express graphics controller so the motherboard only needs one chip rather than both a north and south bridge.

    • Game_boy
    • 14 years ago

    With a serious investor they could go somewhere. If I had a few billion dollars I’d probably buy a 49% stake in VIA (so Intel can’t object) and get to work on an uber-chip.

    • eitje
    • 14 years ago

    VIA!

    • Game_boy
    • 14 years ago

    There are some early and unreliable figures around the internet suggesting a bigger difference than just one memory channel. Namely SuperPI and CPU Queen scores that are about 15% worse than what you’d expect from an i7 at those clocks. I think they changed the architecture slightly, to fit in the 95W TDP with their 2.93GHz part rather than 130W and to reduce die size.

    • Decelerate
    • 14 years ago

    On the subject of competition, we’d need a third player. If only IBM would play…

    • moshpit
    • 14 years ago

    The i5 should on average, lag the i7 by around 0-10%, clock for clock. More often towards the 0 then the 10 though I think. A single memory channel difference won’t be that big of a deal.

    • albundy
    • 14 years ago

    “More affordable Core i7 derivatives”

    I don’t think it was the Core i7’s that were priced unfairly. it was the x58 that was obnoxiously priced.

    • moose17145
    • 14 years ago

    I know that i should already know this, but what are the differences between the i5 and the i7 again? I know the i5 is supposed to have two memory channels instead of the i7’s three, and the socket is of a 1156 pin design instead of i7’s 1366 pin design. Is there anything else that really differentiates the two, or is the changed socket and one less memory channel the only real differences?

    • Game_boy
    • 14 years ago

    Because they can. Companies are out to make maximum profit, not to make sense, and Intel will only replace one product with another when it would either increase profits or respond to competition.

    Intel isn’t feeling pressure from competition and evidently don’t think the i5 will make more profit than the Core 2. However they need the i5 to be out there so that there’s an installed base for their Socket 1156 32nm products which ARE more profitable than Core 2.

    Intel’s lineup will make more sense about 6 months after the 32nm introduction when they’ll have top-to-bottom 32nm products.

    • Buzzard44
    • 14 years ago

    I thought Core i5 was supposed to be mainstream. What’s mainstream about ~$200 for lowest end CPU? Who will pay $562 for a Core i5 processor with Core i7 out?

    What else does the flagship processor have that the others don’t? You can’t honestly tell me that they’re charging an extra $278 for another 130 Mhz. That’s ~100% higher price for ~4.5% higher clock speed.

    I’m very confused by these offerings.

    • Game_boy
    • 14 years ago

    I didn’t say that. I said when they are EVEN. That means a small enough difference so that the name is all that matters. If AMD is LOSING a given fight then you shouldn’t reward them, of course.

    But they are very much competitive with the Phenom IIs vs. the C2Qs and the Athlon X2s vs. the Pentium dual-cores. They aren’t competitive with the high-end C2Ds, the Q9650 or any i7.

    • Silus
    • 14 years ago

    So we should reward AMD for having “not so good” products
    That logic is flawed and you know it. For competition to be any good, we need compelling products from 2 or more manufacturers, that compete in every segment. I don’t think AMD has any problems competing in the mid and low end market, even if they are severely undercutting their own profit margins to do so. But if Intel still has an advantage with their Core 2 Duos over Phenom IIs and at around the same price point, why would anyone choose the slowest of the two ? If AMD wants people to buy their products, then they need to actually beat the competing products, even if not by much (as is the case with Intel’s Core 2 Duos over Phenom IIs). They should not be rewarded for having products that don’t actually “win” anything.

    • khands
    • 14 years ago

    The only reason the i5 could possibly succeed at these prices is the dumb-consumer.

    • Game_boy
    • 14 years ago

    The cause is lack of competition from AMD. The only way this will change is if AMD manages to get back into the high-end again.

    So if anyone wants more choice in that market segment, when there is an even choice between Intel and AMD they should choose AMD regardless of personal preference.

    Anandtech said as much in its recent review of the Q8400: /[<"Maybe the right way of looking at this isn't by talking about a 6% performance advantage, but instead talking about whether or not you want there to be a real competitor to Intel in the future. Maybe the Phenom II X4 940 should get the win here just to ensure we have an AMD to talk about in a couple of years..."<]/

    • khands
    • 14 years ago

    Yeah, the whole thing is kinda BS filled. The flagship should be about i7 920 prices, not the bottom end.

    • [SDG]Mantis
    • 14 years ago

    I’ve seen the i7 920 periodically for as low as $212. With an X58 available for as low as $165 AR, the P55 MB’s would need to be pretty cheap and the i5 would need to be competitive with a similarly clocked i7 for it to be worthwhile.

    It a P55 MB comes in under $100, then it might make sense. But I doubt that the i5 will compete with the i7 clock-for-clock.

    • wingless
    • 14 years ago

    Actually, I think you may be right. P55 mobos won’t be all that cheap

    l[http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1137415/dfi-offers-sneak-peak-intel-p55-motherboards<]§

    • glacius555
    • 14 years ago

    If these are the prices, why should one even think about Core i5+P55?? I bet Core i7 920 and X58 combo costs the same!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This

Share this post with your friends!