http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083

These blow the already super fast i7s out of the water, and overclock like crazy. Amazing.

---

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083

These blow the already super fast i7s out of the water, and overclock like crazy. Amazing.

You left out the best part - the 2600 is only about $300 - however, the motherboards with the correct socket are a bit pricey.

Fry's has a complete Lenovo system - I7 2600, 1T hard, 8 gig memory for just $999 - I normally build my own systems but at that price why bother>

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083

These blow the already super fast i7s out of the water, and overclock like crazy. Amazing.

You left out the best part - the 2600 is only about $300 - however, the motherboards with the correct socket are a bit pricey.

Fry's has a complete Lenovo system - I7 2600, 1T hard, 8 gig memory for just $999 - I normally build my own systems but at that price why bother>

Right now the cheapest at http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.phtml?sortby=pricelow&N=4294966996%2B4294945904&sht=Any&prt=NewProduct is about 100 bucks US and the cpu is about 300 bucks as you said.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083

These blow the already super fast i7s out of the water, and overclock like crazy. Amazing.

You left out the best part - the 2600 is only about $300 - however, the motherboards with the correct socket are a bit pricey.

Fry's has a complete Lenovo system - I7 2600, 1T hard, 8 gig memory for just $999 - I normally build my own systems but at that price why bother>

I might go Intel this time around...

---

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083

These blow the already super fast i7s out of the water, and overclock like crazy. Amazing.

You left out the best part - the 2600 is only about $300 - however, the motherboards with the correct socket are a bit pricey.

Fry's has a complete Lenovo system - I7 2600, 1T hard, 8 gig memory for just $999 - I normally build my own systems but at that price why bother>

I might go Intel this time around...

I would bet AMD will be come in with a much better priced system that although isn't as powerful is more bang for the buck. Sure a nice quad with HT can crunch alot of stuff but so can a 6 core system, and we are only talking 2 cores and they are HT, not real ones.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083

These blow the already super fast i7s out of the water, and overclock like crazy. Amazing.

You left out the best part - the 2600 is only about $300 - however, the motherboards with the correct socket are a bit pricey.

Fry's has a complete Lenovo system - I7 2600, 1T hard, 8 gig memory for just $999 - I normally build my own systems but at that price why bother>

I might go Intel this time around...

I would bet AMD will be come in with a much better priced system that although isn't as powerful is more bang for the buck. Sure a nice quad with HT can crunch alot of stuff but so can a 6 core system, and we are only talking 2 cores and they are HT, not real ones.

True. We'll see how the "bulldozer"s do from AMD.

---

Chile Guy -

Have you taken a serious look at the Bulldozer architecture? If I read things right it is made up of two core "modules" with each module sharing two integer and one 256 bit floating point unit which can be "split" into two 128 bit units.

I am not sure how that is going to work out with a math intensive application such as Rosetta. It is my understanding that the decision to go with a shared floating point unit was based on saving "real estate" on the chip itself. The documentation I have read indicates that Bulldozer will debut at 45nm feature size.

Because of the "bang for the buck" factor I have been primarily and AMD user on the systems I build. The only Intel chips I have at this time are on my Mac Book and my Mac Pro.

Comments were made in this thread about AMD's 6 cores vs Intel's 4 cores with HT - what I have seen is that my 2.66 Xeon quad with HT easily keeps up with my 6 core Phenom II systems clocked at about 3.1 - so whatever Intel is doing they are doing right.

With the advent of Sandy Bridge Intel appears to have really raised the bar - power consumption (and heat) are way down as is the dollar cost for their CPUs - though I do question their decision to integrate the GPU onto the CPU chip itself. I think that I would have rather seen the space used for additional cores.

I really need to motivate myself and get down and buy one of the new Intel setups - they may not bee the answer to all the world's problems but optimizing a system to run on one of them should provide a few evenings of entertainment.

Oh well, I guess procrastination can be a good thing - today's tech news carries a story about Intel having to recall the chip set used to support it's new line of processors due to issues with SATA ports 2 through 5.

Fry's has a complete Lenovo system - I7 2600, 1T hard, 8 gig memory for just $999 - I normally build my own systems but at that price why bother>

Any chance you can post a direct link to this system? I had a look on frys.com but wasn't able to find it. Am interested in comparing parts to see how much I could get it for in NZ

Oh well, I guess procrastination can be a good thing - today's tech news carries a story about Intel having to recall the chip set used to support it's new line of processors due to issues with SATA ports 2 through 5.

Source Fudzillia Dated Tuesday, 01 February 2011 11:07

Intel says that the issue has been corrected and that new versions of the chipset will ship late February, with full volume recovery expected in April. Unfortunately, it has been said that the entire thing will cost Intel as much as $1 billion in repairs, lost revenue and resulting delays.

---

Have a crunching good day!!

Here you go with the requested link:

http://www.frys.com/product/6490902?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG

Here you go with the requested link:

http://www.frys.com/product/6490902?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG

Thankyou

---

Have a crunching good day!!

Chile Guy -

Have you taken a serious look at the Bulldozer architecture? If I read things right it is made up of two core "modules" with each module sharing two integer and one 256 bit floating point unit which can be "split" into two 128 bit units.

I am not sure how that is going to work out with a math intensive application such as Rosetta. It is my understanding that the decision to go with a shared floating point unit was based on saving "real estate" on the chip itself. The documentation I have read indicates that Bulldozer will debut at 45nm feature size.

Because of the "bang for the buck" factor I have been primarily and AMD user on the systems I build. The only Intel chips I have at this time are on my Mac Book and my Mac Pro.

Comments were made in this thread about AMD's 6 cores vs Intel's 4 cores with HT - what I have seen is that my 2.66 Xeon quad with HT easily keeps up with my 6 core Phenom II systems clocked at about 3.1 - so whatever Intel is doing they are doing right.

With the advent of Sandy Bridge Intel appears to have really raised the bar - power consumption (and heat) are way down as is the dollar cost for their CPUs - though I do question their decision to integrate the GPU onto the CPU chip itself. I think that I would have rather seen the space used for additional cores.

I really need to motivate myself and get down and buy one of the new Intel setups - they may not bee the answer to all the world's problems but optimizing a system to run on one of them should provide a few evenings of entertainment.

Yes. I read something along these lines in Wikipedia a few days ago. Might have to go intel if I build a new system (or replace CPU/MOBO/RAM in my current desktop). I'm definitely buying this from the US tho. For some odd reason, even tho Chile has Free Trade Agreements with almost everyone, imports like these are still about 1.5x-2x more expensive than back in the US.

Also, 4 cores with HT, should perform closely like a 6 core. I always take the extra virtual core from the HT as 50% of a real one.

---