Details of Intel's Core i7 950 and 975 Extreme emerge

A few weeks back, Neowin reported that Intel would be phasing out their Core i7 940 and 965 Extreme CPUs on September 4, 2009. Now, details on their successors, the Core i7 950 and 975 Extreme, have trickled out from various unofficial listings of the CPUs.

PCs for everyone has a listing for the Core i7 950 CPU. If details they possess are accurate, the processor would retail for $649.00 and will be made available on May 31. It is available for pre-order on their website. The 950 is set to replace the 940 when it is phased out.

Specs of the Core i7 950:

  • Product Type: Desktop
  • Product Line: Core i7
  • Socket: LGA1366 Socket
  • Clock Speed: 3.06 GHz
  • QuickPath: 4.8 GT/s
  • L3 Cache: 8 MB Shared
  • L2 Cache: 4 x 256 KB
  • L1 Cache: 4 x 64 KB
  • Package Type: 1366-land Flip-Chip Land Grid Array (FC-LGA8)
  • Threads: 8
  • Manufacturing Process: 45 nm
  • Thermal Design Power: 130W
  • Thermal Specification: 67.9°C
  • Core Voltage: 0.8 - 1.375V
  • Intel VT: Yes
PROVANTAGE has a listing for the Core i7 975 Extreme CPU. The only details revealed in the listing are:
  • Clock Speed: 3.33 GHz
  • Socket: LGA1366
  • Cache: 8MB
  • QuickPath: 6.4 GT/s
There is no word on pricing, but according to Engadget, it is expected to retail for well over $1,100. The 975 Extreme is set to replace the 965 Extreme when it is phased out.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Buzz Corps / Ivy Worldwide logo design competition

Next Story

Microsoft confirms Silverlight 3 to launch on July 10

27 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

hmm... I'm thinking next step really is to start pushing for 4GHz and beyond... surely they can manage that. I feel the step between dual and quad isn't as big as it could be purely because 9/10 applications/games do not take full advantage of all the cores. Why add even more cores when the developers can't even keep up?? Let's just start making them faster clock for clock for the time being =)

Intel hit the nail in the donkey's arse with the x58 architecture.. mega fast throughput!

Dave_ek said,
hmm... I'm thinking next step really is to start pushing for 4GHz and beyond... surely they can manage that. I feel the step between dual and quad isn't as big as it could be purely because 9/10 applications/games do not take full advantage of all the cores. Why add even more cores when the developers can't even keep up?? Let's just start making them faster clock for clock for the time being =)

Intel hit the nail in the donkey's arse with the x58 architecture.. mega fast throughput!


why push for 4GHz? they should be pushing for more instructions per clock, not a faster clock...

Dave_ek said,
hmm... I'm thinking next step really is to start pushing for 4GHz and beyond...

Someone hasn't been reading CPU history... You want another Pentium 4 fiasco?

I'm sure the 975 could encode things fairly fast.

But there's the thing. When I've used MeGui in the past, only one thread has worked on encoding the video, so how can people say a quad core is faster than a dual core at this task?

Other encoders (such as those included with sony vegas) do support multi-threaded rendering. I had all 8 threads 100% on my 920 rendering. Not like a multi-threaded encoder is expensive compared with the cost of these CPUs.

smithy_dll said,
Other encoders (such as those included with sony vegas) do support multi-threaded rendering. I had all 8 threads 100% on my 920 rendering. Not like a multi-threaded encoder is expensive compared with the cost of these CPUs.

So if I encoded a DVD -> ??? with this Sony Vegas, it would use however many cores/threads the CPU has? In my E8300's case, it would use both cores together?

meh to overpriced for me to evan consider saying nice proccy not at this price tag $2220.41nzd hell i could build an entire amd setup for that have they not heard Smaller Faster Cheaper is what we want not more expensive hotter smaller faster

The Nehelim EX with 8 cores intel talked about a few days ago is still 45nm though. And while, sure it's a Xeon and part of the server family, the arch is the same afaik. I don't think Intel has to wait for 32nm to bring 8 core versions to the desktop.

But price is more the issue I'm sure. Before we look at more cores we need to get faster L3 in there, with less latency.

GP007 said,
The Nehelim EX with 8 cores intel talked about a few days ago is still 45nm though. And while, sure it's a Xeon and part of the server family, the arch is the same afaik. I don't think Intel has to wait for 32nm to bring 8 core versions to the desktop.

But price is more the issue I'm sure. Before we look at more cores we need to get faster L3 in there, with less latency.

Incorrect. Nehalem MP Xeon based processors are 45nm, yes, similar architecture, yes but only gainstown/bloomfield DP/UP Xeons use socket LGA-1366. The 8 core Xeon nehalem-EX MP a.k.a beckton is socket LGA-1576. Tbh i believe it's got more to do with fact 45nm and possibly LGA-1366 they can't fit/read the 2.3bn transistors it uses so that's why I am saying you probably won't see a core i7 line 8 core/16 thread processor until they shrink to 32nm in later 2010 on the tock.

I just ordered a 920... not like i have the money for the 940 and above, but is the 920 going to get replaced any time soon?

s0nic69 said,
I just ordered a 920... not like i have the money for the 940 and above, but is the 920 going to get replaced any time soon?

950 will replace 940 920 hasn't had replacement put forward though.

Many retailers may possess the processors, but they have not been officially announced to the public.

Also, PCCASEGEAR does not ship internationally.

bloody hell that's a lot i'm guessing thats in US dollars not Aussie$$
Anyone know if or when they are going to bring out a new Quad Core Range want to upgrade my PC any info would be appreciated

its gonna be that price to attract the people that 'must have' the latest CPUs.
As time goes on and they start working on the their next CPU (which is likely to be already), the prices will lower.