Recommended Posts

just came across this and thought i might type it out and people may find it useful.

They will be listed in this order:

Model | Release Date | Base technology | Production technology | Clock speed | Number of cores | L2 Cache | FSB [front side bus speed]

Intel Pentium E2140 | August 2007 | Core 2 Duo [allendale] | 65nm | 1.4GHz | 2 | 1MB | 800MHz

Intel Pentium E2160 | August 2007 | Core 2 Duo [allendale] | 65nm | 1.6GHz | 2 | 1MB | 800MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E4300 | January 2007 | Core 2 Duo [conroe] | 65nm | 1.8GHz | 2 | 2MB | 800MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E4200 | April 2007 | Core 2 Duo [conroe] | 65nm | 1.6GHz | 2 | 2MB | 800MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E4400 | April 2007 | Core 2 Duo [conroe] | 65nm | 2.0GHz | 2 | 2MB | 800MHz

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 | March 2007 | Core 2 Extreme [kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.4GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,066MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E6540 | Q3 | Core 2 Duo [bearlake?/wolfdale] | 45nm | 2.33GHz | 2 | 4MB | 1,333MHz [*]

Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 | Q3 | Core 2 Duo [bearlake?/wolfdale] | 45nm | 2.33GHz | 2 | 4MB | 1,333MHz [*]

Intel Core 2 Duo E6650 | August 2007 | Core 2 Duo [wolfdale] | 45nm | 2.33GHz | 2 | 4 or 6MB | 1,333MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 | August 2007 | Core 2 Duo [wolfdale] | 45nm | 2.66GHz | 2 | 4 or 6MB | 1,333MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E6800 | August 2007 | Core 2 Duo [wolfdale] | 45nm | 2.93GHz | 2 | 4 or 6MB | 1,066MHz

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 | August 2007 | Core 2 Duo [wolfdale] | 45nm | 3.0GHz | 2 | 4 or 6MB | 1,333MHz

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 | January 2007 | Core 2 Quad [Kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.4GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,066MHz

Intel Core 2 Quad | October 2007 | Core 2 Quad [Penryn] | 45nm | 3.46-3.73GHz | 4 | 12MB | 1,600MHz

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 | April 2007 | Core 2 Extreme [Kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.93GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,066MHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ | January 2007 | Windsor | 90nm | 3.0GHz | 2 | 2MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ | January 2007 | Windsor | 90nm | 2.8GHz | 2 | 2MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5400+ | March 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.8GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ | March 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.7GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ | January 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.6GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ | January 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.5GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ | January 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.3GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ | January 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.1GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ | August 2007 | Brisbane | 65nm | 2.8GHz | 2 | 1MB | 1GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X4 | April 2007 | Barcelona | 65nm | 2.5GHz | 4 | 512*4/2MB | 1.4GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X4 | August 2007 | Altair/Agena/K10 | 65nm | 2.7-2.9GHz | 4 | 4MB | 2.6GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 | August 2007 | Kuma/K10 | 65nm | 2.7-2.9GHz | 2 | 4MB | 4GHz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 2900+ | Q3 2007 + | Kuma AM2+ | 65nm | 2.9GHz | 2 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 2700+ | Q3 2007 + | Kuma AM2+ | 65nm | 2.7GHz | 2 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 2500+ | Q3 2007 + | Kuma AM2+ | 65nm | 2.5GHz | 2 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 2300+ | Q3 2007 + | Kuma AM2+ | 65nm | 2.3GHz | 2 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 2100+ | Q3 2007 + | Kuma AM2+ | 65nm | 2.1GHz | 2 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 1900+ | Q3 2007 + | Kuma AM2+ | 65nm | 1.9GHz | 2 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X4 2500+ | Q3 2007 + | Agena AM2+ | 65nm | 2.5GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X4 2300+ | Q3 2007 + | Agena AM2+ | 65nm | 2.3GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X4 2100+ | Q3 2007 + | Agena AM2+ | 65nm | 2.1GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 X4 1900+ | Q3 2007 + | Agena AM2+ | 65nm | 1.9GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Opteron 1266 | Q3 2007 + | Barcelona AM2+ | 65nm | 2.1GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Opteron 1268SE | Q3 2007 + | Barcelona AM2+ | 65nm | 2.3GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Opteron 1270SE | Q3 2007 + | Barcelona AM2+ | 65nm | 2.5GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

AMD Athlon 64 FX | Q3 2007 + | Agena FX QuadFX | 65nm | 2.5GHz | 4 | 2MB-L3 | + [**]

+ = TBA [To be announced] (http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/6277/amdk10sm4.jpg)

[**]added - 03/11/2007 2007.

[*] added - 03/13/2007

If anything gets changed or updated please post and will change them or a mod can change them, but have solid proof before requesting.

Cheers. :)

Edited by Digix
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/545104-upcoming-cpus-for-2007/
Share on other sites

Umm... the Barcelona chips are a native quad-core design... :blink:

Barcelona is AMD's first quad-core processor, featuring four cores on a single 65nm die. Unlike Intel's quad-core Kentsfield, Barcelona is not made up of two dual core die, which is why AMD calls it a "native" quad core solution.

SOURCE

Intel Core 2 Quad | October 2007 | Core 2 Quad [yorkfield] | 45nm | 3.46-3.73GHz | 4 | 12MB | 1,333MHz ???

Okay... let's see. My computer is still brand new, and I will skip this next generation... meaning that.. I will get something MUCH better than this? hey.. it's awesome! Though I'm pretty sure they will continue to add notebook CPUs into iMacs, so I'm not really sure I'll get something THAT better. I know Santa Rosa is supposed to be next, but the cache and bus they wanna add to these Intel Core 2 Quad is just incredible.

I can't believe that AMD cannot keep up with Intel with their 45nm transistors... if AMD goes away, there won't be any competition... at all. This is bad for AMD and for us! Oh well, at least I encouraged AMD for the 3 processors before my Core 2 Duo, I shouldn't feel this bad.

(off-topic : digix, a mac CAN right click since the very beginning... you're misinformed)

(off-topic : digix, a mac CAN right click since the very beginning... you're misinformed)

Indeed, that's why it's a joke because for long time i dunno if still applies now i'm not a heavy mac user most mac mouses had the single large button on it.

prices will be the same field pretty much around what they are with what they are now plus i'm not american or know how processor sales market justify prices so if someone wants to write up an appropriate list of predicted prices i'll be more then happy to add them.

Anyone knows if the 680i chipset is compatible with the 1333Mhz FSB processors?

Yes it does but might need BIOS update. All you need is correct RAM speed circuitry (RAM/FSB divide ratio) to support 1333MHz. 965 could support if it has correct RAM/FSB divide ratio as well (that's why you can see all these reports of 965 going over 1500MHz FSB but could not support E6x50 series), and actually some 965 with newer circuits to support the required ratio do support 1333 MHz FSB.

Edited by kenipnet

well i think we just add what we know so far in terms of prices. Like what was released on the front page yesterday. Which is:

$266 for E6850

183 for E6750

163 for E6550

I cant believe the 6850 will be 50 bucks cheaper than what the 6600 is now. That just seems too low.

October 2007 seems like the month to get a new computer :D

Intel Core 2 Quad | October 2007 | Core 2 Quad [yorkfield] | 45nm | 3.46-3.73GHz | 4 | 12MB | 1,333MHz

I'm guessing that it's 3 MB of L2 Cache per core?

I wonder what the pricing is going to be like however... How much heat energy do the 45nm cores expend compared to the older ones?

well i think we just add what we know so far in terms of prices. Like what was released on the front page yesterday. Which is:

$266 for E6850

183 for E6750

163 for E6550

I cant believe the 6850 will be 50 bucks cheaper than what the 6600 is now. That just seems too low.

not really, considering Q3 is when intel should be moving to 45nm (so the 65nm chips would drop in price anyway), but also because Q3 is when AMD are supposed to be releasing their new CPU's. Prehaps Intel knows something we do not?

  • 4 weeks later...
well i think we just add what we know so far in terms of prices. Like what was released on the front page yesterday. Which is:

$266 for E6850

183 for E6750

163 for E6550

I cant believe the 6850 will be 50 bucks cheaper than what the 6600 is now. That just seems too low.

That's pretty cheap for a processor like that. :blink:

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 | January 2007 | Core 2 Quad [Kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.4GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,333MHz[**]

Intel Core 2 Quad | October 2007 | Core 2 Quad [yorkfield] | 45nm | 3.46-3.73GHz | 4 | 12MB | 1,333MHz

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 | April 2007 | Core 2 Extreme [Kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.93GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,333MHz[**]

The above are wrong. Change those to

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 | January 2007 | Core 2 Quad [Kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.4GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,066MHz

Intel Core 2 Quad | October 2007 | Core 2 Quad Penryn | 45nm | 3.46-3.73GHz | 4 | 12MB | 1,600MHz

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 | April 2007 | Core 2 Extreme [Kentsfield] | 65nm | 2.93GHz | 4 | 8MB | 1,066MHz

Changes made in Bold.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm not aware of this issue, but to help the other guys.  What version of Android are you using? Did you try a different browser? To see if Edge is the issue here.
    • I agree when are you going to read this (really poor BTW) article? Here is a better article so you actually know what is going on and answers questions you had in other comments --> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/05/speed-boosting-low-latency-profile-is-one-of-the-improvements-coming-to-windows-11/ It is unclear if one will be able to disable the new profile at this point but I am not seeing any reason why one would.
    • I disagree; they come off very "bitchy" and "whiny". Make a great product and combine that with a great price (free) and people will come over to your side. Or build it and they will come as they say. Constantly trying to get attention by complaining all the time, will turn people off to your product.
    • It use to be a nightmare, with LibreOffice supporting a newer draft ODF standard by default, and Microsoft Office supporting the older non-draft standard. Now that they both support the same version of ODF, they should be interoperable.
    • Brave Browser 1.91.171 by Razvan Serea Brave Browser is a lightning-fast, secure web browser that stands out from the competition with its focus on privacy, security, and speed. With features like HTTPS Everywhere and built-in tracker blocking, Brave keeps your online activities safe from prying eyes. Brave is one of the safest browsers on the market today. It blocks third-party data storage. It protects from browser fingerprinting. And it does all this by default. Speed - Brave is built on Chromium, the same technology that powers Google Chrome, and is optimized for speed, providing a fast and responsive browsing experience. Brave Browser also features Brave Rewards, a system that rewards users with Basic Attention Tokens (BAT) for viewing opt-in ads. This innovative system provides an alternative revenue model for content creators and a way to support the Brave community. SlimBrave Neo takes all the good things about Brave and makes them even better by keeping everything clean, light, and privacy-focused. It removes the extra clutter, turns off features you might not need, and cuts down on anything that could slow you down or collect unnecessary data. Because it relies on simple settings and policies instead of modifying the browser itself, you still get full Brave compatibility—just in a smoother, lighter, and more privacy-friendly package. Brave Browser 1.91.171 changelog: General Fixed Cardano not being disabled on upgrade to Brave Origin. Upgraded Chromium to 149.0.7827.103. Origin Removed “Survey Panelist” setting from brave://settings/privacy. Fixed P3A and usage ping under brave://settings/privacy being displayed on first launch on Linux. Upgraded Chromium to 149.0.7827.103. Download: Brave Browser 64-bit | 1.2 MB (Freeware) Download: Brave Browser 32-bit View: Brave Homepage | Offline Installers | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Jamswaz earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Jamswaz earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      Marzoid went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Community Regular
      coch went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • One Year In
      slackerzz earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      517
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      189
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      156
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      84
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      75
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!