Intel: Core i7 to Be Up to 52% Faster Compared to Core 2 Quad


Recommended Posts

So how do you interpret the "52% increase in CPU processing power in 3D gaming", considering it's a constantly shifting balance between the CPU and GPU under different environments, resolutions, and effects settings, for different games and game levels? It doesn't make any sense at all in that case :D

It actually makes much more sense if it means playing 3D games in software rendering mode, like those Red Mars CPU benchmarks in 3DMark 06 :laugh:

well the CPU is still working. A benchmark of the game may not be accurate but you can be sure its something Intel looks into when designing the chips. You'd look at the efficiency and time gaming related calculations take to perform. So yeah, I'm not proposing a single benchmark will ultimatly show these gains at all but it certainly doesn't mean the result should be indicating that Intel predicts a 50% overall fps figure in a game.

Yes, GPU, resolution and all that changes too but it'd be the raw calculations regarding games I'm sure this is talking about. You'd need to use a synthetic benchmark to test it anyway likely which everyone knows isn't always a good guide to actual in game gains.

edit: Simply put, if people think its possible that video encoding related calculations are 40% more effiecient why is it unrealistic that calculations related to gaming operations cant be in the same ball park? As I said above, I believe 52% is purely about processing power and not the real world performance of the app overall so it makes sense if encoding can get a huge gain (which some people said isnt unrealistic) then the games calculations too can benefit. It also goes without saying that with larabree in development (or whatever their GPU solution is named atm), then Intel will be looking very closely at ways to optimise anything related to gaming.

Edited by Smigit
When I see something like that I interpret it as 52% CPU processing power, not as a 52% overall performance of FPS. Obviously the overall game won't be boosted by 52%, that goes without saying given most are GPU not CPU dependent. I personally think some people are misinterpreting that 52% figure as meaning FPS.

Even 52 is likely a tall order in relation to pure CPU grunt, but I would expect a fairly considerable improvement.

It specifically says 3D gaming, however. While it may not result in a 52% increase in FPS, it's going to be an increase. Previews of the Nehalem said it's nothing like that at all.

yeah, everybody forget how was Core2Duo vs P4 and latest (in that time) AMD when some games got big increase on fps

remember for ex FEAR that got almost 60fps more? probably will not happen something like that now, they are probably referring to about CPU overload in different directions, will make probably gain many fps but not anything like P4->Core2Duo

but... anything is possible, depends on the optimizations

the new micro-architecture in its first implementation provides roughly 52% more performance at the same clock-speed compared to currently used Core 2 micro-architecture.

Clock speed isn't everything. The technology that makes up the CPU is everything.

I'm currently using an AMD user but I'll probably go back to Intel (Had a Celeron D before) once this is released. Curious as to what the different models are. Is the cheapest going to be 3.20GHz? Or is that the highest?

For Intel to Use a Integrated memory controller (like AMD) that supports DDR3 with three channels of memory. so 6 Slots can be used, Hyper-threading each cores can process two threads so 4Core looks like 8 core on a single CPU. Gaming , PhotoShop and Video Editing will be better on a Intel Core i7 system.

what i am waiting for is Nehalem-EX Server Version Quad channel FB-DIMM2 Memory Controller SkullTrail II will be my next upgrade.

Clock speed isn't everything. The technology that makes up the CPU is everything.

I'm currently using an AMD user but I'll probably go back to Intel (Had a Celeron D before) once this is released. Curious as to what the different models are. Is the cheapest going to be 3.20GHz? Or is that the highest?

lol no , 3.2GHZ is core i7 Extreme edition . i hope if it really was like what you said :woot:

but damn core i7 EE would cost ~14xx$

core i7 945 2.9GHZ ~7xx$

core i7 920 2.6GHZ ~35x$

acourding to this

For Intel to Use a Integrated memory controller (like AMD) that supports DDR3 with three channels of memory. so 6 Slots can be used, Hyper-threading each cores can process two threads so 4Core looks like 8 core on a single CPU. Gaming , PhotoShop and Video Editing will be better on a Intel Core i7 system.

what i am waiting for is Nehalem-EX Server Version Quad channel FB-DIMM2 Memory Controller SkullTrail II will be my next upgrade.

why would you need core i7 Multi-socket(Quad socket/processor ,octo socket/processor ) :| , anyway skulltrail is DP(dual processor ) platform

lol no , 3.2GHZ is core i7 Extreme edition . i hope if it really was like what you said :woot:

but damn core i7 EE would cost ~14xx$

core i7 945 2.9GHZ ~7xx$

core i7 920 2.6GHZ ~35x$

Holy crap. Wayy to expensive. I'll stick to AMD for now... :(

So I've been hearing about these types of speed increases for awhile now, but what I hadn't heard anything about was price. If these things are going to cost a grand, then I sure am happy I bought my computer when I did, because I'll be sticking with my processor for quite awhile now. It isn't the sheer price that phases me to the point where I can say that... it's the fact that, on top of that, I'd be needing to buy a new motherboard, DDR3 memory, and even a new heatsink for the processor, since the socket size switch makes all the stuff I just bought useless.

Don't get me wrong, I am going to upgrade eventually, if maybe only because I love the chance at working on a new build. But I was always thinking my build would be an immediate thing. Now I know I'll at least be waiting for USB 3.0.

lol no , 3.2GHZ is core i7 Extreme edition . i hope if it really was like what you said :woot:

but damn core i7 EE would cost ~14xx$

core i7 945 2.9GHZ ~7xx$

core i7 920 2.6GHZ ~35x$

acourding to this

So I've been hearing about these types of speed increases for awhile now, but what I hadn't heard anything about was price. If these things are going to cost a grand, then I sure am happy I bought my computer when I did, because I'll be sticking with my processor for quite awhile now. It isn't the sheer price that phases me to the point where I can say that... it's the fact that, on top of that, I'd be needing to buy a new motherboard, DDR3 memory, and even a new heatsink for the processor, since the socket size switch makes all the stuff I just bought useless.

Don't get me wrong, I am going to upgrade eventually, if maybe only because I love the chance at working on a new build. But I was always thinking my build would be an immediate thing. Now I know I'll at least be waiting for USB 3.0.

need i to say more ..

According to this, the Intel Core i7-940 (2.93GHz) and Intel Core i7-920 (2.66GHz) are nearly the same, except in clock speed. The i7-940 is only 0.27GHz faster and it's $353 more expensive. That doesn't make sense to me.

Heck, I'll be happy with half of that in improvement, honestly. I'll believe these numbers when I see some real tests done, but I'm already preparing to rebuild my whole rig about a year from now, complete with a mid-range i7 Quad Core, a new mobo, and at least 4GBs of DDR3 RAM. I'll likely be looking at a new video card by then too. Granted, this will probably be delayed a bit by buying Windows 7 next year, but that's ok. My rig will remain fairly solid for at least another 18 months. :)

According to this, the Intel Core i7-940 (2.93GHz) and Intel Core i7-920 (2.66GHz) are nearly the same, except in clock speed. The i7-940 is only 0.27GHz faster and it's $353 more expensive. That doesn't make sense to me.

Hence why I'll get the cheaper one and overclock the heck out of it. :D I managed to overclock my Core 2 Duo E6750 from 2.66GHz to 3.6GHz on air. I plan to run that i7 as hard as I can. ;)

well the CPU is still working. A benchmark of the game may not be accurate but you can be sure its something Intel looks into when designing the chips. You'd look at the efficiency and time gaming related calculations take to perform. So yeah, I'm not proposing a single benchmark will ultimatly show these gains at all but it certainly doesn't mean the result should be indicating that Intel predicts a 50% overall fps figure in a game.

Yes, GPU, resolution and all that changes too but it'd be the raw calculations regarding games I'm sure this is talking about. You'd need to use a synthetic benchmark to test it anyway likely which everyone knows isn't always a good guide to actual in game gains.

heh, you are not making any sense here. There's no way to measure this so-called "CPU processing power in 3D gaming" of yours. What's the "CPU processing power in 3D gaming"? is it AI, physics, data loading, data decoding, or what? That basically covers everything out there, and varies greatly from game to game. In one 3D game it may have complicated AI but simple physics, in another 3D game it may have complicated physics but simple AI, and the "CPU processing power in 3D gaming" are about completely different tasks, favoring completely different CPU architectures. The "raw calculations regarding games" is completely undetermined, so talking about a certain percentage of "performance boost" in "raw calculations regarding games" is completely non-sense. :D

edit: Simply put, if people think its possible that video encoding related calculations are 40% more effiecient why is it unrealistic that calculations related to gaming operations cant be in the same ball park? As I said above, I believe 52% is purely about processing power and not the real world performance of the app overall so it makes sense if encoding can get a huge gain (which some people said isnt unrealistic) then the games calculations too can benefit. It also goes without saying that with larabree in development (or whatever their GPU solution is named atm), then Intel will be looking very closely at ways to optimise anything related to gaming.

Because video encoding is 100% done on the CPU, so we can measure the 40% increase in performance for sure. On the other hand, there's no way to measure the "calculations related to gaming operations" since there's no such fixed set of "calculations related to gaming operations", thus it's unrealistic to talk about "performance boost" percentages regarding "calculations related to gaming operations", and it can't be determined at all. So by your interpretation of that line, Intel must be pulling some random numbers out of their asses :laugh:

Yes it isn't unrealistic for encoding to gain 40%, and it isn't unrealistic for gaming to gain some performance, but it's completely unrealistic and ridiculous to pull out a 52% figure out there, no matter how you look at it. It either can't have that much of increase (52% fps increase with 3D accelerated graphics), or it's absolutely impossible to measure the increase in any determinable manner (your so-called interpreted 52% boost in "calculations related to gaming operations"), or it's just mostly useless (52% fps increase in software rendering mode) :D

And Larrabee is about 3D graphics, so even if Larrabee can have great improvement over nVidia and ATi graphics cards, it has absolutely zero relation to the Core i7 CPU's performance improvement over C2Q's in 3D games.

According to this, the Intel Core i7-940 (2.93GHz) and Intel Core i7-920 (2.66GHz) are nearly the same, except in clock speed. The i7-940 is only 0.27GHz faster and it's $353 more expensive. That doesn't make sense to me.

yea but there are always premium for next to the best cpu

ex.

330$ 570$

Q9550 Vs Q9650 ( next to QX9700)

2.8 3GHZ

on the old days

266 Vs 560$

Q6600 Vs Q6700 (next to QX6850)

2.4 GHZ 2.6GHZ

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why Delta Chat is the best decentralized messenger you have probably never tried by Paul Hill There is no shortage of messaging apps out there; we have WhatsApp, Messenger, and Telegram, just to name a few. While Meta has taken steps to incorporate encryption into Messenger and WhatsApp, they still leave a lot to be desired. If you are in the market for a messaging app that promotes security, privacy, and optional anonymity, you'll want to read what I have to say about Delta Chat. For those not familiar with Delta Chat, rather than relying on centralized servers as you do with Facebook Messenger, it relies on email. Essentially, it is a chat interface that feels like a messaging app, but secretly in the background, it is firing off emails. In the past, you used to have to sign in with your email account. When you sent messages to people, it would just be sending encrypted messages to their inbox, which their Delta Chat client would decrypt. When I first learned about Delta Chat, it required users to sign in with an email account, but I was pleasantly surprised upon trying it in 2026 that this is no longer a requirement, or the preferred method was to use the app. Recently, I’ve tried UAD-ng on my old Nokia 3.4 to disable most of the Google apps because the bootloader is locked, and this is the next best option. While finding replacement apps in F-Droid, I came across Delta Chat again, and it has undergone quite a big change since I last used it, with its new chatmail relays, which no longer require you to sign in to your own email account, providing anonymity, and they offer greater security. Android and Desktop Delta Chat apps. Not only does it run on my de-googled phone, but it also works on desktop computers and iOS, making it truly ubiquitous. For me, Delta Chat is a wonderful alternative messenger because it gives you more control. It supports switching between different profiles, which you can set up super quickly; you don’t register a username, you don’t register a password. The only thing you do have is a random string email address on a chatmail relay (which you don’t have to memorize). To maintain access to your profile, you just need to add a second device to your account via QR code or make a backup of your account, which you can restore later. Fail to do these, your account is gone - as it should be if you don’t want to leave accounts that could get hacked later on. My decision to block Google stuff on my Nokia was done for practical reasons; the device sucked when it launched, and it sucks even more now. The nice thing about F-Droid and the apps within is that they’re usually lightweight, free of bloat, and work well on that device. What was inconvenient for me was that it was hard to send messages from that device, say if I wanted to copy a code over to my main phone or send family members a link from that device. That’s when I decided to look at the available chat apps and saw Delta Chat. Another nice thing about Delta Chat is its notifications. Some messaging apps rely on Google’s ecosystem for notification transport on Android; however, with Delta Chat, it can use Google’s solutions if you have Play Services or MicroG installed. Otherwise, it is able to keep a background connection to the chatmail relay server so that you can get notified when you receive a message. As free software, the code of Delta Chat is open for all who want to take it and build upon it. In the future, if the developers of Delta Chat make a catastrophically bad decision and take the app in an undesirable direction, users can take the code and fork the project. This contrasts with closed-source apps from corporations that can take their products in any direction they like. By relying on free software instead of closed-source programs, you actually control your computing. I’ve spoken at length about how running this type of software is like owning your own home rather than renting it. The same applies here; if you use Delta Chat, you don’t need to worry about it going away in the future. Whether it is Telegram, WhatsApp, or Messenger, you are required to register a username and password to use these services. A major flaw in this design is that anyone can try various passwords and potentially break into your account with your complete chat history intact. Sure, there is encryption in Messenger, where you need a second PIN and two-factor authentication in Telegram, but breaches happen all the time. Unlike before, when you used to sign in to your email account to send and receive messages, the primary way to do it now is to create an account on a chatmail relay. The resulting email address is a random string followed by the name of the relay you pick. This means you can start and begin adding contacts Without a username and password, you either need to ensure you have a backup or at least one device running your Delta Chat profile. The primary way to log in on another device is to go to the settings and add a second device. Then, you’ll just scan a QR code with your new device, and it’ll log in to your account and sync all your chat history and contacts. To end users, Delta Chat just looks like any instant messenger; however, it is really sending your messages as encrypted emails to your contact. This is pretty cool from a censorship perspective, as it makes the service more difficult to block. Previously, the main way to use the app was by logging in with email, but nowadays, it’s recommended that you use chatmail relays. Chatmail relays temporarily hold messages in case your device is offline. They are cheap, simple servers that don’t store data as group states. Other information, like your name and avatar, only exists on your device and the devices of those you share your contact information with. The relays are also decentralized and operated by various groups and individuals. It is even possible to set up your own chatmail relay, but most people will want to use one hosted elsewhere. To keep your messages secure, Delta Chat uses a secure subset of the OpenPGP standard that gives you automatic end-to-end encryption. It also uses Secure-Join to exchange encryption setup information through QR-code scanning or invite links. Autocrypt is also used to automatically establish end-to-end encryption between contacts and all members of group chat, but sometime this year Autocrypt v2 will be rolled out, bringing post-quantum resistant encryption and forward secrecy. The Delta Chat FAQ is an interesting read that explains many more details about the app. Credit: Pexels Delta Chat is unique among messaging apps because it is built on email, a technology that’s decades old and isn’t going anywhere soon. What’s more is that email is not centralized either, so it’s far more difficult for any authoritarian regime to disrupt the Delta Chat app. I haven’t spoken too much about features yet, so I will do that now. Delta Chat allows you to do one-on-one chats, group chats, and create channels. It also supports file sharing and making audio and video calls when chatting one-to-one, but it’s not available for group chats right now. At the time of writing, the calling functionality is disabled and can be enabled in Settings > Advanced > Debug Calls. I have used the video calling feature, and the quality is excellent. It works over WebRTC, another open standard. The app also lets you send voice notes, enables disappearing messages, and has its own app ecosystem. I did try playing chess one time there, but it was a bit spotty; though, we did manage to complete the game with a victory for me. To add people to Delta Chat, you can either give them your Delta Chat link or your QR code to scan. These are the only ways to add users, so you won't have any spam bots bothering you. If the people you want to chat with don't have the app yet, just send them your link, and it will take them to a webpage where they can install the app and then add you. It's really quick for them to install it and get started, which is nice. Credit: Microsoft. The Majorana 2 quantum chip unveiled in 2026. I do not think quantum computers are too far out now, and I do hope that Delta Chat is able to push out Autocrypt v2 sooner, rather than later, so bad actors do not attempt to collect encrypted communications and then decrypt them in the future using quantum computers. By getting people’s messages post-quantum-safe now, users won’t have to worry when quantum computers start cracking legacy encryption. Overall, I would recommend this app to people who are already past WhatsApp and Messenger and have perhaps begun using apps like Telegram or Session. It shares a lot of characteristics with these apps and goes a lot further than Telegram in terms of security. By being based on email, it is also resistant to censorship, and the lack of a username and password makes you anonymous (if you want to be) and safe from brute force password cracking attempts. Let me know in the comments if you’ve tried Delta Chat recently. Do you think it's a good bulwark against governments that are tightening their grip on the internet?
    • Putin was behind Farage/Brexit and behind Trump/MAGA. Different idiot lying beasts, same fascist master. Same screwed up results for both nations.
    • For me the Final Fantasy games, Langrisser I & II, Hardspace: Shipbreaker, Horizon Forbidden West Complete Edition, Metaphor: ReFantazio and LUNAR Remastered Collection
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      465
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      217
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      155
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!