facebook rss twitter

Intel to introduce Core i5 680 and Core i7 870s processors

by Parm Mann on 22 March 2010, 11:26

Tags: Intel (NASDAQ:INTC)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qawpv

Add to My Vault: x

Intel's wicked-fast Core i7 980X Extreme Edition CPU has occupied both headlines and hearts in recent weeks, but for those unwilling to set aside the best part of a grand for a CPU upgrade, the chip giant has a few other launches up its sleeves.

According to Chinese newspaper Digitimes, Intel will extend its line of Core i5 parts with a new range-topping addition, the Core i5 680.

Said to be clocked at 3.6GHz, the dual-core processor will feature 256KB of L2 cache per core and 4MB of L3 cache.

Built on Intel's 32nm Clarkdale process, the Core i5 680 will feature 45nm integrated graphics and looks set to become Intel's fastest dual-core processor to date. Pricing in thousand-unit quantities is rumoured to be $284 (approximately Ā£190 excluding VAT).

Further up the scale, Intel will also introduce a new Lynnfield-based part in the form of the Core i7 870s. The energy-efficient chip will retain the feature set of the existing Core i7 870 but will be clocked at a lower 2.67GHz, enabling it to carry a TDP rating of just 82W, as opposed to 95W for the full-fat 2.93GHz version.

The low-power part is expected to ship soon priced at $560 in thousand-unit quanitities.



HEXUS Forums :: 7 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
So the i7 870s is going to be slower than the i7 860? That numbering scheme makes sense then.
kalniel
So the i7 870s is going to be slower than the i7 860? That numbering scheme makes sense then.
Ah, but it's going to be a *lot* more expensive, so in terms of pricing the numbering *does* make sense. No-one's going to spend more money on a lower-numbered processor, because we all know that the higher the number, the better it is :lol:
I believe the idea is to have a lower base clock so the powersaving stuff can reduce speeds even lower when idle, but to have a similar peak speed via turbo-boost or whatever. Still seems a bit iffy to me, but I think that's intel's plan.
no more 32nm parts? i would have thought that the i5 would have used 32nm
semo
no more 32nm parts? i would have thought that the i5 would have used 32nm

Try reading the article ;)

Irien
I believe the idea is to have a lower base clock so the powersaving stuff can reduce speeds even lower when idle, but to have a similar peak speed via turbo-boost or whatever. Still seems a bit iffy to me, but I think that's intel's plan.

Have you got a link? I think that's the first I've heard of S series chips having a higher turbo boost relative to base speed.