QX9770? What's new?
The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650, released last month and available to buy in limited quantities right now, debuted the Penryn core. Ticking along at 3.0GHz and interfacing with the chipset via a 1333MHz FSB, its clockspeeds weren't any faster than the previous Extreme Edition, the Kentsfield-based 'QX6850. As we saw in our review of the first Penryn, any performance speed-ups were directly attributable to the enhanced core.
The Core 2 Extreme QX9770 operates at 3.2GHz but, as we mentioned on the first page, increases northbridge-to-processor interconnect (aka front-side bus) to 1600MHz, or 12.8GiB/s, fattening the data pipe and allowing more traffic along the 'highway'. QX9770 will be available in Q1 2008, Intel has said.
We already know that Intel's performance X38 chipset currently supports the range of dual- and quad-core 1333MHz FSB processors, and a number of motherboard partners unofficially validate their boards to run at 1600MHz FSB - the very speed of the QX9770's pipe.
However, in a move to extract even more money from your pockets, you will be able to purchase mainboards based on the soon-to-be-released X48 chipset, with official 1600MHz FSB support and scant little else over and above the already-expensive X38. Indeed, we've heard motherboard partners moan at the $20 price premium of the X48 chipset, so expect £200 boards that are laden with everything but the kitchen sink.
The optimum combination for pure performance, then, will be the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 sat atop of an X48 motherboard and fed by DDR3-1600+ XMP-compatible memory. Take 4GiB of such memory and, going by current prices, you'll be paying around £1,400 for the subsystem alone: yikes!
Let's contextualise the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770's attributes with ye olde table.
| Processor name | Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 | Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 | Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 | Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 | AMD Phenom 9600 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Form factor | LGA775 | LGA775 | LGA775 | LGA775 | AM2+ | AM2 |
| Manufacturing process | 45nm | 45nm | 65nm | 65nm | 65nm | 90nm |
| Die size | 214mm² (2 x 107mm) | 214mm² (2 x 107mm) | 286mm² (2 x 143mm) | 143mm² | 285mm² (monolithic) | 219mm² |
| Transistors | 840m | 840m | 582m | 291m | 450m | 243m |
| Physical execution cores | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 |
| Inst. per clock | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
| Pipeline stages | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 12 | 12 |
| Clock speed | 3.2GHz | 3.0GHz | 3.0GHz | 3.0GHz | 2.4GHz | 3.2GHz |
| FSB/HT | 400MHz (1600MHz QDR) | 333MHz (1333MHz QDR) | 333MHz (1333MHz QDR) | 333MHz (1333MHz QDR) | 200MHz | 200MHz |
| Memory support | DDR2/3, 800MHz/1066MHz+, DC | DDR2/3, 800MHz/1066MHz, DC | DDR2/3, 800MHz/1066MHz, DC | DDR2/3, 800MHz/1066MHz, DC | DDR2, 800MHz/1066MHz, DC | DDR2, 800MHz, DC |
| L1 cache total | 128KiB data + 128KiB code | 128KiB data + 128KiB code | 128KiB data + 128KiB code | 64KiB data + 64KiB code | 128KiB data + 128KiB code | 128KiB data + 128KiB code |
| L2 cache total | 12MiB | 12MiB | 8MiB | 4MiB | 2MiB | 2MiB |
| L3 cache | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 2MiB | N/A |
| ISA | x86, x86-64, SSE-SSSE4.1 | x86, x86-64, SSE-SSSE4.1 | x86, x86-64, SSE-SSSE3 | x86, x86-64, SSE-SSSE3 | x86, x86-64, SSE-SSE4a | x86, x86-64, SSE-SSE3 |
| TDP | 136W | 130W | 130W | 65W | 95W | 125W |
| Operating voltage | 1.1-1.25V | 1.1-1.2V | 1.2-1.3625V | 0.965-1.35V | 1.1-1.25V | 1.3-1.35V |
| Current price | £750 | £600+ | £600 (phased out) | £165 | £180 | £115 |
The QX9770 is multiplier-unlocked, just like the QX9650; that's what significant expenditure buys you. Thinking it through logically, owners of the usurped QX9650 shouldn't feel short-changed, for a 30-second play in the motherboard's BIOS will turn your processor into the 'brand-new' QX9770.
We've added the AMD Phenom 9600's vital stats to the table for illustrative purposes only. Products should be performance-compared on a like-for-like basis, so the Phenom's £180 pricing, around 25 per cent of the QX9770's, makes pure benchmark comparisons kind of pointless. Had it been priced at, say, £600 we would have no hesitation in adding it to the processor-vs-processor mix.
