The e5200 is Out

[Memulator91k]

Newegg.com - Intel Core 2 Duo E5200 Wolfdale 2.5GHz 2MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor - Processors - Desktops

With a 12.5 Multiplier and its based on 45nm, This is going to be an Overclocking Monster. Only Cons is that it's a bit high priced compared to an e7200 which is only 20$ Higher. But Street Prices are Always Hight at start.

__________________

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

if i wanted a flat girl, i would just f*** a guy...

[gamefreak94]

Why not advertise this as the E7100 or something? Its just making their line-up of processors more confusing. I mean the E5405, E5410, E5420 and E5430 are Xeon quad-cores while the E5200 is a desktop C2D

__________________

"Don't worry about what people think. They don't do it very often." - Anonymous

[Memulator91k]

The E7000 series have 3mb cache this one has 2mb.

__________________

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

if i wanted a flat girl, i would just f*** a guy...

[Cheesus]

I'm more enthused by the Q8200.

I think I'll get one as soon as my student card arrives. A 3.6Ghz quad core penryn for $200-240 tickles my biscuits a wee bit . I figure I could use it till my Nehalem upgrade (which I've pushed back) in January. I'm probably going to need new RAM sticks though... Its only got a 7x Multiplier.

__________________

Desktop: Core i5 2500K @ 4.2Ghz; Radeon HD 6870 1GB; 8Gb 1333Mhz; 1.75Gb Seagate HD; 128Gb OCZ Vertex 4; 23" LS23A350HS; 24" LS24A350HS; Windows 8 Pro 64bit

Lenovo x121e: Core i3 2367M; Intel HD3000; 4Gb 1333Mhz; 128Gb OCZ Vertex 4; 11" Matte Display; Windows 8 Pro 64bit

[Memulator91k]

Why the Q8200 It's more Expensive than the Q6600 got 4mb less cache and has a 7 multiplier plus the Q6600 has a higher clock. Only Pro is it's 45nm

---

Last edited by Memulator91k; September 3rd, 2008 at 15:49..

[gamefreak94]

Originally Posted by Memulator91k

The E7000 series have 3mb cache this one has 2mb.

Yeah, but the E6xxx series has differing L2 cache sizes too. The E6300 was 2MB for e.g

__________________

"Don't worry about what people think. They don't do it very often." - Anonymous

[kenmasters1983]

thanks for the hardware news

i personally don't see how amd is going to keep up with intel...

A wolfdale cpu for $90 shipped...thats insane i bet its atleast as fast as an e6600..if not faster!

__________________
memorable mastershake quotes.
Ol' Drippy: Here, lick my head.
Master Shake: Here, kiss my ass!
-
Frylock:The Highlander was just a movie.
Master shake:No, Frylock, The Highlander was a documentary, and events happened in real time.
-
Meatwad: Pedestrian always has the right of way.
Master Shake: I swear, it's gonna be hell week all rolled up into one night up in here.
-
Meatwad: I'm callin' Japan.
Master Shake: Who the hell do you know in Japan?
Master Shake: Nobody!
Meatwad: Yes, connect me to Godzilla please.

[StriderVM]

Well, I thought the same thing. However, I remembered that less than 10% of current PC's today are overclocked. And most of the E7000 series have AMD Triple Cores and Quad Cores in the same price range. So I think it's not that bad for AMD.

__________________

[Cheesus]

Originally Posted by Memulator91k

Why the Q8200 It's more Expensive than the Q6600 got 4mb less cache and has a 7 multiplier plus the Q6600 has a higher clock. Only Pro is it's 45nm

It won't stay more expensive for long. It doesn't make economical sense.

__________________

Desktop: Core i5 2500K @ 4.2Ghz; Radeon HD 6870 1GB; 8Gb 1333Mhz; 1.75Gb Seagate HD; 128Gb OCZ Vertex 4; 23" LS23A350HS; 24" LS24A350HS; Windows 8 Pro 64bit

Lenovo x121e: Core i3 2367M; Intel HD3000; 4Gb 1333Mhz; 128Gb OCZ Vertex 4; 11" Matte Display; Windows 8 Pro 64bit

[runawayprisoner]

Avoid this like a plague if you plan on getting it for PCSX2. The half-cache cut-off of the E7xxx from the E8xxx series already resulted in a good 5% performance drop overall, and about 10 to up to 50% in some other games... say like... Gran Turismo 4. Imagine how much more it'll go down when the cache is again... cut in half?

Intel is not doing any miracles, they are feeding off of the success of the faster wolfdale processors... You should have seen this from a mile ago looking at the price tag of the E8600. Yeah, that thing can go way above 4GHz, but so can E8400 and E8500. E8600 is just slightly easier to overclock. Think... like a rarer E8400 or E8500 or something.

[Cheesus]

I don't really use PCSX2 for more then nostalgia and benchmarking/when I'm too bored to leave the PC alone after an OC while running Orthos

(In reality I wouldn't get it if the government wasn't giving me ~$300 to spend specifically on computer parts/sports wear.)

__________________

Desktop: Core i5 2500K @ 4.2Ghz; Radeon HD 6870 1GB; 8Gb 1333Mhz; 1.75Gb Seagate HD; 128Gb OCZ Vertex 4; 23" LS23A350HS; 24" LS24A350HS; Windows 8 Pro 64bit

Lenovo x121e: Core i3 2367M; Intel HD3000; 4Gb 1333Mhz; 128Gb OCZ Vertex 4; 11" Matte Display; Windows 8 Pro 64bit

[runawayprisoner]

Then you are good with 5200. Just warning you about PCSX2 performance in case... cuz if I didn't, someone may turn to hate Intel for the rest of their lives.

No... but seriously, Intel is not doing a lot of good things lately. One reason why I said Nehalem would fail and be too positive about it. Intel is just a bit... too in over their heads at the moment.

[Princess Garnet]

I know this is an emulation forum, but one unfinished niche program (no disrespect is meant to PCSX2 in this) is not the be all for a piece of hardware's worth. The E5200 in itself is pretty great. 45nm CPUs are finally at budget level. The way I see it is, there's four levels. There's the budget level, two mainstream levels, and the extreme level. The latter is next to useless as it's always overpriced. The lower mainstream level is usually not what you want. It's either all (minus the overpriced extreme level) or nothing, the nothing being the budget level. The E5200 would be the budget level, the E7200 is in the middle, and the E8400 is the higher mainstream (well, that'd be the E8500 now, but the difference is moot). Now again, this is just my opinion. I'm not calling the E7200 bad, and it's great that there's different levels, but to me, the E5200 is great as the budget level is really where the biggest improvements are needed as the masses have that (of course I'm aware there are as many Celerons as there are Pentium Dual-cores in OEM machines). I usually have two machines, one budget level and one higher mainstream (at times of build). Of course people aren't going to move from their E6x00 series to this, and no, it's not a beast, but it's a great value for the price. I'm aware your opinion of Intel isn't so great (and I sort of agree with it), and sure, it's not that great for PCSX2, but that's really irrelevant to the E5200 in itself, don't you think?

Oh, and by the way, the E5200 has 2/3, not 1/2, of the L2 cache of the E7200 (2MB vs 3MB).

__________________
"The heart has it's reasons that reason knows nothing of."

[Memulator91k]

Originally Posted by Lord Zedeck

I know this is an emulation forum, but one unfinished niche program (no disrespect is meant to PCSX2 in this) is not the be all for a piece of hardware's worth. The E5200 in itself is pretty great. 45nm CPUs are finally at budget level. The way I see it is, there's four levels. There's the budget level, two mainstream levels, and the extreme level. The latter is next to useless as it's always overpriced. The lower mainstream level is usually not what you want. It's either all (minus the overpriced extreme level) or nothing, the nothing being the budget level. The E5200 would be the budget level, the E7200 is in the middle, and the E8400 is the higher mainstream (well, that'd be the E8500 now, but the difference is moot). Now again, this is just my opinion. I'm not calling the E7200 bad, and it's great that there's different levels, but to me, the E5200 is great as the budget level is really where the biggest improvements are needed as the masses have that (of course I'm aware there are as many Celerons as there are Pentium Dual-cores in OEM machines). I usually have two machines, one budget level and one higher mainstream (at times of build). Of course people aren't going to move from their E6x00 series to this, and no, it's not a beast, but it's a great value for the price. I'm aware your opinion of Intel isn't so great (and I sort of agree with it), and sure, it's not that great for PCSX2, but that's really irrelevant to the E5200 in itself, don't you think?

Oh, and by the way, the E5200 has 2/3, not 1/2, of the L2 cache of the E7200 (2MB vs 3MB).

QFT.....

__________________

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

if i wanted a flat girl, i would just f*** a guy...

[SCHUMI_4EVER]

Originally Posted by Lord Zedeck

I know this is an emulation forum, but one unfinished niche program (no disrespect is meant to PCSX2 in this) is not the be all for a piece of hardware's worth. The E5200 in itself is pretty great. 45nm CPUs are finally at budget level. The way I see it is, there's four levels. There's the budget level, two mainstream levels, and the extreme level. The latter is next to useless as it's always overpriced. The lower mainstream level is usually not what you want. It's either all (minus the overpriced extreme level) or nothing, the nothing being the budget level. The E5200 would be the budget level, the E7200 is in the middle, and the E8400 is the higher mainstream (well, that'd be the E8500 now, but the difference is moot). Now again, this is just my opinion. I'm not calling the E7200 bad, and it's great that there's different levels, but to me, the E5200 is great as the budget level is really where the biggest improvements are needed as the masses have that (of course I'm aware there are as many Celerons as there are Pentium Dual-cores in OEM machines). I usually have two machines, one budget level and one higher mainstream (at times of build). Of course people aren't going to move from their E6x00 series to this, and no, it's not a beast, but it's a great value for the price. I'm aware your opinion of Intel isn't so great (and I sort of agree with it), and sure, it's not that great for PCSX2, but that's really irrelevant to the E5200 in itself, don't you think?

Oh, and by the way, the E5200 has 2/3, not 1/2, of the L2 cache of the E7200 (2MB vs 3MB).

Would you not rather go for an older cheaper (not cheaper than the E5200, cheaper than current high-end) 65nm processor than a weak 45nm though?

__________________

Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83Ghz stock) | ASUS P5Q | 2x2GB Transcend JetRam DDR2-800 | ASUS ENGTX260\HDTP\896M | Windows Vista Home Premium 64bit SP1

The Champ has retired but may his Legacy live on FOREVER !!!!

No$GBA DS FAQ 2.0

Get it right fools! The glass is HALF-EMPTY, not half-full!!!

!!! WARNING: Emulation requires a brain !!! WARNING: Emulation =/= Piracy !!!

[runawayprisoner]

Originally Posted by SCHUMI-4-EVA

Would you not rather go for an older cheaper (not cheaper than the E5200, cheaper than current high-end) 65nm processor than a weak 45nm though?

Yeah, that was my point. Is spending an extra $30 or $50 to get a better version of a processor really that crucial? I thought it was crucial, but then you'll see... if you are updating, you are better off exhausting all of your resources.

[Princess Garnet]

I do agree with you on the prices. Intel never held to holding the prices of these 45nm refreshes either the same as their 65nm counterparts or the market of supply and demand (such as with the E8400 at launch) drove prices way up.

__________________
"The heart has it's reasons that reason knows nothing of."