Intel discontinuing the i7 920

**WileECyte** · 04-06-10, 02:22 PM

Get 'em while you can...

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/18358/1/

You should know by now that Core i7 920 is getting replaced by slightly the faster Core i7 930. Intel has released its PDN (Product Discontinuance Notice) for this CPU in Q1 2010 and it has informed its partners that official end of life for this CPU is Q2 2010. after that time, Core i7 930 will fully take the place of the fallen CPU.

**Phyrelight** · 04-06-10, 02:24 PM

that bad boy should be put in the hall of fame. Love that chip.

**Keiron** · 04-06-10, 02:32 PM

So how much should the price fall then since it is being discontinued?

Hmm. I'd be tempted to get one but it is probably still too pricey for me at the moment.

**Phyrelight** · 04-06-10, 02:33 PM

on the flip side, people will find out they are no longer available and they will buy them up driving the prices higher.

**WileECyte** · 04-06-10, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Keiron

So how much should the price fall then since it is being discontinued?

Hmm. I'd be tempted to get one but it is probably still too pricey for me at the moment.

The average price tends to rise when a processor is discontinued because the supply dwindles.

**Keiron** · 04-06-10, 02:37 PM

Intel themselves should reduce the price some. Ultimately though they'll probably go up. Oh well.

**digital** · 04-06-10, 02:41 PM

Question, why the hell do we not have any 5 or 6 ghz processors?

Can't past the 4ghz limit so were going 2 and 4 core processors to make up for it?

**WileECyte** · 04-06-10, 02:47 PM

The higher the frequency, the more power is needed and the more heat is generated. Blame the whole green computing initiative. That and the physical limitations of the silicon they're using to produce the processors.

**Potemkine** · 04-06-10, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by digital

Question, why the hell do we not have any 5 or 6 ghz processors?

Can't past the 4ghz limit so were going 2 and 4 core processors to make up for it?

I think it has to do with multitasking. Its better to have 2-3 processors doing 3 or 4 tasks as opposed to one beast processor doing one at a time. I could be wrong though.

**draco7891** · 04-06-10, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by digital

Question, why the hell do we not have any 5 or 6 ghz processors?

Can't past the 4ghz limit so were going 2 and 4 core processors to make up for it?

Because at the amperages required to compute that fast, electrons have a tendency to jump the boundaries between traces in the CPU, wreaking havoc with the logic in the chip and/or burning it out. Different formulas of silicon doping and trace design have helped contain the problem to this point, but now the technology is largely up against the wall of what the material is capable of delivering. Special techniques can help push speeds further (see: cooling the chip with liquid nitrogen until it becomes a superconductor), but are not feasible for widespread usage.

4GHz is about as fast as silicon chips will ever go, barring some miraculous discovery.

Draco