Hasta La Gadget!

It may be a cheaper way to join the high-end Core i7 family, but that doesn’t mean it’s “cheap.” Intel’s Core i7-970 ($899), which just started shipping to consumers around a month ago, has just undergone a thorough looking-over at Hot Hardware, where the six-core chip was tested alongside its more potent (and in turn, more costly) siblings. If you’ve no interest in dropping over a grand for a Core i7-980X, and you aren’t about to lower yourself by purchasing a quad-core Core i7-975, this here chip might just do you proud. In testing, critics found the 970 to be quick, but hardly mind-blowing, when handling more mundane tasks; stir in a few heavily threaded applications, though, and it managed to “sail past” the quad-core contemporaries and “keep pace” with the aforementioned 980X. All told, the silicon managed to perform around 5 percent worse than the 980X, yet it rings up for around 12 percent less. If you’ve got the workflow to truly take advantage of all six cores, and you can stomach not having the absolute best, it seems as if the 970 strikes a fine balance — and hey, if you’re down with overclocking, you can probably get that 5 percent back with just a mild uptick in your energy bill.

Intel’s Core i7-970 gets reviewed: great for overclocking, still expensive originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:59:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Hot Hardware  | Email this | Comments

Virginia Tech’s no stranger to housing supercomputers — those folks strung together 324 Mac Pros back in 2008 just for kicks, giggles and “research” — but their latest computing monolith is quite the shift from the ordinary. A cool $2 million is floating over to Blacksburg in order to create HokieSpeed, a “versatile new supercomputing instrument” that’ll soon be primed and ready to handle not just one or two tasks, but a variety of disciplines. Wu Feng, associate professor of computer science at the university, calls this magnificent monster a “new heterogeneous supercomputing instrument based on a combination of central processing units (CPUs) and graphical processing units (GPUs),” with expected performance to be orders of magnitude higher than their previous claim to fame, System X. One of its first assignments? To give end users the ability “to perform in-situ visualization for rapid visual information synthesis and analysis,” and during the late hours, hosts a campus-wide Quake deathmatch. Just kidding on that last bit… maybe.

Virginia Tech’s HokieSpeed supercomputer to rely on CPU and GPU synergies originally appeared on Engadget on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 08:10:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Physorg  |  Virginia Tech  | Email this | Comments

Don’t you just love it when a plan comes together? Or when a rumor plays out perfectly? We’re looking at a case of the latter here today, as HP‘s oh-so-lovable 12-inch TouchSmart tm2 is now available to order with a Core i5 processor. Just months after gaining Core i3 support, the convertible tablet can now be ordered with a 1.2GHz Core i5-430UM (capable of hitting 1.73GHz with Turbo Boost). Said CPU can be paired with integrated Intel graphics or with a discrete ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5450, and 4GB of DDR3 RAM is standard on either configuration. Hit the links below to investigate further, but be sure to keep your plastic far, far away unless you’re kosher with impulse buys of a rather significant caliber.

HP TouchSmart tm2 gains Core i5 CPU option, a whole new level of respect originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:02:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Logic Buy  |  HP  | Email this | Comments

Sure, smartphone and tablets might be the Next Big Thing, but desktop computing ain’t dead yet — just ask Intel, which just reported its best-ever quarter with a $2.9b profit on $10.8b in revenue. That’s an increase of $445m in profit from last quarter and a whopping $3.3b from last year, all driven by record laptop and server chip revenue, as well as a 16 percent increase in Atom revenue. What’s more, the average sale price of all those chips went up, and selling more chips at a higher price is always good for business. Intel’s got a call to discuss these numbers in depth at 5:30PM ET, we’ll let you know if we hear anything good.

Intel has its best quarter ever, brings in $2.9b profit originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:31:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Intel  | Email this | Comments

Well, we’ve gone a full month since the last episode of NVIDIA’s and Intel’s ongoing public feud, but it looks like Intel has now stoked the flames once again (albeit inadvertently) in a paper presented at the recent International Symposium on Computer Architecture. That attempted to debunk the “100X GPU vs. CPU myth,” but it also contained the tidbit that GPUs are “only” up to 14 times faster than CPUs in running application kernels, which NVIDIA has more than a happily latched onto. In a blog post, NVIDIA’s Andy Keane says that it’s a “rare day” when a competitor states that their technology is only 14x faster, and that he can’t recall another time when he’s “seen a company promote competitive benchmarks that are an order of magnitude slower.” Of course, he then further goes on to note that Intel’s tests were done with NVIDIA’s previous generation GeForce GTX 280, and that the codes were simply run out-of-the-box without any optimization — but, still, he seems more than happy to accept this bit of “recognition.” In Intel’s defense, however, the overall finding of the paper (linked below) is that the performance gap between a GTX 280 GPU and Core i7 960 processor is actually just 2.5X “on average,” which NVIDIA hasn’t highlighted for some reason.

NVIDIA thanks Intel for saying GPUs are ‘only’ 14 times faster than CPUs originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:52:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  The NVIDIA Blog, Intel’s Insides, Intel paper  | Email this | Comments