I decided to go for the 960 instead. I was looking up prices for the faster chips yesterday, just out of curiosity, and noticed that some stores are selling the 960 a mere 10 or so euros more than the 950 (
7 euros in this German store). The price differential between the 950 and the 940 is also pretty small (
in one Spanish store it is currently 1 euro, lol), so the next logical step up from the 920 is really the 960, in which case I don't really mind paying double the 920's price for it, since I'll be moving up three processor categories, so to speak: from 2.66 GHz per core to 3.20.
Much of Intel's desktop attention has been focused on launching and supporting the Lynnfield-based Core i5 and Core i7 chips, released at the start of September 2009.
Rather more quietly, the chip giant has bolstered the range-topping LGA1366 Core i7 line, known as Bloomfield, with the Core i7 960.
Coming in at the same 3.20GHz frequency as the Core i7 965 Extreme Edition, which has now made way for the 975 EE processor, the new chip will effectively replace the Core i7 950 as the middle LGA1366 CPU.
The introduction of the Core i7 960 casts further doubt on the relevance of the LGA1156 Core i7 870, and we should expect to see the latest 9-series chip in systems costing around £1,500.
Still too expensive to recommend to most enthusiasts, Intel's ability to charge £400-plus for a single chip is directly related to AMD's inefficacy to compete in the high-performance sector.
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=20787One thing I do not understand is how they can say that the 960 is the new "middle LGA1366 CPU". Excluding the 975 EE, which costs twice as much, it is Intel's fastest chip in production! Second-fastest, then, but in no way the "middle" chip.
In any case, here is a comparison between the 960 and the 975 EE (in German) which shows that they are almost indistinguishable in performance:
http://www.technic3d.com/article-975,1- ... n-haus.htmHere's a summary: The difference between the 960 / 975 EE and the 920 is in many of the tests they performed small or even extremely small, but in others it is quite significant (3D Mark 2006 - CPU, 3DMark Vantage - CPU Performance Test, some of the synthetic tests, etc.) Gaming-wise the upgrade does not seem to be worth it at all with current-gen games, but this could perhaps change in the future, as new games start stressing the processor more. Or at least that's what I am telling myself to justify the extra 250 euros I'll be paying for it.
Now all I need is to find a (European) store that actually has the chip in stock.
P.S. And by the way, the 920 is also being phased out in favor of the 930, it seems:
Intel may be set to discontinue its excellent Core i7-920 chip within the next few months, but we've just heard confirmation that its replacement will arrive in Q1 2010.
It'll be called the Core i7-930.
At 2.88GHz it'll be a drop-in quad-core, eight thread upgrade for current LGA 1366 motherboards, although we're yet to find out whether this will be a 45nm or 32nm part.
We've also heard prices are likely to be comparable to the current Core i7-920 too, meaning that those LGA 1156 Core i7-860s and 870s will still have to drop in price considerably to become attractive for UK buyers. If you're planning an upgrade, we'd still advise LGA 1366 as the route to take.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2 ... -q1-2010/1
So, to recap all of the above, the best deal on a performance gaming chip is and remains the 920, until the 930 rolls around. But if you have some extra cash to burn, like me, go for the 960 instead.