<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Intel to ship Intel i7</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.webtlk.com/2008/11/07/intel-to-ship-intel-i7/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.webtlk.com/2008/11/07/intel-to-ship-intel-i7/</link>
	<description>Concise and Accurate News Every Day</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:25:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Web Talk</title>
		<link>http://www.webtlk.com/2008/11/07/intel-to-ship-intel-i7/comment-page-1/#comment-3206</link>
		<dc:creator>Web Talk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webtlk.com/?p=2785#comment-3206</guid>
		<description>Thanks William,
Overall I tend to agree with you. Lately processors tend to be almost alike to each other. In the end all processors will face the same issue: Atom dimensions. You can make a processors faster and faster...but you can not split an atom! A processor at 3.0 Ghz will be sufficent for all operative systems for a long, long time!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks William,<br />
Overall I tend to agree with you. Lately processors tend to be almost alike to each other. In the end all processors will face the same issue: Atom dimensions. You can make a processors faster and faster&#8230;but you can not split an atom! A processor at 3.0 Ghz will be sufficent for all operative systems for a long, long time!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Pastuszka</title>
		<link>http://www.webtlk.com/2008/11/07/intel-to-ship-intel-i7/comment-page-1/#comment-3204</link>
		<dc:creator>William Pastuszka</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:39:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webtlk.com/?p=2785#comment-3204</guid>
		<description>Actually the new i7 can be overclocked to reach speeds of 1600FSB so effectively would be faster especially with DDR3 ram.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually the new i7 can be overclocked to reach speeds of 1600FSB so effectively would be faster especially with DDR3 ram.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Pastuszka</title>
		<link>http://www.webtlk.com/2008/11/07/intel-to-ship-intel-i7/comment-page-1/#comment-3203</link>
		<dc:creator>William Pastuszka</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:34:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webtlk.com/?p=2785#comment-3203</guid>
		<description>To be honest i was going to buy one for a new build for Windows 7 but i fail to see the difference between an i7 on a LGA 1366 socket  &amp; a LGA 775 socket Quad core processor.

IMHO there is no speed difference because both processors fire out upto 1333FSB &amp; most motherboards are only capable of that top speed.

The only difference apart from the sockets is the price.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be honest i was going to buy one for a new build for Windows 7 but i fail to see the difference between an i7 on a LGA 1366 socket  &amp; a LGA 775 socket Quad core processor.</p>
<p>IMHO there is no speed difference because both processors fire out upto 1333FSB &amp; most motherboards are only capable of that top speed.</p>
<p>The only difference apart from the sockets is the price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (Feed is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/9 queries in 0.007 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 213/226 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.webtlk.com @ 2012-02-12 20:13:10 -->
