 Best Sellers | | Home Intel Core i7 965 3.2GHz 8M L3 Cache 6.4GT/sec QPI Hyper-Threading Turbo Boost LGA1366 Extreme Processor | |
|  | |  | | | Intel Core i7 965 3.2GHz 8M L3 Cache 6.4GT/sec QPI Hyper-Threading Turbo Boost LGA1366 Extreme Processor | | | | | | | |
List Price:
| $1,159.99 | |
Our Price:
| $990.00 | |
You Save:
| $169.99 (15%)
| | *Shipping: | $8.55 | |
*Shipping:
| |
| | | SKU:
DHBX80601965 | | In Stock | | Availability:
Usually ships in 1-2 business days | | |
|
| | Features | Intel Core i7-9656.4 Intel QuickPath Interconnect3 Channel Memory8MB L3 CacheLGA-1366 package
| |
| | Description | Intel Core i7-965 Processor Extreme Edition 3.2 GHz, 6.4 QPI, 45nm, SSE4, 3 Channel Memory, 8 MB L3 Cache, Turbo Boost Technology, EIST in a LGA-1366 package | |
| | Product Details | | Product Length: | 25.0 inches | | Product Width: | 8.26 inches | | Product Height: | 7.75 inches | | Product Weight: | 0.75 pounds | | Package Length: | 7.8 inches | | Package Width: | 7.2 inches | | Package Height: | 4.9 inches | | Package Weight: | 1.6 pounds | | Average Customer Rating: |  based on 10 reviews |
| |
| | Customer Reviews | Average Customer Review: ( 10 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
35 of 37 found the following review helpful:
 WOW! - This is one amazing processor. BEAST! Nov 19, 2008
By J. J. Marino
"Geekasaurus Rex"
I upgraded to this processor from a Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0 GHz 6M L2 Cache 1333MHz FSB LGA775 Dual-Core Processor. This processor is an amazing upgrade. I recommend the RAM for this processor Corsair TR3X6G1333C9 XMS3 6 GB 3 x 2 GB PC3-10666 1333MHz 240-Pin DDR3 Core i7 Memory Kit. This is one serious processor, the cost in my opinion is totally worth it. Just like all black box Intel processors this one is for serious gaming/ video editing. There are several Intel Core i7 processors out there that are more moderate and significantly less costly. You will see amazing boot times and access times that are really short. Games have no stutters or any significant lag.
I got a 3D Mark Vantage score of around 19,000 amazing!
Lets get to the specs:
965 Extreme Edition
Process: 45 nm
Cores: 4
Threads: 8
Clock (GHz): 3.2
Cache: 256 KB L2/core 8 MB shared L3
Memory: 3xDDR3 800/1066 MHz
Quickpath*: 1x 6.4 GT/s
Socket: LGA 1336 **
* QuickPath is a point-to-point processor interconnect developed by Intel to compete with HyperTransport. It allows the sub processors on the motherboard to have a quick access point to the main processor.
** make sure your motherboard has this socket before ordering.
Pro's -
Amazing power for your desktop
Speed
Con's -
Costs
Requires new motherboard
Requires new memory
If your ready to step up to the latest killer system then this is the processor for you!
Thank you for reading my review I hope it helped.
45 of 53 found the following review helpful:
 Worth the price? Maybe. Dec 14, 2008
By Nathan Beauchamp
"ConsumerAdvocate"
There is no question that this CPU is incredibly fast, and is likely the fastest consumer chip ever released by Intel (or anyone else for that matter). It is simply an amazing piece of technology. However, I'm not sure it is worth the price. There are discernible difference between this and the Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz processor, but are they worth 3x the price? Let's evaluate.
The I7 965 operates at 3.2ghz, and has a quick path speed of 6400 MT/s vs. the I7 920 which operates at 2.67ghz and has a quick path speed of 4800 MT/s. In every other aspect they are the same chips. Same 8mb cache size and both are 45nm chips. Essentially the main difference between the two CPUs is the quick path speed, which is roughly equivalent to FSB. That's a simplification I know, but it's accurate enough for this comparison. The higher frequency speed is nice, but high end ghz isn't as important as it used to be now that almost all software (and especially games which is what this card is intended for) are written for multi-thread processors.
Given the fact that overclocking these chips is very easy and that they're very, very stable at 20-30% over their stock operating speed, and given the fact that virtually all new games being written for multiple core gaming, I'm just not convinced that the price difference between the I7 920 and the I7 965 is justified.
The I7 965 strikes me as ideal for someone who wants top shelf speed but doesn't want to pursue overclocking. Basically your paying a premium for an enthusiast chip. You can get remarkable performance out of the I7 920 if you spend a bit of time to tweak it. For me, tweaking a I7 920 is a much better option, considering the price point on the two CPUs. However, if you are trying to build the 'ultimate' machine, and have the cash, the I7 965 is crazy-amazing. Both are fantastic CPUs, and you'll have to decided for yourself if the price of the I7 965 is worth it.
12 of 13 found the following review helpful:
Renders HD video in under a minute for minute Feb 24, 2009
By G. Martin
Purchased to hopefully improve HD video rendering time from a typical rate of 5 minutes for 1 minute of HD video to closer to one+ minute for 1 minute of video. In fact, with an ASUS P6T6 MOBO, the rate is consistently 47 seconds for 1 minute of HD video. Incredible!
4 of 4 found the following review helpful:
It's fast, but for that price it had better be! Mar 22, 2010
By Scott Showalter
"purefusion"
Question is, can you get something nearly as good for much less? Indeed, it's possible. But considering that technically you can get the i7 975 for even cheaper (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002A6LOI4?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8), that should be enough to make you drool a few more drops of saliva if money is no object.
Contrary to popular belief, CPU chip fabrication is really an imprecise art, and manufacturing perfection cannot be found in this industry. The same series of chips, in this case the i7 900 series, are all manufactured from the same wafer. Whether or not they get the extreme designation and specified number is based on testing done on each chip after the fabrication process is complete. However not every chip is tested for a specific range in the series (e.g. 965/975).
Like any company, Intel has manufacturing quotas, so a certain number of 965s and 975s have to be produced each month, but beyond that, they don't run the harder tests involved with these extreme chips. So in reality, you could technically get a 965 or a 975 in the 950 mix, assuming all quotas were met for any chips above 950 in that particular month of fabrication. The main reason for this is due to the limited demand on the 965s and 975s. In the end, it's more-or-less the luck of the draw.
Technically, this means you could by chance end up with a 920 that matches the quality of a 950 or higher. However, the chances are more likely that you could get a 975-quality from a 950 batch, since both would come from the same vicinity on the wafer (that vicinity being the area that consistently yields the best chips) whereas the 920s are coming from a known lesser-quality area of the wafer. The 920s typically are the bottom of the barrel in the series.
So if you're absolutely picky and you must have top-of-the-line equipment, definitely go with the 975 or one of the other extreme edition CPUs, because you're guaranteed to receive a chip of the highest quality (assuming you can afford it).
However, if price is any concern at all, but absolute top performance is certainly not an issue, go with a 950 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002A6G3V2?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8) and take your chances on getting something better, especially if you're considering overclocking. It really all depends on your cooling solution, settings and the chances of drawing something better than the label suggests, but from what I've seen the chances are actually pretty decent.
I've benchmarked the 975, 965 and 950, all overclocked. The 975 ran only 1.8% faster than the 950, but the 950 ran even better than the "extreme" 965. In the end, I was certainly satisfied with the results of the 950 for the price. For anyone on the fence with price vs performance, you certainly won't be dissatisfied with the 950. Even if you have the extra cash to plop down on the 975, save your money and get an SSD with the extra cash flow. That's where the real bottleneck is in computing these days, and you shouldn't ever run such a top-of-the-line system without having a high-speed hard drive!
For those who are curious, here is what I chose for my machine's final configuration:
Mobo: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001KA9PZK?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8
CPU: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002A6G3V2?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8
Memory: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001VNLDN8?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8
Hard Drive (SSD): http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002IGT7IU?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8
PSU: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001M3G42W?tag=a52-20&ie=UTF8
2 of 2 found the following review helpful:
fast chip but quad not used much Jun 01, 2009
By Dakar
this is a nice fast chip but really not worthwhile at this point. Most applications aren't going to use the chip fully and only a few people who do the intensive rendering etc. will even notice the difference. So for 3x the price, better off spending the extra money on better graphics card, video and storage. I'm glad people are buying it to help subsidize the rest of their chips though.
See all 10 customer reviews on Amazon.com
| |
* Estimated shipping rate for US 48 states. Final rate calculated at checkout. | |
| |  | |  |
|
Recently Viewed | You may also like ... |
