http://www.gizmocrave.com/11134-int...pushed-to-june/

Quote: In an interview, Intel’s executive VP Sean Maloney said the launch “had been moved back eight to ten weeks, from April to June”. He also said that the delay shouldn’t be read in the backlight of low demand, but because of the delay in manufacturing the 22-nanometer chip used in the construction of the Ivy Bridge processor.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2507...dont_panic.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrick...ease-calm-down/

No big surprise I guess. Third time it's been delayed though.

techpowerup is saying that only the Notebook models have being pushed into June.

They're saying the i5 and i7 desktop models will launch in April

Quote: 29 April, 2012: This is when Intel will launch quad-core Core i5, Core i7 "Ivy Bridge". On this day, the media will be able to post reviews of the new processor platform. It's not clear if you'll be able to buy these chips on this day, either. Perhaps you might.

http://www.techpowerup.com/161319/I...e-Revealed.html

Hope they're right... time will tell.

At first I was disappointed... but then I realised that any delay just means more time for the HD7800/7900 cards to come down in price.

saajiik wrote: At first I was disappointed... but then I realised that any delay just means more time for the nVidia lineup to be released.

FTFY

Meh skipping the chip anyway.

Privoxy wrote: Meh skipping the chip anyway.

These new models were supposed to have nice performance gains over Sandy, but the numbers have been revised downwards a number of times. Now it looks like a Ivy is only 10-15% faster under best conditions when comparing clock for clock speeds. The hope is that the clock speeds can be pushed up significantly.

Considering the above, I can't blame you for waiting for Haswell, although that may very well also be delayed now towards the end of 2013.

Thats alright... I am still rocking a i7 920 and it does me well. I want to see a drastic improvement before doing another 10k+ complete rebuild on everything.

s0cks wrote: FTFY

I only care about Nvidia if their cards push the price of the AMD cards down.

saajiik wrote: I only care about Nvidia if their cards push the price of the AMD cards down.

Haha same here

Privoxy wrote: Thats alright... I am still rocking a i7 920 and it does me well. I want to see a drastic improvement before doing another 10k+ complete rebuild on everything.

Haha same, I'm still busting a i7 950 like a baws

My 4GHz i7 920 seems to be the best investment computer-wise I have made thus far tbh. No other part has lasted as long.

qazwsxokmijn wrote: My 4GHz i7 920 seems to be the best investment computer-wise I have made thus far tbh. No other part has lasted as long.

Agreed. But mine is at 4.5

Never able to get my damn chip stable past 4.4GHz....**** it, 4GHz is plenty enough....overkill, even, for 10/12 months of the year pretty much....

Still also rocking a i7-930 here. Does the job perfectly fine.

yeah, 1366 was a pretty good investment tbh.

i7 860 myself, but she's a hot bitch with HT enabled. Keep it at 3.6GHz

Looks like the Q6700 will have to live a little longer then

My chip is the oldest part on my build, bought in Feb 09, it has seen 3 mobos come and go. I skipped sandy because ivy was meant to be so boss. Ivy will be pretty expensive seeing as bulldozer was a fail. I might skip it too, or just wait a year for the prices to calm down.

Come to think of it, there are no games on the horizon that warrant an upgrade right now anyway.

like most of you guys I still have a first gen i7, I only game on my PC so I dont see the need to upgrade for at least another couple of years

Will27 wrote: Looks like the Q6700 will have to live a little longer then

Ditto for my Q6600

Engineering test sample:

http://www.3dcenter.org/news/erster...idge-prozessors

Intel holding back on chips cause there's no market pressure, waiting on AMD to catch up

President wrote: Haha same, I'm still busting a i7 950 like a baws

Got mine at 4.2ghz, its stable but I'm sure it'll go higher if I can ever be bothered..

Analgia wrote: Intel holding back on chips cause there's no market pressure, waiting on AMD to catch up

They completely deny this and I believe them. I think their primary reason about manufacturing issues is honest.

If anything, if this was the only reason holding them back, why wouldn't you just beat AMD AGAIN and destroy the competition? The demand for the chip is massive right now, it will sell like crazy, it would make no sense to hold it back.