I went on an Internationisation seminar last year. One of the lectures was "Dangers of Cross Cultural Misunderstangs".

For the non-UKians out there the P45 is the little form your ex-employer gives you so you can claim unemployment benefit.

I suppose the next chipset will be called the UB40.

The difference between the ICH9 and ICH10 is the 65nm production process in the latter.

ICH10 is also used as the southbridge for the Nehalem processors.

Something like the Abit P35 Pro is so easy to obtain improbably high stable overclocks with, while all the P45 based boards I've tried are quite fiddly and just don't deliver the same results. While you can sometimes approach P35 levels of performance, stability just isn't there. Eventually you end up settling for less performance, which is hardly progress, is it?

Either P45 is a blind alley, or Intel's just abandoning the overclocker community.

Definitely eaves you wondering about the future...

Will I be running a P35 based system in 2010 that still runs faster than the current state of the art?

Is it called P45 because it is being made redundant? I'm guessing that the name was not thought up by someone in the UK.

You beat me to it. All I add is, if Joe Bloggs specifies a P45 chipset and it bombs, does he get what he asked for?

ditto that @ James Anderson. Reminds me of the Australian equivalent of Sellotape. I think it was no more than 2 seasons before Formula 1 cars stopped roaring around European Grand Prix circuits with Durex plastered all over them.

Australia at least: An American actress told a story once how she did an interview show in Aus., and she told a story about her car, saying that she pulled over & popped the trunk open. She said then the audience sort of gasped.

8Gb vs 16Gb might not seem real worldly, but I have Q35 desktops deployed with 8Gb already and the entire ram complement is being used. If 16Gb was available, I'd deploy it.

Why? Astrophysicists eat ram.

The alternative to putting this amount of ram in a personal desktop system is buying in servers which cost 5-10 times as much and then having them fight over CPU time. This results in less effective work.