http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7505We take a closer look at AMD’s claims that Quad FX is the platform for power users. Is its quad-core Megatasking ability all it’s cracked up to be?
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7505We take a closer look at AMD’s claims that Quad FX is the platform for power users. Is its quad-core Megatasking ability all it’s cracked up to be?
Last edited by Tarinder; 18-01-2007 at 10:20 AM.
So, Intel win over AMD with Quad core as well then; at least AMD keep the Intel prices low so something good to come out of this.
Probably a good thing for AMD you didn't do perf/watt either.
MOLLY AND POPPY!
QuadFX is still hamstrung by the processors it seems which are basically a generation behind C2D. I think the next gen chips(if they ever arrive) + QuadFX will hammer C2D, but at the rate Intel are going it may be a moot point by then.
I think the real advantage is the engineering experience AMD are getting from running this, so that when they go quad core/1 package they'll be able to get to '8 core' quickly, and the higher the number of cores the more they take advantage of Intel's weakness at the moment.
It's also good practise for torrenza and use of any non-x86 processors to plug in to the second socket, which is in turn probably going to lead to Fusion.
This image:
http://img.hexus.net/v2/cpu/amd/QuadFX2/Q4PV.png
has both the green and the blue marked as being FX-62
Apart from that good article
Whats this you say? 4 cores? Good article though.
With love and many thanks,
Melons
I think Hexus hit the nail on the head at the end withonce again it's a boring waiting game for the native quad core and the new architecture that people have been banging on about.Throughout our dealings with AMD during this review process, it has become clear that Quad FX is more a proof of concept than a platform intended to provide stiff competition.
I think this was quite interesting. This is what I have been waiting for as "Mega Tasking" is something I find myself trying to do. Sometimes I would run CS and Warcraft 3 at the same time so that when I got bored I could switch easily. On Intel P4 HT it worked well but with AMD it was impossible. Now that dual core and quad core systems are out many tasks at once are important form me. This is especially since I play games that benefit from having more than one window of the game open. If I play an mmorpg I can use a fighterclass and box a support class which speeds up the leveling process and makes me a stronger fighter. Its quite interesting to see AMD note that this could be stronger in launching multiple games. However it looks like intel will hold the crown and I don't think AMD can beat such a marchitecture like Core2Duo. Even if they do at the rate they are going it wont matter because intel will either have refined themselves to the point where they are still competitive or just release a new product.
I think we're forgetting the price thing. Intel = £600, AMD = £350. Its not THAT far behind and its fairly cheap. AMD FTW!
With love and many thanks,
Melons
why did the amd system hgave 4 gigs of ram and the other two have only 2 gigs?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)