...but they're in Japanese.
Here
The pictures are interesting though, and you can babelfish it.
Looks like AMD still has alot of work ahead of them...
...but they're in Japanese.
Here
The pictures are interesting though, and you can babelfish it.
Looks like AMD still has alot of work ahead of them...
mm. so in a quick summing up. for multithreaded apps quad is better. for the usual stuff core2 is.
hardly a shock. you cant just throw cores at games and expect improvements. AMD is crying out for the next core revision
VodkaOriginally Posted by Ephesians
The whole QuadFX seems like SLI or CF to me: two chips at high prices for minor preformace gains. I think the advice applies too: it only has the possibility to make sense for the absolute top of the line, and even then the competition might be able to beat it.
Looking at a few of the benchmarks, the memory access is slowed by having 2 CPU connected.
Not sure, does this imply that the QUAD FX M/B will run with just one CPU in?
If so if there was a cheaper M/B available to take the chip, I can may be see people selling on the 2nd CPU to get a cheap dual system ... just a thought.
4x4 is a bit pointless really seeing as kentsfield is faster overall, the 4x4 mobos cost £230, and the socket's gonna be obsolete in a few months....Guess we'l just have to wait for barcelona to see any credibile competion from amd
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)