Yowzers ! Intel are gonna dominate the CPU scene again for years by the looks of things![]()
http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/09/10...he_rampage_uk/
Yowzers ! Intel are gonna dominate the CPU scene again for years by the looks of things![]()
http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/09/10...he_rampage_uk/
An engineering bodge just to beat AMD to the first quad core release on paper and generate some hype? Well it will dominate for months anyway...
Core 2 has just two tricks that the current generation AMD devices can't do: memory re-ordering worth about 5% and SSE issue rate which gives AMD the rest of its kicking. Both will be addressed in the AMD K8L core. Remember, the *currently shipping* AMD processors have a quad core capable crossbar on them, AMD are just waiting for their 65nm shrink to ramp up before making use of it.
AMD will still have an on-board memory controller to help them win at that point, I guess we will see just how much difference it makes when the rest of the playing field is pretty flat.
I have no doubts that the AMD K8L will smash all Core2duo/quaddro's perhaps even easily... Intel needs something like hypertransport before they can have maximum performance
Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.2Ghz (400Mhzx8) 1.52V (set in bios, 1.47v real) | 4GB GeIL PC6400 4-4-4-12 | Gigabyte DQ6 @ 1600Mhz | HD2900XT 1GB | Enermax Infiniti 720W | Silverstone TJ07-B with custom watercooling | BenQ FP241WZ
3dmark05 - 13140 | 3dmark06 - 6698 | SuperPi 1M - 15s
the extra 2 cores are for running norton 2008.
so whens k8l coming?
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
VodkaOriginally Posted by Ephesians
I was hoping that Intel would take the same approch as AMD is doing by coming out with a native quad-core. I know they do not use a HTT like AMD's, but I am sure intel could of come out with a Dual or Quad FSB type setup.
IMO, Intel rushed this double dual core & I just don't see its performance impressive right now. Its innovation is just nothing to brag about.
Oh, the inquirer, must be true then![]()
Personally, I am not really interested in quad core. Its an expense that is overkill for what I do and thus doesn't interest me until coders start taking use of multiple CPUs properly. Hopefully this will happen soon to give people (other then server purchasers and 3d modelers) a reason to buy them.
Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive
Intel will have a native QuadCore
I'm running a Quad Core CPU right now - I like it - I'd prefer my Woodcrest box to be upgraded to Dual Quad Cores though![]()
i dont have any use for quad core
less cores = less volts and heat so the dual core equivalent should overclock better, and there will only be a few hardcore apps that can even use more than 2 cores, so dual core should be faster for everything i do
I have to agree, this is the first time in years I have been really excited by in Intel CPU.......... Not since the Celeron 300 over clocked so nicely in my dual cpu Abit BP6... Anyways back to the 21st centaury and its time to start saving saving.....
Workstation 1: Intel i7 950 @ 3.8Ghz / X58 / 12GB DDR3-1600 / HD4870 512MB / Antec P180
Workstation 2: Intel C2Q Q9550 @ 3.6Ghz / X38 / 4GB DDR2-800 / 8400GS 512MB / Open Air
Workstation 3: Intel Xeon X3350 @ 3.2Ghz / P35 / 4GB DDR2-800 / HD4770 512MB / Shuttle SP35P2
HTPC: AMD Athlon X4 620 @ 2.6Ghz / 780G / 4GB DDR2-1000 / Antec Mini P180 White
Mobile Workstation: Intel C2D T8300 @ 2.4Ghz / GM965 / 3GB DDR2-667 / DELL Inspiron 1525 / 6+6+9 Cell Battery
Display (Monitor): DELL Ultrasharp 2709W + DELL Ultrasharp 2001FP
Display (Projector): Epson TW-3500 1080p
Speakers: Creative Megaworks THX550 5.1
Headphones: Etymotic hf2 / Ultimate Ears Triple.fi 10 Pro
Storage: 8x2TB Hitachi @ DELL PERC 6/i RAID6 / 13TB Non-RAID Across 12 HDDs
Consoles: PS3 Slim 120GB / Xbox 360 Arcade 20GB / PS2
Very interesting. So, when AMD shrink to 65nm and hence double their transistor density, would you prefer
1/ 4 cores
2/ Tons of cache
3/ cheaper dual core
Intel have kind of given us the choice with 6300 (cheaper) vs 6600 (cache) apart from the clock speed difference, but then we can overclock around that![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)