What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
29 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16I don't know... $600 for two CPUs (8 cores total), 12 SATA ports, 8 video port capability, 20 USB 2.0 discrete buses... very, very tempting... Can the core 2 quads even be applied in two+ discrete CPU packages?
The age of multicore is here... right now. Programmers: multi-thread or die. - bigwophh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Intel's manufacturing capabilities are second to none. It gives them a huge advantage that won't be easily overcome. Intel is firing on all cylinders right now. AMD needs a new micro-architecture to put the heat back on Intel. For competition's sake, I hope K8L does the trick.
- soogy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Exactly. While Intel has lowered their production costs and increased productivity, speed and reliability, AMD has been left in the dust to play catch-up -- a game Intel knows all too well.
All I can say is good work, Intel. You've learned from your mistakes. You're no longer the girlfriend I'm ashamed to have meet my family. - DerMeister45, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14AMD fell through... the rise of Intel for now, and they have a 45nm tap out while AMD is still trailing...
- danielwsmithee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"Can the core 2 quads even be applied in two+ discrete CPU packages?"
Yes that is the the Xeon 5300 series. People have already bought them and dropped them into existing Xeon based machines like the Mac Pro and have a similar 8 core system up and running. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9This is all really moot for the foreseeable future. These quad-core processors, from both AMD and Intel, currently cost more alone than most reasonable people would pay for an entire PC.
It's not really that good of an investment anyway. When you get into these higher-end components, especially the CPUs, the difference in performance becomes less and less while the price difference grows more and more. The best investment you can probably make right now is a high-end video card. This is what most people's PC horsepower is put into anyway and, unlike with a CPU, you'll actually see tangible improvement in your day-to-day PC usage.
Unless you're a professional who does heavy video editing or something like that... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The power consumption for AMD is just outright RIDICULOUS! hothardware tries to explain some of it, but that's still completely unacceptable when you compare it to the Core 2 Quadro!
I also could've used some 3dsmax 8 benchmarks, more game benchmarks, and more video encoding benchmarks. Any other sources? - V1ncent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I have been using AMD for years now and now startingly enough it looks like they got caught with their pants down. Congrats, Intel! They finally came out and took the lead. Well deserved! I think this is good for AMD because they got lazy and now they'll make an even better product. Without AMD and Intel fighting it out, we'd all have sucky processors. They need each other and we get the best of the best cheaper as a result!
- Satanael, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6These are not Quad-Core CPUs. They're two Dual-Core CPUs.
As much as I have grown to love AMD I'm a little ashamed they're doing this. The article claims that AMD is consuming more power and making it more complex just to try and catch up with Intel. But it is definitely good bang for the buck. - davodavo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8"That's like 40 cores, right?"
No, but it's retarded. - NoHandle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Was there a hidden pun in there or was "firing" just coincidental?
- Satanael, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Perhaps the sarcasm wasn't laid on thickly enough for you to understand.
I extend my deepest apologies. - NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The big question is, when does a multi core processor stop being multi core and become a single core parallelized processor? If you have a million 'cores' on a single die, is that really a million core processor or just one core with a lot of parallel processing units?
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5from earlier:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTIzMywsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0
Shows the same thing. AMD is power hungry and doesn't perform as well. Makes for a wonderful heater during the cold winter. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"multi-thread or die"
I'm ahead of you, been multithreading for over a decade on the server end. This multi-core stuff is great for servers, the consumers are driving multiple core technology and that's spilling over to servers. Intel's 5320 is a great bargain right now.
And with all the virtualization that is so trendy, I'm sure a few polyster-clad mainframe guys are coming out of the woodwork. - mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Thanks geronimo, but we're looking for individual processors, not entire servers. Do you know where to get those?
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Where do you get these things? I have a friend who's looking for quad-xeons but we can't find them anywhere."
Just ordered a couple of 5320's 10 minutes ago...
http://www.siliconmechanics.com/
http://www.siliconmechanics.com/i5992/intel-dual-core-server.php
5320 is cheaper than the 5150 despite the 5320 being faster when multithreading.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=585&num=2 - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3err this shows the 5320 being faster (see make -j which taxes all CPUs)
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=585&num=6 - NoHandle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Oh boy, I can't wait for my new vigintuplet processor system.
- Satanael, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I, for one, think the next logical step is Cube processors... one side of the cube plugged into the Motherboard with the other 5 sides serving as sockets... for cell processors...
That's like 40 cores, right? - JayRod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I see this as a desperation move for AMD. Why not just shrink the die to 45nm and do a quad core on "One" chip. Easier said than done I guess. Having two dual core processors and selling them in pairs doesn't seem right. Maybe if they were quad core and have two of them for 8 cores would make more sense. I've always been an AMD fan since the days of the K6-III 450 can beat their Pentium III 450 days. But this will force me to go with Intel on this one. Keep same motherboard for Core 2 and just pop in the quad core later. Sorry AMD, upgrading to that 1 kW power supply is not in my immediate future.
- toveling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's a million cores. A million things can happen at the same time, that's the point. One core can do one thing at a time (simply put, not looking into pipelining etc).
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Please stop it with the, "Wait for this!" *****. People told us to wait for socket AM2 processors and that ended up being worthless. Then I was told to wait for 4X4. Here we go again. This power hog is just not as cost-effective as its competitor. Maybe it will play games better in the future, maybe it won't. We do NOT know.
- mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Intel's 5320 is a great bargain right now."
Where do you get these things? I have a friend who's looking for quad-xeons but we can't find them anywhere. - Alcorr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2This is good and bad. First of all, the value looks incredibly tempting. Consider this, you can get whats basically a quad core system for the cost of only 600$ cpu wise. Thats pretty impressive. Once games get more and more multithreaded (source engine anyone?) then two fx 70s are gonna be WAY more powerful than a single dual core 6800. Give this thing into summer of 2007, and this will be pretty impressive.
The bad (for me at least) is that I need to build a new system but really want to wait until amd gets native quad core going so I might get 8 cores. Waiting an entire year really sucks when my current rig is a 2.4ghz p4 and ati x1600 with 768MB of ram. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Nope, although you can probably call silicon mechanics and ask them where they get their processors.
- ThunderChunks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Its a completely false economy. Unless you are into heavy video processing your better of sticking with a high end dual core at the mo. How many applications actually use dual core let alone quad core. Looks like we are heading towards 'core wars' whereas they should be looking to optimize the dual core tech thats out there at the mo. No good having a quad core beast if it only gives the same performance as current dual core models in single apps.
- inanitywarlord, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Looks like it could be time for Amd to borrow once again from Ibm on new and improved soi. Maybe it's what's needed to get this next leap forward.
- vezquex, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1NUMA!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is