What is Digg?39 Comments
- NikoK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24For kicks they should make the FSB clock at 1337 mhz :) because thats exactly what this chip is. Definantly building my new pc around this chip.
- airwalkery2k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Hmm--I may just schedule my new computer around this chip.
- vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Damn, I just typed out a long, very eloquent post pointing out that you were wrong... Then I got the joke.
- Mootabolife, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I used to say that every time I drooled over a new benchmark. I finally decided to settle down with my 4400+ about 2 years ago and have never been happier.
- rattsabre, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"No thanks, I don't want to be able to run multiple apps at once."
- emceepecks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5AMD's K8L is going to have to be pretty damn good to even compete with the enthusiast market (all of which are running Core2's)
- NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Stop saying chip so much, you're making me hungry.
- gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Shuck: You're forgetting about how long Socket A ran and how short-lived Socket 423 [and now 478] was (the first P4 sockets). It happens with both companies. The moral of the story? Just go with what suits you best at the moment.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Anyone know the heat specs on it?"
Penryn was designed to fit the same TDP as Conroe (as well as socket). - pkulak, on 10/29/2007, -3/+6So that's what my next MacBook will have in it.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Either way you're all missing the point: unlike other processors, Penryn is likely to give you a performance increase, even on single core applications, but not through core multiplexing or any other magical technology, but rather simple overclocking; instead of having the other core run at full power, Penryn can turn down the clock on the second core and turn up the clock on the first, giving you a performance boost, even in Word.
As for "is quad core necessary", I'll hold that discussion for "are 12 cores necessary". I know for a fact the typical PC user is at least running two applications, and one of those applications is likely to be multithreaded (music players). Quad core simply offers a level of responsiveness and performance that can't be matched with single- or dual-core machines, which is why _everyone_ is getting to quad core as fast as they can. As for scaling much after quad core, who knows. Sheesh, we didn't get this much resistance when video cards went with 64 pixel shaders (which I just think is ridiculous)... - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"hiding your inability of a real bus and mem controller intel? "
Well, memory controllers have the hideous problem of locking you to the socket that the particular chip is setup with, but as for the bus it's more stubbornness to get as much out of one piece of engineering than anything else.
As for the cache; you've gotta understand that 12MB of cache is spread across 4 cores (well, two dual core dice, 6MB a piece, which isn't that bad to manufacturer), so it really isn't that expensive to manufacture as compared to say, the rest of the chip. - Smills, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3As soon as more programs start using multi-core CPU's you will see just how much of a performance increase they give, it is going to be big.
- benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I hear you shuk, i still use older tech, upgrading a mobo is painful with the lack of pci slots in newer offerings, i have to choose between my tv tuner and 560 gb of IDE hard drives (pci ide controller).
- donjaime, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It is simpler and cheaper to scale out with more cores than to improve the fundamental design of each core. For multi threaded server applications these new quad core chips are a DREAM.
There are diminishing returns, but you still see huge performance gains for multithreaded applications. Computational tasks which are parallel in nature BEG to be split up across parallel hardware. Sure there is synchronization and scaling overhead with adding cores, but for lots of tasks in modern computing, it is worth the cost. - TheGuruStud, on 10/12/2007, -2/+412 megs of cache... hiding your inability of a real bus and mem controller intel? I'd like to know how much it costs them to make that chip. High speed cache is not cheap.
- JayRD, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2What socket is this? Is it the same as a Core 2 Duo?
- cyberwarriorx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@smills
The reality isn't so simple. It's like the whole 64-bit debate. Either your program needs the extra abilities, or it doesn't. I've worked on several large projects in the last few years and really, in most cases it's far easier and better to keep everything on a single thread than it is to split up everything. You usually get better performance too to boot.
What's really nice about the concept of multiple cores though is that you could for instance dedicate a core for each cpu-intensive program that may be running concurrently without any fear of lag since you aren't doing any context switching. Aside from that, I doubt you'll see what you hope for. Most programmers either don't know how to code for such setups, or really don't care to. - Shuk, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6I'm really regretting buying a Socket 939 motherboard. Intel can build 3 generations of chips on one socket, and I can't even upgrade one generation of AMD without changing motherboards. (Technically, I could, but the selection is painfully bad)
- Beaver6813, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was thinking of buying a new processor last night... but i think it can wait... 2-3 months.. no problem!
The quad core was slightly better, but bear in mind nothing was over/underclocked so the quad core has the potential for a better overclocking than the dual core, hence 4 cores being overclocked and not just two. (Says me still running my P4 2.6ghz ;-)) - dcbebop, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Wouldn't that be nice. Unfortunately I think that's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy off.
Anyone know the heat specs on it? - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"upgrading a mobo is painful with the lack of pci slots in newer offerings, i have to choose between my tv tuner and 560 gb of IDE hard drives (pci ide controller)."
Buy a PCI Express IDE controller, they're pretty damn cheap (20 bucks gets you a PATA port and two more SATA ports), and stick the tuner into the one PCI slot most machines still ship with. - byronm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Its probably cheaper than engineering in the other options at this point. Sun/IBM have had large "E-cache's" for years.. bout time intel caught up!
- init100, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2Yes it is. The generation after that, Nehalem, is bound to use a new socket though.
- benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1if it aint broke dont fix it
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2slightly off topic question, a friend of mine has a core 2 duo in his laptop, its the 1.8ghz one, cpuz shows 2 cores each at 900 mhz? . So either its wrong, or are they just adding the 2 cores together and calling it 1.8ghz, instead of saying its a 900mhz dualcore?
- wonderworm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A dual core Penryn getting over 50FPS's more than a Quad Core as yet still unreleased quad core PERFORMANCE KING !!?? And you say that is underwhelming? First you need to Understand how much faster a QX6800 is when compared to a standard Core2duo. Then it really comes to light how good this chip will be for enthusiasts.
http://techreport.com/reviews/2007q2/core2-qx6800/index.x?pg=12 - JayRD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thank you. Later on I can upgrade to that I see.
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1cpuz in this case is wrong. It reminds me of those "8ghz pentium 4" computers on ebay ^__^
- volve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12-3 months? I didn't see that in the article, thought it was Q1 2008... :(
- The_Pope, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Benitojuarez: I don't want to appear flippant, but just buy a PCI-E TV tuner (50 bucks?) or a new hard drive - you can get two 250GB for 135 bucks. Leave the old tech with the old mobo and start fresh
- IMOG, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Is it just me or do these results seem underwhelming to others also? Digg me down if I'm alone here, but I do see some excited comments above which were dugg up.
- n0c0ntr0l, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1And I am finnaly going to switch from AMD to intel.... First AMD went to ATi... so Nvidia is bound to hook up to intel THEN this.... I jsut gotta get one
- swimmerking111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0intel i suppose is decideing to pound back AMD for beating them to the whole dual core idea. 3.33 GHz overclock to 4.0 easily. dual socket hard drive. shiiiit
- The_Pope, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3You say that, but I think I've only ever CPU-only upgraded ONCE in 15 years. Most of the time there are other reasons to upgrade the mobo at the same time: PCI to AGP, AGP to PCI-E, DDR to DDR2, IDE to SATA etc. I don't really see buying a new motherboard as a big deal. For the same reasons, I really don't care about backwards compatibility for game consoles. I'm not mega rich or anything, but I wanted PGR and Halo, so I bought an Xbox. If I really wanted PGR3 and Gear of War, I'd now buy a 360.
- init100, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"hiding your inability of a real bus and mem controller intel?"
I recently read that Intel will use an integrated memory controller and something akin to HyperTransport in their next-generation microarchitecture, Nehalem. - digitalarcanum, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2And you're unable to do that currently with a dual core machine? What I'm saying is that the more cores you throw into a processor the less each additional core is gonna net you any performance gains-- aka diminishing returns. It's not like I'm flaming intel, I'm stating facts here. More cores = diminishing returns.
- josemore, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1me too!
- digitalarcanum, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Maybe it's just me, but I'm not all that impressed with the quad core benchmarks. it really didn't fare that much better than the dual core 45nm or the core 2 extreme it was pitted up against... Of course this has to be taken with a grain of salt: it was a pre-production model. There was a performance increase to be had for sure, but nothing to warrant the sure to be ridiculous price tag that's gonna be associated with it once it's released. While I'm impressed that intel has practically mastered the 45nm process, I'm not impressed with their whole 'lets throw more cores at the problem to make it faster.' at best, that's a temporary solution what with diminishing returns and all.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is