What is Digg?37 Comments
- nsharp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13"works in existing motherboards"
Penryn is still not without its mysteries; a primary concern for enthusiasts is motherboard and socket support. Penryn will launch on Socket 775 -- meaning existing motherboards can physically harbor the new CPU but electrically might not. "Motherboard developers will have to make some minor changes to support [Penryn]. We can't guarantee that a person could just plug the chip into every motherboard on the market today."
OK. I'm confused but cautiously optimistic. - sishgupta, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12If you are confused I can try to help.
The amount and alignment of pins are the same between the current intel's and this Penryn because they are both socket LGA775. This means that you can physically place any LGA775 socket chip into a LGA775 socket motherboard.
The problem is that there are technological differences between CPUs and motherboards need to support these in order for the CPU to be supported. An example of this is the Pentium D and the Core 2 Duo (conroe). They are both the same socket, but motherboard manufactures had to release new motherboards to support the core 2 duo due to new technologies in the c2d.
You may be asking then why don't they change the socket to eliminate confusion.The reason is that people might still want to use pentium D processors instead of core 2 duos (there are various reasons for this) and so the motherboards are backwards compatible if they keep the same socket.
A bios update might solve the problem, but it might also be physically limited by the chipset and then one would need to get a new mobo. - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@dawgma
Most likely yes, if you buy a quality motherboard. ASUS, Gigabyte, etc will all put out BIOS updates to support newer processors, however buying a board this early in the game is likely going to cause you to lose out. It's kinda like what intel said about conroe, it was supposed to be drop-in compatable, but they had to revise the power specs at the last second and motherboard manufactures could not fix it without a newer board revision, the same is likely for this time around. Unless you're buying your hardware a few months before peryn's release, don't expect compatability. - jstevewhite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@damentz
"AMD always worked on optimizing the core more than cheating by making new extension standards to win temporarily."
Ever heard of "3dNow!" ? It was AMD's attempt at matrix math extensions like SSE and Altivec. It didn't suck, but, for various reasons, it didn't prevail. The assertion that offering optimized extensions for common tasks is 'cheating' boggles the mind, however. You'd have me believe that any extensions over and above the original 8080 instruction set is 'cheating'?
I'm not an AMD hater - I'm glad they're around to keep Intel honest. I've owned more than one AMD system. But I would like to point out that AMD processors were ***** until they licensed the Alpha processor (EV6/7/8) technology and put it in the Athlon; the Alpha FPU was what made the Athlon competetive at all. Intel isn't 'nice', or 'cool', and they don't play well with others, but one thing they do extremely well - when their market share is threatened - is build a processor. - Mejogid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Presumably that just means a BIOS update? If they physically fit in and the mother boards have the bandwidth etc, I'd have thought motherboard manufacturers could release updates if they can be bothered.
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@dumbledorito
if i recall the XPS700 had a foxconn motherboard in it, (obviously dell rebranded).
But here's a link to a site that discusses the XPS700's ability to use newer processors, it more primarily concerned about quad core, but don't expect your board to run a fab shrink if it doesn't support the quad core signal specs.
http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archive/2006/11/15/3573.aspx
It appears that dell will leave you out in the cold, no bios updates, no support....nothing. Bear that in mind. - drizek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6really? My dad doesnt work for intel, but I heard that news a month ago on slashdot.
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Not really, what Intel has going for them is the fabrication process. AMD unless something changes, will not be able to catch up (not until many months after intel has released). Meanwhile, AMD is still reeling from the aquisition of ATI, from my perspective this is the most opertune moment to strike for intel.
- TonyCubed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well, Intel have been bashed around for several years, looks like they want payback.
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Intel's agressive fabrication plan is aimed to put AMD in the hurt, the concept is really simple, genius if you ask me, but a little unfair.
Intel is aiming to get 8 core chips in mainstream by 2008, mean while get the fabrication process down to 45 or 30nm. AMD can compete with intel in terms of research, but fabrication is a huge problem for AMD. As we all see, AMD was 5-6 months behind intel to 65nm, i doubt that AMD can ramp up fab to 45nm or especially 30nm in any where near that time frame, in addition to this, intel is content to fight AMD in a price war.
It's pretty clear to me what Intel's strategy is here. Develope faster than AMD, crush AMD's profit margins in the price war, or otherwise throw the massive weight that intel has on the industry full on against AMD. Intel is even doing what it normal doesn't, and is pushing to adopt newer technologies, PCIe 2.0 and DDR3. It's going to be brutal and AMD is going to be in the hurt for a few years, unless AMD can put out a "killer" chip. - warriorscot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Actually i prefer this in AMD the competition for motherboards are better and in general quality especially in K8s and 9s is higher and prices lower(although that's partly because AMD doesn't need as complicated a motherboard with its onboard memory controller). If they both released processors that performed equally well and it came down to how well motherboards performed and cost i think AMD would win without question of a doubt because apart from cheapo brands and some asus boards AMD motherboards are fantastic in both quality and features, cheaper too.
The new Intel chips are good but ive never liked Intel motherboards to sparse on features and certainly too expensive also having the same socket for so long is confusing to alot of people i personally think they should have moved to a new socket for core2. - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Probably not, a few molecules thick of material on 200mm2 is no big deal, creating descrete components, very very expensive.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Understood. Thank you!
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How so? Dell carries Intel and AMD. Whatever the consumer wants, I would assume.
- lucid270, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2well.. it is a die shrink, not a completely new architecture
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Fantastic. Hope they win this round. Dell has to be downloading into their collective diapers right about now.
- noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Do applications even use SSE3?
- dawgma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So does this mean that if I purchase a Core Duo core now... I will be able to replace it with a Duo or Quad "Penryn" in the future?
- damentz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Very informative, now I know how fast it is.
- ApplCmptrDood, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4My dad works for Intel, and the first prototype build of the Penryn processor worked with XP on bootup.
- dawgma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Thanks, maninblac1!
- cantoral, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"The implementation of high-k and metal gate materials marks the biggest change in transistor technology since the introduction of polysilicongate MOS transistors in the late 1960s" claims Gordon Moore, Intel co-founder attributed with coining "Moore's Law."
Hafnium for high-k materials. Does that mean we are going to have high dielectric capacitors coming soon, and thus capacitors replacing some batteries soon? - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3A QX6600 (pricey) should stem you over for 5 (easy) years without any problems in the world.
Normal people won't see a significant difference going beyond 4 cores. Unless the software industry has a revolution. - Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@maninblac1: Do you know if the Dell XPS700 series has a "quality" motherboard? I've been eyeing their C2D systems in the business outlet (some are selling for cheaper than the component parts and are decent machines) and wondered if they would also allow these new chips.
- TonyCubed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Adobe Premier 2 wouldn't work without a CPU with SSE2.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"meaning existing motherboards can physically harbor the new CPU but electrically might not."
Shame motherboard developers like to take shortcuts and develope their products so that they ride the edge of the specs of chips (and thusly can use cheaper voltage regulators, or underdesign the board's electrical pathways to be tolerant to certain kinds of noises).
"Presumably that just means a BIOS update? If they physically fit in and the mother boards have the bandwidth etc, I'd have thought motherboard manufacturers could release updates if they can be bothered."
Presumably, yes. But in actuality about 1 in every 4 boards just isn't going to work because of spec-bending. The big-names usually get it right (and the motherboard in your Dell is probably made by one of those big names so it should be okay), but some of the smaller motherboard manufacturers, or even some of the bigger manufacturer's cheap-o lines just don't cut the mustard. - damentz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Exactly, the only reason's the old pentium 4's would have been faster was because they had an extension that AMD did not incorporate yet, which used to be the issue. AMD always worked on optimizing the core more than cheating by making new extension standards to win temporarily.
- ricodued, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Let's just say an entire OS uses it (cough OS X cough), or at least requires it.
Lots of people who run OS X on PC hardware like to buy SSE3 processors so that OS X will run perfectly without patches (for the processor at least). - freidog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The thing about SSE3 is that it was a pretty small update, about a dozen instructions in all. A few specifically for Hyperthreading, a few with atrocious execution latencies (the Horizontal add / sub were 10 or 15 cycle latency on Netburst chips, if not for the load store operations, x86 instructions would probably have been faster), leaving only a handful of really use full instructions - and they were quite specialized for certain tasks.
SSE1 and 2 laid down an excellent foundation for SIMD instructions on Intel and AMD chips, but additions to those are going to be largely to fill small niche needs the general purpose instructions do not adequately fill (or provide relatively poor performance).
So does software make use of SSE3? Yea, a little bit. But if you support SSE1 and 2, you've got 99% of what you need for good SIMD optimization. - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@warriorscot
You key problem is "if they release processors that perform equally well", AMD is now behind intel, not far behind but it will be soon. And i don't mean technologically, i mean in fabrication. If you have two chips that perform equally well, one at 65nm and one at 45nm the 45nm uses less power and can be clocked faster.
AMD so far, even in their latest 4x4 hasn't really held a candel to intel, (read the lackluster reviews of 4x4), it's always been true that AMD has had better memory access, and thus needed less cache...and thus had cheaper components. It doesn't however adopt new technologies quickly, (like DDR2) etc.
If you really read up on the 2 companies long term developement plans, AMD doesn't come close to what intel is "trying to do", intel is trying to get down to 22nm, 1 billion transistors, 8 cores+, (eventually an integrated memory controller), DDR3, PCIe 2.0. (all by 2010 (or so) no less) Even if they perform the same clock for clock, while newer technologies are expensive, that doesn't matter in the long run, intel has the advantage. - Rudy69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0so when can we expect this to come out?
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Sheds light..."
Moron - smish420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@ subxero37
I've just had the pleasure of dealing with that type of motherboard problem you had.....I dont even know what to do since I dont want to have to buy a new cpu too since i already have a dual core 939 and I was pretty happy with it until the board crapped out. (MSI brand) I'm just afraid that I'll have the same problem no matter what board I replace it with - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I suppose i forgot to add that sometime in the future, intel will revive HT (probably about the same time DDR3 is implemented to handle the bandwidth), (after reworking the methodoly etc) i'd fully expect to see Clovertown, or Whitefield processors but particularily Conroe and Kentsfield (if they're still in productin) with HT enabled. This should give potentially a major performance boost. Because one thing remains certain, HT was a good idea, it's implementation the first time around left ALOT to be desired.
- subxero37, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2What Intel really has going for them is that they make their own motherboards for their own processors using their own chipsets. With AMD, you can't get an official AMD motherboard -- I used to own an Athlon 64 (still do, it's just not operational) and the motherboard on that thing is terrible. Absolutely horrendous. It performed well for a few months, and then started having random reboots, random "BIOS checksum error" messages, random program crashes, and all of it was traceable back to the motherboard. The RAM was fine (I'm using it today, on this Intel board, and it's 100% stable) and the CPU was fine (tried it in a different motherboard) but because AMD has no serious guarantee about companion products (like motherboards) I've almost completely switched back to Intel.
I'm not looking forward to new Intel processors, I'm sticking with Intel more for the stability -- it's not speed I care about, I'm not an avid gamer (hell, I'm using a Celeron right now.) Intel needs to realize that speed is important, but sheer component interaction and stability is far more important.
I'd still be with AMD if they had the right idea. - rollerboy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0I don't know enough about processors other than to say; TECHNOLOGY IS SO QUICK JUST TELL ME WHICH IS THE BEST AND THE CHEAPEST ARRRGGGHH.
- Cable, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Who buys intel motherboard?
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is