What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
64 Comments
- Kericr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+53It's like Intel processors found the Quake quad damage upgrade and are camping the AMD spawn.
- goat77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+49Link to ACTUAL ARTICLE http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/
- xSweetWilliamx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28or the newest in 5 blade razor technology.
- LordSkywalker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26A preview of a review. Wow.
- TugsMcgroin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24"Core 2 Quadro" sounds like something a sleazy south american car dealer would try to sell you.
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21I love *next page* Tom's Hardware *next page* articles. *next page* *ad* *ad* They're so *ad* informative *next page* and *next page* interesting!! *ad*
- evolseven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23I sware some people act like they download linux iso's constantly.. it must be a collection or something
- Coopjust, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21All of the article, one page with no ads, is here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/print.html
You can add "print.html" to the end of any THG article to get an ad free, all in one version. - shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14more than 200W man thats hot.....
hopefully the final version will only turn on as many cores as it needs, i don't want my processor idling at 180W all night while i download my linux ISO's... - EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"or the newest in 5 blade razor technology."
No, that's the 4 blade, the 5 blade is the fusion... come on now... hmm... time to overclock my razor. - mdew, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Gillette making cpu cores now?
- PayneX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+84 cores for less irritation
- edzieba, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I think i'll stick with my single-core 4000+ until the core-2-dodeco comes out.
- boyter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I like the idea of using the power these things have to run virtual OS's. One stable one as the base OS which I never touch. Then have virtual PC's for Windows/Linux/BSD. No more s*** fights over which is better as you have each one there for you, running full speed. Plus if you want to backup you just copy the image over and everything is sweet.
I guess the problem is Video cards. Every virtualisation program I have tried didnt take advantage of my 3d card so I was forced to go back to the host OS to play a game, negating the point of what I wanted to do. Hopefully this has changed since I last looked. - jaredvolkl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Care to elaborate on the "inaccuracy?" I'll admit tom's has gotten bad with their ads, but they are still a reputable source.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I've seen what I need. In CG rendering and image editing the Core 2 Quadro is a must for me. If you don't need that, you probably want to stick to Core 2 Duo.
- jamesdwi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Take Intel's fastest dual core chips, with lots of L2 cache, overclock them, and put twice as many cores per chip. Install faster RAM, make the FSB run faster and place on the latest motherboard. Attach fast video card, and fast 10k rpm sata drives.
All of this should get 100% speed increase correct? In most of the benchmarks it only gets you 30-50% over AMD fastest chip in most of the bench marks
Of course the older AMD system is happy with an older mother board, slower ram, read cheaper. And wait for 6 months to a year when AMD releases it quad core chips that will have features that will make Intel look slow while Intel's solution shares one front side bus for everything on the system. AMD will have multiple Buses, RAM and IO, have separate buses with each core adding more compatibility thus will scale as expected. - brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I remember a Mad Magazine parody of the Mach 3. It was introducing the Mach 6! With six blades of closeness!
A now there is a five-blade razor. - AndreFronDrei, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5If anybody understands norwegian (or just like to see the nice results):
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?showtopic=608405&hl=+kentsfield
contains OC results, etc...
Happy reading - jon3k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5About a year after everyone already has them running Windows and Linux.
*ducks*
Just kidding, I love Apple! - PantherX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Link to the actual article. buried.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4""Core 2 Quadro" sounds like something a sleazy south american car dealer would try to sell you."
Vote Quadro. - olegk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4But then, next year they will start selling 16-core CPUs and you will curse yourself.
- Klisk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yeah, but who is going to be able to afford this crap when it's first released?
Will gaming companies be so naive to code for it?
I'm 21, can't afford to goto college, and my *life's* saving it roughly 200 dollars. I'm still running an old 900mhz computer, and I even game on this POS because hardware is too expensive.
The technology is nice and all, but don't you think it's more smart to calm down until it's affordable? - MikeCerm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Before reading the article, I thought that FSB would be a problem for Intel. FSB is obviously very close to saturation, and so they've even increased it to 1333 MHz. That 20% increase (over 1066) made little difference, so I'm thinking the tighter bottleneck is elsewhere.
- MikeCerm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Having read the review, it's interesting to note that the Kentsfield is barely faster than Core 2 Duo (at the same clock speed) in most of the tests. Many of the benchmarks, just like real life applications, are single threaded. Even in the "multitasking" benchmarks, there's very little difference.
I think that seek-time and data-transfer rate of hard drives is the new performance bottleneck. - ckasprzak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah I'd prefer AMD's Native quad core to Intel's hacked up dual core proc....
The power consumption will be controlled better on them as it can shut down the cores that are not in use! - 0144, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2wait for 4x4, with competition in quad area the prices will drop
- xr56n44, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2people who link to their own lame-ass blog instead of the actual article should be bitch-slapped like the ***** ***** they are
- RegisteredUser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2More on the the "print.html" hack..
It only works after you load the first page. The print page uses a referrer check. So if you click on the print page from a different site, it will just load the ad-filled regular page. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Core 2 Quadro won't be out in mainstream for a while. It's not like we don't have a choice but to wait.
- EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4200 Watts for 4 cores.... quick math.... 50 Watts a core! That's fine with me. It *might* necessitate water cooling though.
- ImmortalLobster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You know...my opty 165 is plenty for a while...but I gotta say...I want K8L
Oh K8L, where art thow K8L
Intels latest chips are indeed stupid fast,but one thing that would stll stop me from going that route...their still pushing all this on an archaic non-scaleable FSB....thats why the Quads performace isnt that much greater then Conroes, the bandwidth isnt there to support all four cores. oh well, guess it will be up to AMD to show Intel how its done...again - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"200 Watts for 4 cores.... quick math.... 50 Watts a core! That's fine with me. It *might* necessitate water cooling though."
Surprisingly, it doesn't get that hot. It's no worse than a P4 Extreme Edition.
"Will gaming companies be so naive to code for it?"
NO. But they could optimize their code for multi-core processors of all kinds. And this should allow more advanced multiplayer games. E.g. 128 players + bots? - lazlonger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2AWESOME! Thanks for that tip. You should submit it as a seperate article even! jk, but that is good to know.
- ImmortalLobster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Or maybe the FSB;)
- Slovenian6474, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Didn't SNL do a parody on a 10 blade razor? Each blade shave progressively closer as it takes off layers of skin.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8I can't keep thinking of selling my X2 for a c2d. Argh!!!!!
Quad core was promised by the end of the year but now Intel has too. Come on AMD, some up with something! - shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"I sware some people act like they download linux iso's constantly.. it must be a collection or something"
sorry maybe i should explain myself, in Australia the term "linux iso's" is interchangeable for "pr0n and warez".... - klawz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The the new (just released) "quad core" Mac Pros, are NOT quad core, they are dual core X2 chips (so in essence a total of four cores, but not quad-core chips). I suspect if I had bought one of the just released Mac Pros, I'd be kicking myself in the ass if they release the true quad-core chips (X2 chips meaning 8 cores total) any time soon.
- skiptracer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2as homer would say "mmmmmmmmmmm sacralicious"
- nukem996, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Currently none do although I read that nvidia is working on 3d accleration with xen on Linux.
- mufasa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1a guy working at a norwegian eTailer actually managed to get his hands on a Kentsfield ES over a month ago :O
http://pub.tv2.no/nettavisen/it/article695857.ece
- thats from July 28th - - EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Don't current chips support hardware virtulization- virtually (pardon the pun) eleminating overhead?
- marc26uk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yeah, competition is great : )
- berfmurret, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i wonder what the price on these little beasties will be on release. everyone is saying "dont buy now unless you expect your new chip will just be a stopgap! wait just a couple of months!! " but when you can OC a e6300 to 3.5ghz ($190 chip) im thinknig that unless these chips start out at $500 or less then i would be more than happy with a core 2 duo for a good couple of years. im thinking intel will release these closer to core 2 duo extreme prices.
- pbarnes7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2That's relevant to WHAT? Nothing.
- marc26uk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1That talk of 32nm process by 2009 is starting to make my head spin.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Just someone that will not admit truth. I don't have brand loyalty, I just want the best processor that'll work for me. Today, AMD is not the option.
- ImmortalLobster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Is it still an accomplishment if the bandwidth supplied to the chip isnt large enough to feed those transistors...nooo
is it an accomplisment to have to use so many transistors to accomplis this task...probably not
its all relative ;) -
Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is