enthusiast.hardocp.com — A chat with AMD's CTO about the upcoming K8L Quad Core AMD processor gives us some new insight as to just how AMD is looking to handle the newly competitive market served up by Intel's Core 2 Duo and beyond.
Sep 18, 2006 View in Crawl 4
jakethecakeSep 18, 2006
I would love to have a quad when compiling world in gentoo or freebsd. It takes 9 hour or so with an amd X2. Compiling on the linux/bsd desktop really scales well thanks to the kernel optimizations from the guys at novell/ibm/redhat.. I think Vista with it's 2003 server codebase is going to do good too. The Q4 06 intel quad is going to be soo expensive :-/
hurfydurfurSep 18, 2006
Leapfrog while [H]ardOCP covers how great AMD is.(see bias: <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardocp#Core_2_Review)">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardocp#Core_2_Review)</a>
hurfydurfurSep 18, 2006
In the article, OCP says "The Xbox 360 has three dual-core processors onboard, and Phil thinks that this has game developers moving down the multithreaded path."I thought the 360 had three cores but each core could do two threads. Anyone?
pugfug90Sep 18, 2006
It would be 8.<a class="user" href="http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/04/top_secret_intel_processor_plans_uncovered/page7.html#45_nm_processor_overview">http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/04/top_secret_intel_processor_plans_uncovered/page7.html#45_nm_processor_overview</a>Notice how Intel is going from Solo, to Duo, to Quadro, to Octo:)Adding 1 core to 2 cores would only yield 50% more performance max, and that's for threaded software. Intel/AMD need to double the cores. Otherwise, they would be increasing costs without noticeable performance gains.
mikecermSep 19, 2006
The Cell was both revolutionary at the time it was announced, and DOA. It's seems at though they're just unable to make them, and it's basically impossible to fully utilize for gaming. We don't have multi-threaded games for the PC yet, and IBM/Sony though that people would be able to take advantage of a multitude of "specialized" processing units? Basically, as it has over the last 20 years, x86 will progress too quickly for alternative architectures (like Cell) to gain any traction. Look what happened to PPC. Despite it's theoretical technological advantages, it ultimately couldn't compete with what Intel and AMD were doing.
vinbobSep 19, 2006
My point was that Windows 2000/XP doesn't recognise the difference between multi-core CPUs and multiple CPU sockets, they just see a number of CPUs.2003 & Vista do recognise this difference, whereas Linux doesn't have a limit on how many cores/CPUs you throw at it.