Intel Quad Core Soon

[Devils-Blood]

It seems that intel has got AMD on the run again with them likely to release their kentsfield processor as early as November. It seems that AMD will be at least 18 months behind Intel with their quad core.

I don't think I will be buying one at $999 or around £580

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20060906094518.html


All those disappionted playstation fans with the delay of playstation 3. Both my brothers wouldn't believe me when I told them a few months back it wouldn't be released until next year in europe. If people would only read company analyst reports from wall street.

[Firerat]

AWWWW, why did you tell me that, I just bought an E6600 !!

[Mighty_Jah]

AMD on a historical note, always have let the competition slip up, then attack...with More beef speed and value for money...! :wink:

heres hoping for a repeat perfomance....Lets ave it!!!!


Mighty... :wink:

[Devils-Blood]

But with Intel being a whole year and a half in front of AMD, Intel will have moved onto the next manufacture process down from 65nm where AMD will just be geting upto speed with 65nm. Intel will be able to bring new revisions that will beat AMD quad core. Reading analyst reports that suggests AMD will be on the back foot for some time now and will struggle to out perform Intel. This is basically Intel being so far ahead of AMD on manufacturing size, and by the time AMD release their quad core processor Intel would be moving to 40nm.

[Devils-Blood]

I don't care who is in front as long as it makes prices cheaper. AMD took it eyes off the game and got caught out. I was one of the early adopters of AMD moving from Intel and encouraging others. What I used to like about AMD when a new processor came out they used the same socket, but now we have had socket 754, 939 and now AM2.

They say they have moved to socket AM2 and all new processors in the future will use that socket, but I for don't believe them. That was one of the advantages they had over Intel, easy upgrade when better faster processors were released and I am sure it was a big part of people moving to AMD from Intel.

When I wanted to upgrade I passed AMD over for Intel because to upgrade using AMD I had to buy new mobo and memory, so I thought I might as well buy the best processor out there seeing I had to buy a new mobo and memory anyway.

I think that will be a problem for AMD.

Nothing to do with AMD or Intel

Next is DDR 3 and that has a different pin configuration than DDR 2, there must of been a way to of used the 240 pins DDR 2 uses. The ATI RD600 is already compatible and able to run DDR 3 But any body who buys the boards won't able to upgrade to DDR 3 because the memory sockets are 240 pins. It seems to me they are fixing the market in some way to force people to buy new mobo's when the new memory comes in.

[Walrus]

I'm not all that excited by the prospect of quad-core for the mainstream desktop in the short term; medium to long term maybe.

I know for fact that many software developers have trouble getting to grips with multi-threaded applications.

The current performance and general responsiveness gains seen from the current crop of Intel and AMD dual core CPUs is more due to 'background' tasks (some of which are pretty stodgy these days) being able to effectively have a core to themselves. The primary application, that is your application or game therefore isn't hindered so much my these.

My opinion will change when we start to see some well written truely multi-threaded applications and games hitting the home market (some professional packages, predominately graphics packages, already utilise multi-threading well).

[benzeman]

I know for fact that many software developers have trouble getting to grips with multi-threaded applications.

Agree - devs have got stuff that's "easy" to run over lots of cores working (like video encoding), but things like gaming don't really use all four cores at the moment. Having said that, intel are pricing their quads very aggressively!

[Chaz]

Holy mother of thread revival

[marsey99]

some threads should stay dead tbh.