AMD, Intel Plotting Six-Core CPU Releases

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]fatkid35[/nom]omni your right, software developers need to get their multicore sh*t together.[/citation]

Ever thought that maybe some people use multiple heavy apps at once using 2+ cores per app etc

This is going to be the same argument as when dual-cores came out, then quad-cores etc -its getting old people.

Theres nothing wrong with the extra power :)
 
[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]Ever thought that maybe some people use multiple heavy apps at once using 2+ cores per app etcThis is going to be the same argument as when dual-cores came out, then quad-cores etc -its getting old people.Theres nothing wrong with the extra power[/citation]
You're missing the point, I think. The argument actually is very much valid, and alive. Applications which are written well to take advantage of multiple cores run quite fast on a dual-core, and so on. But most apps are not written with this in mind, so you can throw them at 6 cores, or 8 cores but it won't utilize the power which it has at its disposal. That's the point. Yes, of course more cores are better, but are they better because you think they are, or because they really are. Hardware and software should compliment one another, it's not optimal when one hardware outruns software so far ahead that it's actually pointless to pay for the fast hardware.
 
apache i'm not saying more power isn't a good thing. just wish they could harness all that power. and you know most guys just wanna see who's benchmarks are higher, hell i'm one of those guys. i know the real professionals that rely on really good hardware to do "actual work" will use the hell out of them. me, i'm just a hater cause i know i'll never need or use that much power. no offence intended.
 
Q2 2010 BY 10th of May AMD Thurban X6 1075 2.8Ghz, 2.4HT, L2 2Mb, L3 6Mb, TDP 125 = Bios update for AMD2+, AMD3 motherboards,
Q1 2010 AMD Deneb X4 975 3.6Ghz, L2 2Mb, L3 6Mb TDP 125 - 140 = AMD does not want to compete itself e.g X4 965 140 TDP - X4 965 125 TDP. Originally X6 1075 was a 140 TDP part and now is 125 TDP. The 125 TDP parts have much grater exposure and market share than 140 TDP parts. Expect AMD CPU'S Phenom 2 X2, X3 and X4 to reach 4 Ghz by the end of 2010 - Q1 2011.

The X2 CPU's technically can already be produced at 4.0 Ghz TDP 140.
e.g X2 555 3.2 GHZ 80 TDP, 565 3.4 GHZ 95 TDP, 575 3.6 GHZ 110 TDP,
585 3.8 GHZ 125 TDP and 595 4.0 GHZ 140 TDP. The technical abilities of AMD Phenom 2 X3 and X4 allow it to be produced at 3.6Ghz 140 TDP.
AMD will hold the fort with Denebs X2, X3, X4 and X6 untill Q1 2011 Bulldozer and Bobcat AM3r2 = AM3+
AMD X2, X3 and X4 are the same Deneb core with disabled cores for X3 and X4 ;-D.
 
[citation][nom]Aleksa2009[/nom]Q2 2010 BY 10th of May AMD Thurban X6 1075 2.8Ghz, 2.4HT, L2 2Mb, L3 6Mb, TDP 125 = Bios update for AMD2+, AMD3 motherboards,Q1 2010 AMD Deneb X4 975 3.6Ghz, L2 2Mb, L3 6Mb TDP 125 - 140 = AMD does not want to compete itself e.g X4 965 140 TDP - X4 965 125 TDP. Originally X6 1075 was a 140 TDP part and now is 125 TDP. The 125 TDP parts have much grater exposure and market share than 140 TDP parts. Expect AMD CPU'S Phenom 2 X2, X3 and X4 to reach 4 Ghz by the end of 2010 - Q1 2011. The X2 CPU's technically can already be produced at 4.0 Ghz TDP 140.e.g X2 555 3.2 GHZ 80 TDP, 565 3.4 GHZ 95 TDP, 575 3.6 GHZ 110 TDP,585 3.8 GHZ 125 TDP and 595 4.0 GHZ 140 TDP. The technical architecture of AMD Phenom 2 X3 and X4 allow it to be produced at 3.6Ghz 140 TDP. AMD will hold the fort with Denebs X2, X3, X4 and X6 untill Q1 2011 Bulldozer and Bobcat AM3r2 = AM3+. AMD X2, X3 and X4 are the same Deneb core with disabled cores for X2 and X4 ;-D.[/citation]
 
Why six cores? Doesn't it make more sense to double? 1 core...2 core...4 core...8 core...? so in a decade we'll all be running 256 core CPUs of which the cores composed of carbon nanotubes and single electron transistors running at a terahertz with a 8192 bit wide bus on a 32 socket double sided motherboard!
 
[citation][nom]loomis86[/nom]Why six cores? Doesn't it make more sense to double? 1 core...2 core...4 core...8 core...? so in a decade we'll all be running 256 core CPUs of which the cores composed of carbon nanotubes and single electron transistors running at a terahertz with a 8192 bit wide bus on a 32 socket double sided motherboard![/citation]

I think my skull just cracked
 
if its that bad to use quad core or six core processors why dony you all stick to a Pentium 4 or Pentium D? im sure the performance will be sufficent, and the power consumption around the same mark too 😀
 
apps doesnt necessarily mean they should be written for multicores just to harness the potential of dual cores, quads, and six's. i mean, dont you run antivirus, utorrent perhaps, or whatever processes that's in the background? doncha think it would be slow if you have a pentium 4 3GHz running all that vs a core2quad running a 2.93GHz? take your pick if you think that the 2nd core is useless.
 
[citation][nom]falchard[/nom]I bet AMD wins this round for a simple reason.AMD 6-core for $300.Intel 6-core for $1200.[/citation]

O RLY?
 
@apache because the cores have gotten vastly more efficient/faster while using less power per core.

The 40 sempron sargas core will chew up and spit out any stock p4 or pd, with ACC it could be a dual Athlon II. For most of the general users a dual will do just fine for now, many power users who actually utilize the hardware through heavy multitasking, or running several multi-threaded apps will find the need for such chips. The fact that an AMD user could go from a single core to a six-core system with just a bios update and new chip, these things are gonna sell, all while driving down the prices of the already cheap chips.

I wonder if AMD will release x5's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom