Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage

[darklife41]

The Asus P5W64 WS Professional may work with quad core although my supplier has it listed as a server motherboard, and again it has Asus crappy 8 channel onboard sound. My suppliers don't list it as quad core ready but the Asus site does. The WS's have very good voltage regulators. But unless you're also putting in a sound card, I wouldn't pay $300+ USD for an Asus. 🙂

Also, since absolutely no one has gotten ahold of a quad core extreme chip to test yet, I think its premature to say that the chip won't use more voltage than a P4 965 EE, especially since the C2D extreme is already pushing that envelope. In theory, if its the same chip as the C2D extreme, its going to use twice the voltage.

After the initial 975 debacle (P5WDG2 and P5WD2-E, neither of which still supports C2D although Asus orginally claimed they would), I sure wouldn't count on a bios update being able to solve multiple core issues either. But that's just my experience. 🙂

 

[bga]

Also, since absolutely no one has gotten ahold of a quad core extreme chip to test yet, I think its premature to say that the chip won't use more voltage than a P4 965 EE, especially since the C2D extreme is already pushing that envelope. In theory, if its the same chip as the C2D extreme, its going to use twice the voltage.

The chip THG tests is a pre-production EE Kentsfield. The standard Kentsfields are going to be slower SKU's. The C2D X6800 uses max 85W, and the Core Quad is not two X6800 glued together... sadly. The Extreme Edition Kentsfield is 2.66GHz with a maximum of 130W power, which is the same as the P4 965EE. Thats why it is "plug-and-play". Same pins, same FSB and same power envelope, means that motherboards which support Core Duo and can support the powerhungry P4's, will support Quad core. Thats the reason why Intel didn't lower the motherboard power/thermal specifications when they introduced the low power Core 2 architecture.

After the initial 975 debacle with C2D, I sure wouldn't count on a bios update being able to solve multiple core issues either. But that's just me. 🙂

That was not because of increased power, but instead other technical changes 😳 This time there is no change in architecture, and my Intel account manager assures me that Kentsfield already has passed tests with most newer motherboards. For the last few months there have been a fair number of Kentsfields floating around for testing -covered by NDA's- and Intel says that the technology is finished and released to production.

 

[darklife41]

Because some people actually invest their hard earned dollars based on what they read here, I think its important that people on this forum aren't misled. (Guess that's why I'll never be good at marketing.) So...

The chip THG tests is a pre-production EE Kentsfield. The standard Kentsfields are going to be slower SKU's. The C2D X6800 uses max 85W, and the Core Quad is not two X6800 glued together... sadly. The Extreme Edition Kentsfield is 2.66GHz with a maximum of 130W power, which is the same as the P4 965EE....

If I recall correctly, the TG chip had a couple flaws that still needed to be sorted out. I expect the final result to be significantly different to the chip TG tested, as has been the case with virtually every public release. Because of this, the voltage readings could be correct or way off. Until final production models are tested, the voltages are just speculation.

The other thing to keep in mind is that very few people who pay the price for a C2D Extreme or quad core extreme are going to run it at stock settings. The performance and price are geared toward enthusiasts. With that in mind, I'll be running these CPUs at their overclocking limit, and thus voltage regulators and solid capacitors become much more important. It also blows the 130w max out of the water. I apologise for not being more specific with my initial post on the subject.

That was not because of increased power, but instead other technical changes 😳 This time there is no change in architecture, and my Intel account manager assures me that Kentsfield already has passed tests with most newer motherboards. For the last few months there have been a fair number of Kentsfields floating around for testing -covered by NDA's- and Intel says that the technology is finished and released to production.

My point is that Asus initially stated that the P5WD2-E Premium would be able to run the C2D with a BIOS update at some point. They must have had good reason to believe it would? Well it still can't. Regardless of why, a BIOS fix has not remedied the situation and never will (although my failing short term memory seems to recall it having something to do with how the voltage was supplied to the CPU, but I've been wrong plenty of times before). So bottom line is to take everything you read with a grain of salt, whether it be from Asus, or Intel, or posters on forums. Until the product is actually available in working form to the public, its a lot of speculation and educated guesses.

Its great that you have confidence in your Intel Account manager, and I sincerely hope he/she is correct about it being plug and play. However, if they are correct, then any C2D ready motherboard will handle the quad core as well. I don't see that being stated by any motherboard manufacturer anywhere, nor by Intel. So me thinks there's a little more to it than you are aware of, because its hard to believe marketing wouldn't jump on that for every motherboard manufacturer ASAP if it were the case.

My sources are limited to Intel's Australian supplier (Todaytech), who says basically the same as I'm saying.

So my feelings haven't changed on this subject. Anyone buying a motherboard at this point with the expectations that a quad core will work on it are taking a chance. The technology changes daily. I'd think the best bet would be the few motherboards that are claiming to be quad core ready via the manufacturer's website, or the even fewer that state "Quad Core Ready" on the box.

But don't bet the farm that it'll work until its proven to do so. It sure wouldn't be the first time that their claims weren't valid.

Now I have to email my Intel Account Manager to see what he knows but hasn't been telling me. I suspect he doesn't know any more than anyone on this forum does though. 🙂

 

[bga]

Because some people actually invest their hard earned dollars based on what they read here, I think its important that people on this forum aren't misled.

Nobody, wants to mislead anyone. But the Kentsfield is now so close to marked introduction that a lot of information already is out, though we are still missing the "official" stamp from Intel.

If I recall correctly, the TG chip had a couple flaws that still needed to be sorted out. I expect the final result to be significantly different to the chip TG tested, as has been the case with virtually every public release.

THG did not find any errors in the chip, apart from errors in certain applications which seems to have a problem with 4 cores. But that is a Windows/Application problem, not a problem in Kentsfield. As THG mentions, earlier P4EE with hypertreading enabled (resulting in 4 cores) displayed the same problems, which can be solved manually configuring the windows scheduler.

My point is that Asus initially stated that the P5WD2-E Premium would be able to run the C2D with a BIOS update at some point. They must have had good reason to believe it would? Well it still can't.

Once burned eeeeh?
The problems with 975 boards where just not Asus's. The Intel BadAxe board, was also promised to be able to run C2D, but in the end couldn't without a change in the PCB. Sometimes they do promise too much, but Kentsfield is now 4 weeks from introduction, so now everything is rolling. The problem with with the 975 boards was known in april/may, 3 month before the introduction of C2D. So yes, you can't always trust marketing promisses, but this close to introdution and when some independent reviewers such as THG has got their fingers in a testing chip, you can be pretty certain at their promisses.

 

[bga]

Newsflash:

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2848

Motherboards tested for Kentsfield compatability. Most just needs a BIOS update 😀 You should be safe with any recent 975X or 965 based MB. The MB's based on the 945 chipset may also be compatible.

 

[darklife41]

From your own reference:

"The rest of the companies provided a list of Kentsfield compatible motherboards, but some of the lists raised more questions than they answered. Some of the models will be familiar to readers as boards they can currently buy, but look very closely. Some of the Kentsfield compatible boards will be new revisions that will be released in October/November."

and..

"Gigabyte will be providing a compatibility list of current boards that support Kentsfield as soon as testing and BIOS updates are complete."

and...

"Kentsfield is still over a month away from introduction and there will likely be further developments in motherboard compatibility. For the latest information on what works with Kentsfield always check with the manufacturer's website."

All of which supports what I've been saying all along. If you buy now, you're taking a chance. Best chance now is with a board that specifically states that it is quad core ready. Many of these other boards will have to be revisions that haven't been released as of yet. In those cases, a BIOS update isn't going to work. Even for the ones listed for BIOS updates, when you've bought as many motherboards as I have over the past several years, you know that BIOS updates are never a sure thing.

There aren't very many that have been thoroughly tested to state they support quad core, right now, and as is. Only a few are listed on the manufacturer's websites. There are a couple that have been added just this week though.

BTW, nowhere does that article state that current 945 chipsets will work. In fact, it states:

"Existing motherboards based on other chipsets did not make any of the Kentsfield compatibility lists provided by the motherboard manufacturers." 🙂

 

[darklife41]

From PC Stats:

"The first kick at the 4-core can will see two physical silicon dies integrated onto one CPU - or in other words two Core 2 Duo's side by side and forced to communicate via the Front Side Bus. Not the most ideal configuration when confronting bandwidth bottleneck issues, but the first logical step towards one silicon / four core solutions."

Personally, I'm pretty happy with my 805d now, so I'll likely hold out for the Yorkfield core, due to the FSB bottleneck issue with the Kentsfield.

Also from PC Stats:

"By Q3'07 the quad-core Yorkfield will be introduced, and with it support for a 1333MHz FSB, PCI Express 2.0, DDR3-1333 memory, and most importantly an L2 cache which is split between each pair of processors.
In other words each set of cores will communicate directly, which is a more efficient approach."

 

[bga]

Well, darklife41, I think you are reading the article as the devil reads the bible..
Those motherboards which are listed in the article are compatible with only a BIOS upgrade. Their PCB's do not need any revision. Other MB's NOT on the list, might be compatible, with a BIOS upgrade, or maybe it will be nessesary with PCB changes (coming out october/november). The jury is out. Thats is what Anandtech is writing.

BTW, nowhere does that article state that current 945 chipsets will work. In fact, it states:
"Existing motherboards based on other chipsets did not make any of the Kentsfield compatibility lists provided by the motherboard manufacturers." 🙂

The very same list, has several 945 based Gigabyte boards which are compatible, but it seems Gigabyte is the only vendor certifying some of their 945 boards at this moment.

 

[bga]

From PC Stats:
"The first kick at the 4-core can will see two physical silicon dies integrated onto one CPU - or in other words two Core 2 Duo's side by side and forced to communicate via the Front Side Bus. Not the most ideal configuration when confronting bandwidth bottleneck issues, but the first logical step towards one silicon / four core solutions."

Then PC Stats are pretty much alone with that view. Both THG and Anandtech do not see any problem with FSB saturation. Other discussions on this board has been very throughout in dispelling this myth, with lots of documentation as well.

Personally, I'm pretty happy with my 805d now

You certainly should. 805 is not a bad chip by any means - no reason to throw out a perfectly good machine. But with all these new powerfull chips C2D and now C2Q, it is far from top of the line, but most of us do not need top-of-the-line even though we can drool 😀
If in the market for a new PC in the next few months, I would get a E6700 or X6800 if gaming was my main priority. A E6600 if good cost/performance and a quiet machine was priority, or if a heavy multitasker or working with video, I would wait until november when QX6800 comes out for quad performance. QX6800 is a very important step ahead. A good chip with lots of performance for those who can use it. The Xeon quads are going to be even more important, bringing 8 core to the mainstream workstation market. Those changing their workstations every time an important performance increase is possible, now has a very good reason to upgrade.

 

[VideoQuasar]

a line from the article...."The table below lists a hodgepodge of applications that benefit from four cores right away."

Hodgepodge!!!! Pretty much sums up the true benefits of the Quad right now. Development and Video production. Games need to be developed so you can "play" and Hi-Def needs to be rendered so you can "watch" and listen. I dare you to render some video in your machines using a Hi Def codec. It will bring most current machines to it's knee's and get all the fans a twirlin.

Bang for the buck, this Quad is a must have for the consumer Hi-Def video and 3D hobbiest.

VQ