AMD 4x4 surprise

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gerry_W said:
OMG. pwned.

I agree with The General and Nubius. They're trying to shove this overpriced shite down our throats. Greedy bastids. :p

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was not agreeing with Nubius, how could you agree with both of us? Well, I guess in a way I was, but only in the fact that some people don't care about money. I think Nubius would disagree with what I said about how it's a good thing that they are making these advances.
 
notice that the article says you can connect any two processors that are at a lower price. this seems to be no different than the idea of 2p server except its a gaming computer now. im actually looking forward to the performance that these things are going to put out
 
Nubius said:
Morons......doesn't matter if it 'dethrones' it if it costs 20x as much.

Made me laugh. :)

Nubius said:
Those people need to DIE as they are the reason that these companies are making these outlandish ideas.

I totally agree.

Running said:
notice that the article says you can connect any two processors that are at a lower price. this seems to be no different than the idea of 2p server except its a gaming computer now. im actually looking forward to the performance that these things are going to put out
I don't see where it says that you will be able to connect 2 weaker cores. Only that it will cost a lot, will be for the ultra-high-end, and will be focused on the FX series.

This is going to result in 4 cores overall, correct? Its hard enough to write code for 2 cores, I'd like to see how they're going to manage 4, lol.
 
This is going to result in 4 cores overall, correct? Its hard enough to write code for 2 cores, I'd like to see how they're going to manage 4, lol.

True...... BUT.... image the multitaskin ;)....... i kno i cant image even multitaskin on a dual-core since on my P4 i can multitask like crazy. (V-Scan, AIM, MSN, Internet, Burnin DVD, Spybot S&D all at once, no lag, maybe some slow down but barely any.)
 
woops my bad on my previous post, read "price at any cost" wrong. thought price at any cost meaning 100-1000. im embarrassed hehe.
 
Yea, I was about to add that the multitasking would be good. But a Dual Core + 2GB memory + Raptor HDD is all you need for a fast multitasking machine anyway. All that would still cost less than a 4x4 system.
 
Infomatic said:
Yea, I was about to add that the multitasking would be good. But a Dual Core + 2GB memory + Raptor HDD is all you need for a fast multitasking machine anyway. All that would still cost less than a 4x4 system.


yay I have that :D:D

*proud of self


But I agree with nubius, Those people DO need to die.


Quad SLI and such is all there fualt!

its like enthuiasts versus rich people...and it sucks..
 
I hate intel.... but intel has to be laughing their asses off at that. Amd should have stayed quiet, and spent their time and money getting the next thing out the door. BTW does anyone know why they're calling it 4x4 and not 2x2? Doesn't matter I guess.
 
Infomatic said:
Made me laugh. :)



I totally agree.


I don't see where it says that you will be able to connect 2 weaker cores. Only that it will cost a lot, will be for the ultra-high-end, and will be focused on the FX series.

This is going to result in 4 cores overall, correct? Its hard enough to write code for 2 cores, I'd like to see how they're going to manage 4, lol.

I guess this is where reverse HT takes effect. You'd only have to code for one, when it would actually be using more than one.
 
I've mentioned about a dozen times before that RHT only works once. It cannot make 4 cores into 1. It can only turn 2 cores into 1 core, or 4 cores into 2 cores. Anything more just doesn't fit into the process.

And RHT is a more of a rumor than Core Multiplexing. With every passing day, I doubt its existence even more. We're supposed to find out the day after Conroe is released, so I won't make any final judgements yet, since its easily implemented.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom