intel plans quad core chip for 2006
- Thread starter bronxblaza117
- Start date
- Status
Apokalipse
Golden Master
- Messages
- 14,559
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
I was googling around yesterday, and AMD is innovating like there's no tomorrow. sure, C2D is good; but Intel isn't really doing much if anything with the architecture when making it quad. not copared to AMD at least.
Core 2 Quad = 2 x Core 2 Duo's stuck together
the main reason, so I've heard, that the Core 2 Duo's are better is because they are better at ordering instructions to be executed in the core. the actual architecture of the core isn't very different from Yonah.
that is one of the areas K8L will be improving in. they'll probabbly be adding a 4th instruction decoder, all of them able to decode simple and complex instructions, so that the actual core can recieve more instructions at a time (I think I heard they'll need to be able to recieve at least 4 instructions per clock cycle)
after that, there's the fact that all 4 cores will be on one die, sharing 2MB L3 cache
Conroe already shares the L2 cache between the 2 cores. And I've heard that another big reason for conroe being fast is the core's being able to communicate with each other very well
But with the Core 2 Quad's, they will be at a disadvantage, since there will be two separate dies, and hence a lot higher latencies when synchronising cache etc..
it also means that the L2 cache will be split in two
Core 2 Quad = 2 x Core 2 Duo's stuck together
the main reason, so I've heard, that the Core 2 Duo's are better is because they are better at ordering instructions to be executed in the core. the actual architecture of the core isn't very different from Yonah.
that is one of the areas K8L will be improving in. they'll probabbly be adding a 4th instruction decoder, all of them able to decode simple and complex instructions, so that the actual core can recieve more instructions at a time (I think I heard they'll need to be able to recieve at least 4 instructions per clock cycle)
after that, there's the fact that all 4 cores will be on one die, sharing 2MB L3 cache
Conroe already shares the L2 cache between the 2 cores. And I've heard that another big reason for conroe being fast is the core's being able to communicate with each other very well
But with the Core 2 Quad's, they will be at a disadvantage, since there will be two separate dies, and hence a lot higher latencies when synchronising cache etc..
it also means that the L2 cache will be split in two
The General
Banned
- Messages
- 5,191
Maybe you don't understand ... Intel already did their part with the Core 2 architecture. Now they are doubling it.
Going from Netburst to a new architecture was the big part, Core 2 Duos have only been out for what, two months, now they are releasing a quad-core. It's still Core 2, it's still Conroe, it's just 4 cores. They don't need to release anything new until AMD has something that beats Conroe. AMD is innovating like there's no tomorrow? Then why haven't they done anything with their A64 line in 3 years? They stuck two together, and then they added support for DDR2, big deal.
I don't see how the Core 2 Quad's will be at a disadvantage. Core 2 Duo obliterates A64, so that means two Core 2 Duos will still obliterate A64s. I don't see what the problem here is.
Going from Netburst to a new architecture was the big part, Core 2 Duos have only been out for what, two months, now they are releasing a quad-core. It's still Core 2, it's still Conroe, it's just 4 cores. They don't need to release anything new until AMD has something that beats Conroe. AMD is innovating like there's no tomorrow? Then why haven't they done anything with their A64 line in 3 years? They stuck two together, and then they added support for DDR2, big deal.
I don't see how the Core 2 Quad's will be at a disadvantage. Core 2 Duo obliterates A64, so that means two Core 2 Duos will still obliterate A64s. I don't see what the problem here is.
Apokalipse
Golden Master
- Messages
- 14,559
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
you don't understand. they're kinda going backwards on some of the parts which make the Core 2 Duo really good. namely, the shared L2 cache, and the good communication between cores. now, there will be higher latencies to sync the L2 cache, and to communicate between cores.
I don't think you've been reading up enough about what AMD is actually doing. it's quite interesting if you can understand it (most people won't be able to)
when you really look deeply into the architecture, AMD is innovating like there's no tomorrow. and from what I have been reading, their K8L architecture looks set to not just compete with Core 2 Duo, but with Core 2 Quad aswell.
yes, C2D is faster than current K8. K8L will be very different. not to mention, Core 2 Quad is simply 2 x Core 2 Duo's
now, I am not saying that AMD will win. I am saying, however, that K8L will be much better; and AMD are not stuffing around.
I don't think you've been reading up enough about what AMD is actually doing. it's quite interesting if you can understand it (most people won't be able to)
when you really look deeply into the architecture, AMD is innovating like there's no tomorrow. and from what I have been reading, their K8L architecture looks set to not just compete with Core 2 Duo, but with Core 2 Quad aswell.
yes, C2D is faster than current K8. K8L will be very different. not to mention, Core 2 Quad is simply 2 x Core 2 Duo's
now, I am not saying that AMD will win. I am saying, however, that K8L will be much better; and AMD are not stuffing around.
aliasaid
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,400
thegeneral, nobody is doubting that core 2 quad is gonna be great, but what apokalipse is saying is that its not quite innovative, since they used the same method as with the Pentium D's to double up the cpu power, as opposed to the way they doubled the cpu power in the c2d itself... get it? lol
you're still gonna get awesome performance... but it won't be as great as if they had made them all on the same die... and they share the same cache and everything so that they communicate better...
k8l is gonna be good from what apokalipse is saying, but as with any computer tech release... we won't know till its released. i forsee big improvement for amd, but whether it takes the crown back its up in the air.
you're still gonna get awesome performance... but it won't be as great as if they had made them all on the same die... and they share the same cache and everything so that they communicate better...
k8l is gonna be good from what apokalipse is saying, but as with any computer tech release... we won't know till its released. i forsee big improvement for amd, but whether it takes the crown back its up in the air.
- Status
Similar threads
