Quad-core and Octo-core(8) CPUs in future
- Thread starter skullker
- Start date
- Status
Ronnie
Console Gamer
- Messages
- 2,716
- Location
- N. Carolina
k?
Dante_Caligari
In Runtime
- Messages
- 444
Crap! I am just about to buy a E6400.
SLOW DOWN.
We don't NEED OCTACORE right now!!
SLOW DOWN.
We don't NEED OCTACORE right now!!
NosBoost300
I poop on the rug
- Messages
- 10,220
- Location
- Bellflower, CA
This is off of wikipedia of course
Future processors
This section contains information about scheduled or expected future products.
It may contain unverified or unreliable information, and may not reflect the final version of the product.
[edit] Conroe
In October 2006, leaked Intel roadmaps unveiled that Intel plans to release four additional Core 2 Duo Processors. The release in 2007 will coincide with that of the Intel Bearlake chipset. The new processors will be the Core 2 Duo E6650, E6750, E6800, and E6850. Processor with a number ending in "50" will have a 1333 MHz FSB. The processors will all have 4 MB of Level 2 cache. Their clock frequency will be similar to that of the already released processors with the same first two digits (E6600, E6700, X6800).[7]
[edit] Penryn
The successor to the Merom, code-named Penryn will most likely debut the 45 nanometer process that will be also used for the Kentsfield sequel, Yorkfield. Announcements about Penryn are expected by mid-2007.
[edit] Kentsfield
Kentsfield is the codename for the first quad-core version of the Core 2 processor. The first model of Kentsfield, the Core 2 Extreme QX6700, will arrive with a clock speed of 2.67 GHz and two 4 MB L2 caches in November 2006, at a price of $999, the same as the Core 2 Extreme X6800.[8][9] Initial samples of the processor had substantially higher power consumption than their Core 2 Duo counterparts (approx. 130 watts), however the retail version is expected to have a thermal envelope of 80 W.[10] The top-of-the-line Kentsfield CPU will be branded Core 2 Extreme, while the mainstream versions will be called Core 2 Quad. Unlike AMD's 4x4 (which refers to two dual-core processors on one motherboard), Kentsfield will be a one socket solution; for example, the QX6700 will be two E6700 chips connected together by a 1066 MHz FSB on one MCM, resulting in lower costs but less bandwidth to the northbridge. As can be expected, 4 cores scale very well in multi-threaded applications, such as video editing, ray-tracing, or rendering, where the performance doubles compared to an equally clocked Core 2 Duo. However single or dual-threaded applications, for example most games, will not benefit from the additional cores. For single threaded applications, initial performance reports indicate that this relatively small increase in FSB and processor speed does not dramatically increase overall performance alone; however, it does leave more room for high-speed, low latency RAM to significantly boost the numbers. See the review on Tom's Hardware.
[edit] Yorkfield
Earlier media reports suggested Yorkfield to be an octa-core (eight-core) processor consisting of 2 dies with four cores each. However the newest rumours indicate that Yorkfield will be the quad-core successor to the Kentsfield processor[11]. It will have a 45 nanometer process, and be a single die design, unlike the Kentsfield, which has been compared to basically two separate Conroe cores in one socket. The Yorkfield will have 8MiB of fully shared L2 cache (the Kentsfield has two separate 4M L2 caches, shared separately by each pair of processors). An across-the-board increase in bus speed (connection to the northbridge, etc.) to greater than 1333 MHz is hoped for by this point, as all processors will be primarily limited by the bus bandwidth. This may prove to be difficult, as past advancements in bus speed have come coupled with changes in how the data is sent. Yorkfield is also expected to be released supporting DDR3 memory (1333MHz DDR), as suggested by certain enthusiast websites.
[edit] Allendale
An E4300 Allendale (1.8 GHz, 800 MT/s FSB) will be released in the 1st quarter of 2007.
[edit] Merom
Merom was released on July 27, 2006, and has since been adopted by notebook manufacturers.
A second wave of Merom processors featuring an 800 MT/s FSB and using the new Socket P is expected to launch in April 2007. [12] These chips will be part of the platform codenamed Santa Rosa.[13] Low voltage versions are also planned for release in the same timeframe.
[edit] Conroe-L
Intel will offer a low-cost single-core version of Conroe, code-named "Conroe-L", starting from the second quarter 2007, according to an article on DailyTech[14]. The new Conroe-L processors will not carry the Core nomenclature. Instead Intel is resuscitating the Pentium and Celeron brands for Conroe-L based products[15].
[edit] System requirements
[edit] Motherboard Compatibility
Conroe, Conroe XE and Allendale all use Socket LGA775; however, not every motherboard is compatible with these processors. Supporting chipsets are: Intel: 865PE, 945P/PL/G, 955X, 975X, P/G/Q965, Q963, 946GZ/PL; ATi: ATI's Radeon Xpress 200, RD600 and RS600 nVidia: nForce 4 SLI Intel Edition and nForce 570/590 Intel Edition VIA: PT880/PT880 Ultra, PT890, PM880 and PM890.
Although a motherboard may have the required chipset to support Conroe, many motherboards based on the above mentioned chipsets do not support Conroe. This is because all Conroe-based processors require a newer voltage regulator module (VRM), named VRM 11. This requirement is a result of Conroe's significantly lower power consumption, compared to the Pentium 4/D CPUs it is replacing. A motherboard that has both a supporting chipset and VRM 11 supports Conroe processors, but even then some boards will need an updated BIOS to recognize Conroe's FID (Family ID) and VID (Voltage ID).
[edit] DDR2 Memory Modules
Unlike the previous Pentium 4 and Pentium D design, the Core 2 technology sees a greater benefit from memory running synchronously with the Front Side Bus (FSB). This means that for the Conroe CPUs with FSB of 1066 MT/s, the ideal memory speed is PC2-4200. In some configurations, using PC2-5300 can actually decrease performance. Only when going to PC2-6400 is there a significant performance increase. While expensive DDR2 memory models with tighter timings do improve performance, the difference in real world games and applications is negligible.[16]
[edit] Pricing
Core 2's pricing in lots of 1000 to OEMs is as follows (all prices in USD):
Desktop Versions
X6800 (Core 2 Extreme)- $999
E6700 (Core 2 Duo)- $530
E6600 (Core 2 Duo)- $316
E6400 (Core 2 Duo)- $224
E6300 (Core 2 Duo)- $183
Laptop Versions
T7600 (Core 2 Duo) - $637
T7400 (Core 2 Duo) - $423
T7200 (Core 2 Duo) - $294
T5600 (Core 2 Duo) - $241
T5500 (Core 2 Duo) - $209
It should be noted that these prices are what it costs system builders such as Dell and HP to stock Core 2 processors. There are no set MSRPs for Core 2 CPUs in the retail channel - prices at retailers are usually very close to the above mentioned prices, but are dependent on what the supplier is charging to stock these CPUs as well as supply and demand.
[edit] Nomenclature/Abbreviation
Abbreviations quickly develop in all facets of language. In the case of Pentium processors, standard abbreviations include P1 (Pentium), P2 (Pentium II), P3, P4, P4-M, and so on.
With the release of the new Core 2 processor, the abbreviation C2 is often used, as well as C2D to distinguish the Core 2 Duo from future Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Solo processors.
Future processors
This section contains information about scheduled or expected future products.
It may contain unverified or unreliable information, and may not reflect the final version of the product.
[edit] Conroe
In October 2006, leaked Intel roadmaps unveiled that Intel plans to release four additional Core 2 Duo Processors. The release in 2007 will coincide with that of the Intel Bearlake chipset. The new processors will be the Core 2 Duo E6650, E6750, E6800, and E6850. Processor with a number ending in "50" will have a 1333 MHz FSB. The processors will all have 4 MB of Level 2 cache. Their clock frequency will be similar to that of the already released processors with the same first two digits (E6600, E6700, X6800).[7]
[edit] Penryn
The successor to the Merom, code-named Penryn will most likely debut the 45 nanometer process that will be also used for the Kentsfield sequel, Yorkfield. Announcements about Penryn are expected by mid-2007.
[edit] Kentsfield
Kentsfield is the codename for the first quad-core version of the Core 2 processor. The first model of Kentsfield, the Core 2 Extreme QX6700, will arrive with a clock speed of 2.67 GHz and two 4 MB L2 caches in November 2006, at a price of $999, the same as the Core 2 Extreme X6800.[8][9] Initial samples of the processor had substantially higher power consumption than their Core 2 Duo counterparts (approx. 130 watts), however the retail version is expected to have a thermal envelope of 80 W.[10] The top-of-the-line Kentsfield CPU will be branded Core 2 Extreme, while the mainstream versions will be called Core 2 Quad. Unlike AMD's 4x4 (which refers to two dual-core processors on one motherboard), Kentsfield will be a one socket solution; for example, the QX6700 will be two E6700 chips connected together by a 1066 MHz FSB on one MCM, resulting in lower costs but less bandwidth to the northbridge. As can be expected, 4 cores scale very well in multi-threaded applications, such as video editing, ray-tracing, or rendering, where the performance doubles compared to an equally clocked Core 2 Duo. However single or dual-threaded applications, for example most games, will not benefit from the additional cores. For single threaded applications, initial performance reports indicate that this relatively small increase in FSB and processor speed does not dramatically increase overall performance alone; however, it does leave more room for high-speed, low latency RAM to significantly boost the numbers. See the review on Tom's Hardware.
[edit] Yorkfield
Earlier media reports suggested Yorkfield to be an octa-core (eight-core) processor consisting of 2 dies with four cores each. However the newest rumours indicate that Yorkfield will be the quad-core successor to the Kentsfield processor[11]. It will have a 45 nanometer process, and be a single die design, unlike the Kentsfield, which has been compared to basically two separate Conroe cores in one socket. The Yorkfield will have 8MiB of fully shared L2 cache (the Kentsfield has two separate 4M L2 caches, shared separately by each pair of processors). An across-the-board increase in bus speed (connection to the northbridge, etc.) to greater than 1333 MHz is hoped for by this point, as all processors will be primarily limited by the bus bandwidth. This may prove to be difficult, as past advancements in bus speed have come coupled with changes in how the data is sent. Yorkfield is also expected to be released supporting DDR3 memory (1333MHz DDR), as suggested by certain enthusiast websites.
[edit] Allendale
An E4300 Allendale (1.8 GHz, 800 MT/s FSB) will be released in the 1st quarter of 2007.
[edit] Merom
Merom was released on July 27, 2006, and has since been adopted by notebook manufacturers.
A second wave of Merom processors featuring an 800 MT/s FSB and using the new Socket P is expected to launch in April 2007. [12] These chips will be part of the platform codenamed Santa Rosa.[13] Low voltage versions are also planned for release in the same timeframe.
[edit] Conroe-L
Intel will offer a low-cost single-core version of Conroe, code-named "Conroe-L", starting from the second quarter 2007, according to an article on DailyTech[14]. The new Conroe-L processors will not carry the Core nomenclature. Instead Intel is resuscitating the Pentium and Celeron brands for Conroe-L based products[15].
[edit] System requirements
[edit] Motherboard Compatibility
Conroe, Conroe XE and Allendale all use Socket LGA775; however, not every motherboard is compatible with these processors. Supporting chipsets are: Intel: 865PE, 945P/PL/G, 955X, 975X, P/G/Q965, Q963, 946GZ/PL; ATi: ATI's Radeon Xpress 200, RD600 and RS600 nVidia: nForce 4 SLI Intel Edition and nForce 570/590 Intel Edition VIA: PT880/PT880 Ultra, PT890, PM880 and PM890.
Although a motherboard may have the required chipset to support Conroe, many motherboards based on the above mentioned chipsets do not support Conroe. This is because all Conroe-based processors require a newer voltage regulator module (VRM), named VRM 11. This requirement is a result of Conroe's significantly lower power consumption, compared to the Pentium 4/D CPUs it is replacing. A motherboard that has both a supporting chipset and VRM 11 supports Conroe processors, but even then some boards will need an updated BIOS to recognize Conroe's FID (Family ID) and VID (Voltage ID).
[edit] DDR2 Memory Modules
Unlike the previous Pentium 4 and Pentium D design, the Core 2 technology sees a greater benefit from memory running synchronously with the Front Side Bus (FSB). This means that for the Conroe CPUs with FSB of 1066 MT/s, the ideal memory speed is PC2-4200. In some configurations, using PC2-5300 can actually decrease performance. Only when going to PC2-6400 is there a significant performance increase. While expensive DDR2 memory models with tighter timings do improve performance, the difference in real world games and applications is negligible.[16]
[edit] Pricing
Core 2's pricing in lots of 1000 to OEMs is as follows (all prices in USD):
Desktop Versions
X6800 (Core 2 Extreme)- $999
E6700 (Core 2 Duo)- $530
E6600 (Core 2 Duo)- $316
E6400 (Core 2 Duo)- $224
E6300 (Core 2 Duo)- $183
Laptop Versions
T7600 (Core 2 Duo) - $637
T7400 (Core 2 Duo) - $423
T7200 (Core 2 Duo) - $294
T5600 (Core 2 Duo) - $241
T5500 (Core 2 Duo) - $209
It should be noted that these prices are what it costs system builders such as Dell and HP to stock Core 2 processors. There are no set MSRPs for Core 2 CPUs in the retail channel - prices at retailers are usually very close to the above mentioned prices, but are dependent on what the supplier is charging to stock these CPUs as well as supply and demand.
[edit] Nomenclature/Abbreviation
Abbreviations quickly develop in all facets of language. In the case of Pentium processors, standard abbreviations include P1 (Pentium), P2 (Pentium II), P3, P4, P4-M, and so on.
With the release of the new Core 2 processor, the abbreviation C2 is often used, as well as C2D to distinguish the Core 2 Duo from future Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Solo processors.
Ethereal_Dragon
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 3,755
- Location
- USA
^^ Probably would have been better to just give the Wiki link,.....
Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage
Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage
Who needs 8 cores when you can get 16 cores next year?
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4704
16... cores... you could multitask you head off.... literally! WOW!!And 15 yrs from now, you might be able to get applications that are actually capable of using that many cores to their full potential (of course, by then they will be selling 17,849,098 core units so you can do even more multitasking... whaa-hooo!).
Seriously though, has the majority of software even caught up to dual core yet? Do all these companies expect us to shell out more money to get the latest software every time new hardware comes out? I mean, that's ok if you are buying like $50 games... but what about Pro apps. that can easily run from $250-$2500 a pop? And then they get mad when people pirate their software.
I know that the multicore CPU's are the wave of the future (right now at least)... but it all kinda reminds of the story (urban legend) of the guy who strapped a jet engine to his El-Camino....
rediculous
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4704
16... cores... you could multitask you head off.... literally! WOW!!And 15 yrs from now, you might be able to get applications that are actually capable of using that many cores to their full potential (of course, by then they will be selling 17,849,098 core units so you can do even more multitasking... whaa-hooo!).
Seriously though, has the majority of software even caught up to dual core yet? Do all these companies expect us to shell out more money to get the latest software every time new hardware comes out? I mean, that's ok if you are buying like $50 games... but what about Pro apps. that can easily run from $250-$2500 a pop? And then they get mad when people pirate their software.
I know that the multicore CPU's are the wave of the future (right now at least)... but it all kinda reminds of the story (urban legend) of the guy who strapped a jet engine to his El-Camino....
rediculous
- Status
Similar threads
