intel QUAD core info

[atomic tofu]

as always, consumer oriented informing I be...

Initially Intel planned for Quads in 07 but good thing they moved it up (good or bad really )

http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/hardware/0,39042972,39376580,00.htm

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060720-7310.html


2nd link talks about both sides for your buying decision pleasure!

And now for some Wexford Irish Cream Ale. First time with this...anybody have experience with this particular brew? It's a pint...will I get lit from just 1 can? lol

Hope everybody (in the US and some asian countries, that I know of, are having a wonderful and safe 3 day weekend)

 

[Snake-Eyes]

Sounds like, IMHO, AMD's 4x4 will be the better system, however more expensive it is expected to be, because each processor will have it's own set of RAM.

I stay by AMD another day.

 

[atomic tofu]

yeah, I was going to make that comment but didn't want to add anything...hehe

I was typing it and then thought....well, intel's architecture just may be good enough that they can do that. Much like their lack of the integrated memory controller vs AMDs...but Conroes still fly past the AMDs

it's a holdover tech until real intel quads appears, then it gets interesting

 

[tommyboy123x]

yeah i thought i read something about AMD's quad cores coming out in 08 along with ddr3 or something like that...

looking forward to more clear answers

 

[cedjunior]

yeah i thought i read something about AMD's quad cores coming out in 08 along with ddr3 or something like that...

looking forward to more clear answers

Quadcore and 4x4 is 2 different things. 4x4 is going to be 2 dualcore processors. Pretty big waste-o-money if you ask me.

 

[gurusan]

Yeah 4x4 sucks a nut

 

[tommyboy123x]

4x4/quad

i did read the article...

i was talking about quad core though because its similar, coming up in a few years, and going to be another waste of money when it first comes out....

i mean, dual core is hard enough to program for... LETS MAKE 4 CORES TO PROGRAM FOR!! YAY!!!!!

It almost reminds me of the whole SLI thing when nvidia was making quad SLI and up to 8 GPU's in one computer... it's not improving technology, its just shoving more things in to make it better and forcing programmers to accomidate...

4 cores is just too much whether its 4x4 or quad core... but people will start programming for 4 core computers and you will notice a lag with dual core, and especially with single core...

EDIT: unless what i read about AMD was 4x4 and not quad, which would make more sense.... then disregard the post above

 

[gurusan]

You don't need to program for 4 cores.

Multicore programs should work fine on 2+ cores.

 

[tommyboy123x]

when I tried something out programming in dual core i set the affinity and stuff for that process... but i see how this could be avoided......