Originally posted by keyser09
be honest the amds quad core will kill the core 2 duo am i right?
4x4 isn't Quad Core, it's two Dual Cores on seperate sockets. For one, it's K8 architecture. Which means that a FX-74 system (2 x 3.0Ghz Dual Core processors), which is the best 4x4 system that you'll be able to buy, won't even be enough to match the QX6700 (1 x 2.66Ghz Quad Core processor). As if that wasn't enough, a 4x4 FX-74 system will cost you more
than the $1500 price tag of the QX6700. FX-74 4x4 should be enough to match the regular Q6600 (1 x 2.4Ghz Quad Core processor) that Intel will be releasing later. But it will still cost you about twice the price of the Q6600.
As for AMD's Quad Core (K8L architecture, released 10 months from now
), no one can say whether it will be better or not. For that, we return to the argument about K8L, and the fact is that is isn't likely to do much more than match the Core 2 architecture. Especially since they're keeping the 3-issue core.
I posted this in another thread, but you never read it, it seems. Maybe you'll take note of it in your own thread;
Originally posted by TriEclipse
I'm getting a bit tired of your noob AMD fellatio. AMD's 65nm K8L Dual and Quad Core processors come out in Q3 2007. In the EXACT SAME QUARTER, Intel's 45nm processors come out. The difference in performance is going to be larger than it is right now with the Conroe and Athlon 64. AMD's K8L processors will be clocked at 2.0-2.9Ghz, while Intel's 45nm processors will be clocked at 3.5-4.0Ghz. The fastest Quad Core AMD will be 2.9Ghz, while the fastest Quad Core Intel will be 3.73Ghz. K8L is going to, at best, tie the Core 2 Duo for performance. What do you think Intel's going to do in the meantime? Sit on it's ***? No, the 45nm processors are going to again have architectural improvements. So architectural improvements + Much faster clock speeds = A crushed AMD.