-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Some multi-core CPU slides from GDC
- Thread starter Kleegamefan
- Start date
CaptainABAB
Member
doncale said:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5594773.html
"Over the year, the dual-core concept will come to nearly all of Intel's product lines. In 2006, 85 percent of its server chips offered will be dual-core, the company said, while more than 70 percent of its desktop and notebook chips will have multiple cores. "
sonycowboy
Member
CaptainABAB said:
And yet, some would call the CELL is a flop, despite coming to this conclusion 4 years ago and being substantially faster than any other multicore implementation that's out there on the horizon. :lol
Crankenstein
Banned
sonycowboy said:
It is WAY too early to call Cell a flop or success. It isn't on the market. The R&D for it has been quite expensive. Cell being in the PS3 will help to make up costs.
I'm no computer tech, but how can anyone say it is "substantially faster than any other multicore..." until it is tested with real world apps?
CaptainABAB
Member
I know that there are advantages to dual-cores vs. dual CPU in terms of manufacturing costs and memory access and power consumption - but which one is "expected" to perform better (in general)?
I'm not sure I have seen this question answered yet, so I was just wondering if anyone knew.
I'm not sure I have seen this question answered yet, so I was just wondering if anyone knew.
SpoonyBard
Banned
Enigma said:
Yeah, this new Intel's chip still only has two floating point units per core. AMD will top this easily.
WasabiKing
Member
Crankenstein said:
The whole process of SoC is expensive period. You are basically starting from ground zero when you want to begin developing with this process. But you are correct, it's far too early to tell if the process, not just CELL, is a flop.
BTW, since when have figures ever been computed using real world apps, especially when real world apps modified to optimize the chip's "full potential" is only in development.
Not saying you're wrong in assuming, but just bringing up the problems of high tech marketing procedures.As a FP machine, CELL currently eats the lunch of anything out there, and its scalability means it should age well. It'll really be all about shrinking the process, which I think it supposed to eventually hit 45nm. When the EE was presented, it was a FP powerhouse too. It just never really saw much use outside the PS2. It was originally devised for use in high-speed router clusters. I don't know how that panned out. Something will come out in the future that trumps CELL, but it sure as hell ain't Intel's lame attempts for this year. PEACE.Crankenstein said:
Okay to the hardware gurus here, I have a question.
I need a new PC, as I'm still running on my P3-500, 256MB RAM, Geforce1, 6GB HDD (pathetic, I know :lol ). Do I go with the Athlon FX-55 or should I wait for one of these multi- core cpus? I heard that the first multi-cores by Intel were just two Prescotts put together, whereas the Pressler is where it will really take off.
If it is suggested that I go with the Athlon FX-55, can someone tell me a good namebrand for a motherboard and some good memory to use on it? Something that has a good sound card built onto the motherboard would be nice.
Thanks.
I need a new PC, as I'm still running on my P3-500, 256MB RAM, Geforce1, 6GB HDD (pathetic, I know :lol ). Do I go with the Athlon FX-55 or should I wait for one of these multi- core cpus? I heard that the first multi-cores by Intel were just two Prescotts put together, whereas the Pressler is where it will really take off.
If it is suggested that I go with the Athlon FX-55, can someone tell me a good namebrand for a motherboard and some good memory to use on it? Something that has a good sound card built onto the motherboard would be nice.
Thanks.
go single core AFX with a DFI LanParty or MSI NF4 (seem to be most stable) and some good ram like Corsair or something..
if u really want to see the projected performance of dual core.. here's a link to an AMD survey I took a while back showing theoretical systems for their upcoming dual core chips and expected performance.
http://7520.surveyweb.com/defs_diy.htm
not very inspiring.
if u really want to see the projected performance of dual core.. here's a link to an AMD survey I took a while back showing theoretical systems for their upcoming dual core chips and expected performance.
http://7520.surveyweb.com/defs_diy.htm
not very inspiring.
DonasaurusRex
Online Ho Champ
The great thing about dual core will mean an overall smoother experience for the user. As of right now your computer has different processes that are run to according to what your OS sends it, you can see this if you alt ctrl del and look at your processes in Win2k/XP. In reality your processor is doing a small bit of executing code for each of those processes that request it, then switches to the next and so on. With dual core processors that work can be split up even further. So basically your gonna be able to do things like play a game , and burn a dvd at the same time , multi tasking is where the user will see the biggest most obvious increase of performance. Later on when programs are designed from the ground up to take advantage of two cores a single app, like games will also see great gains.
The server market is where dual core will make a big big splash, with boards that can handle 2 - 8 cpus, you will effectively double how many processors your have to handle the workload how awesome is that!
As far as amd vs intel, its still up in the air, some people think that the A64 is going to have an advantage with its HT link, and the fact that the K8 was built from the ground up to eventually go dual core. On the flip side the Intel dual cpu will have a shared bus, or possibly 2 buses. Its kinda irrelavant though, because intels successor to the P4 is coming which is probably why intel is putting more resources behind the EE dual cores with HT, not only can they charge more and claim more features for their top of the line cpu, they will have a succesor ready anyway when dual core starts to replace single core in the fabs.
The server market is where dual core will make a big big splash, with boards that can handle 2 - 8 cpus, you will effectively double how many processors your have to handle the workload how awesome is that!
As far as amd vs intel, its still up in the air, some people think that the A64 is going to have an advantage with its HT link, and the fact that the K8 was built from the ground up to eventually go dual core. On the flip side the Intel dual cpu will have a shared bus, or possibly 2 buses. Its kinda irrelavant though, because intels successor to the P4 is coming which is probably why intel is putting more resources behind the EE dual cores with HT, not only can they charge more and claim more features for their top of the line cpu, they will have a succesor ready anyway when dual core starts to replace single core in the fabs.
I think some of you are going to be very dissapointed in the whole dual core changeover in the next few years. Intel has said that gaming to still going to be best suited to single cores, and with single core speed stalling we are going to we some very weird performance gains in the next 4 years. Some things are going to do very well, and some things are not going to get the same jumps that people are used to.
Wellington
BAAAALLLINNN'
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/top/story/0,4136,84260,00.html
Another article related to Intel's dual core CPU.
Another article related to Intel's dual core CPU.