And the end of Intel's Pentium D is unveiled...

alvino

Golden Master
Messages
19,967
I present you with...

The AMD Athlon 64 X2 dual-core processor for Desktops! An example of TRUE multi-tasking.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050531...sYjtBAF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Although the X2's are pricey, they're worth every penny because they're more efficient than the Pentium D's. Pentium D's link 2 cores together though the System Bus, which is highy inefficient. The X2, however, uses the Direct Connect Archtecture since the AMD64 architecture was designed to support multiple-cores in the future.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=1

AMD clearly has the advantage when it comes to Dual-Core processors ranging from Athlon 64's to Opterons.
 
Yes but are they really worth it? Concidering that the dual core remains a single core until a program or programs of mutitasking comes in to effect. In the articles it states that the benchmarks are the same as the single core. And they make referencing to a multitasking such as high end video editing. That is commercial editing and just how many people do you know that does that?
Most multitasking anyone does (other than business apps) is music recording/downloading . To spend that kind of bucks on just to speed up getting music files seems a little out there.
 
Here we go again...

Why would a home user want dual core of any brand?
I asked a member that question in another thread and his reply was "Bragging rights". It's not really gonna go any faster, It's just gonna do the job more efficently.
It's going to need a whole new operating system along with a new type of mother board. Which means higher output power supplies. Money, money, money. And it will need all new or updated software to take advantage of the dual core. More money.
For business and industrial use I can see it, but for home use it just doesn't make sense...
 
Yeah, for the moment it doesn't.
I'm sure it will sometime though once more openings for the technology arrive, ie. operating system, programs, etc.

It also makes you think how much power a PC will use in a few years time. These 600watt power supplies we have now probably wouldn't suffice the power needed. How far will it all go?

What I don't get though is the fact that of that 600 watts used, most of it is from heat, and I think this is where the PC problem and any electronic fault lies.
The fact you have to buy more fans, because of this wastage of power. When do you think, and how do you think they could improve on this?
 
hummm, im still going to stick with my centrino... works fine for me, and i dont see that this would give enough of an advantage to warrant the price tag (which is bound to be huge...)
 
On top of all that...

I'm getting really tired of getting beat over the head about AMD is better than Intel. And ATI is better than Nvidia. It's really starting to grate on my nerves.
I use Intel and have used AMD in the past. I don't like AMD for one simple reason. AMD cpu chips do not have any built in thermal protection system. They get too hot and you just kissed off several hundred dollars or even a grand. Intel on the other hand gets too hot it throttles back or forces a shut down. This is a function of the cpu chip not the motherboard I'm speaking of so don't get them mixed up.
Now as for how well either does the job it's intended for, both are so close it doesn't really matter what brand you go with. Both multitask very nicely as well as play those stupid games some drool over. Both have proven they can do the job they were designed for and do it rather well.
Now as for video cards. I currently use Nvidia having given ATI a fair shake and just recently. I use a ATI all in wonder ve for capture and tv on my pc. But that's all. Too damn much money for their products. My Nvidia cards for the past 7 years have given me reliable service along with a long life span. I just last month lost a Riva TNT2 to old age. That card was 7 years old. And had been in 5 different machines. I aquired a mx400 and it's humming right along in my p3 having been bumped out of my p4 for a mx4000. Both have all the bells and whistles I want and some I don't but the point is they didn't cost me an arm and a leg and a left *** to get. Both handle 3D graphics very well. And have a cystal clear image on my 19" Sony Trinitron monitor.
So if you want to blow good money on a new fancy cpu chip and a state of the art vid card then just consider this and I'll be done.
A first year production automobile has more problems than that 62 chey has now. You are getting beta tested and at your own exspence.
Now I'm done...Thank you for your time.
 
I feel true dual core processing will be realized when software are actually written to take full advantage of it along with a dedicated motherboard and relying chipsets, regardless what program you are using (OS, Office, Media Player, Photoshop, games, etc.). For now, it's a big price for a few performance gains in certain areas.

I have no doubt AMD will eventually dump the 939 interface and start preparing for full dual core standard.
 
Most of you are overlooking one simple fact, this secures AMD future in the market. However, AMD will not dump the 939 chipset any time soon. Don't look for that one as the 939 chipset has been pretty successful.

"They get too hot and you just kissed off several hundred dollars or even a grand"

Typically motherboards these days have thermal protection. Why would a CPU need it if practically every motherboard has this feature? And my AMD runs pretty cool.. cooler then any intel i tried. Intel CPUs run very hot compared to AMD CPUs. One simple reason... 20 pipelines versus 8 on AMD... I believe. Intel is essentially more inefficient and hotter.

Hey setis, I agree with you partially... Nvidia is better then ATI. Afterall lets just wait till the 7800 GTX... and also look at the fact that Nvidia has the midrange market by the balls. I still have a GeForce2 TI450 that still runs pretty well... I used it as a back-up card when I had to get a free replacement of my current when there was a power spike in my power supply.
 
yeah, no need for dual core, as setis nicely put it. im sticking with a nice amd 64 3800+. i do a lot of visual basic programming, gaming, and multitasking so yeah.
 
Yeh i think that multi core is cool although, hyper threading rocks as well ashame they cant have both also i would liek a Hyperthreading, 64bit, Multi Core Intel Processor that is 3.8Ghz. Imagine if you had this in a server that had two chips this would total to 7.6Ghz, Faster than i can imagine.
 
Back
Top Bottom