Intel Dual-Cores Will Not Be As Good As AMD's :D

[prosser13]

How great is that???

http://hardware.gamespot.com/Journals-J-34-34-8-19945632-x

And for all you lazy buggars who can't be bothered to open up the page, here is what it says :

"The Inquirer has a report calling Intel's new dual-core CPU a "bolt-on rush job." The next generation "Smithfield" and its successor, "Presler," will have a less than elegant dual-core integration design. According to the report, "Smithfield is a dual CPU chip, where two totally separate processors happen to share a single chip, and Presler is a dual-chip DCM (dual-chip module)."

In a recent interview with GameSpot, AMD's Jonathan Seckler touched upon the Intel dual-core disadvantage by stating "I think Intel is going to be grossly disappointing" after comparing the Athlon 64's dual-core implementation to the Intel design. The AMD processor will have both cores integrated onto a single die which will eliminate the need for external arbitration logic the Intel processors will likely need. "

Here is the link to the article they got it from :

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22020

And again for you lazy buggars:

"OUR CHARLIE was very right when, last year, he pointed out that the initial dual-core Pentium stuff from Intel will be some kind of bolt-on rush job. At IDF, it became very obvious: Smithfield XE was basically two XeonDPs almost literally bolted together on one die. The standard Smithfield is the same, except HT is disabled, even with their separate bus interfaces, while the next round, Presler, is two separate CPU chips in one package.

So, in a way, neither of these is actually a dual-core CPU, like POWER5, Montecito or dual-core Opteron would be: Smithfield is a dual CPU chip, where two totally separate processors happen to share a single chip, and Presler is a dual-chip DCM (dual-chip module).

 

[winterfreshpwnz]

Well I hope that Jonathan Seckler guy is right. I mean it makes sense, but still he could be wrong. Anyway, cool news.

 

[prosser13]

He he. This will help AMD, especially in sales.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

If you're going to read some of it - at least read it all or just plain don't. It would appear Needforspeed did but he hasn't actually brought up any of that information into this thread for the lazy buggers I would - but its most of it below what he quoted and you might as well go and read it yourselves.

In the end it does actually bring up the fact that if we want to be anal; they aren't Dual Core in the technical sense of the word however there are Dual Core in that there are Two Cores. New Programs written for Dual Threading will push this advantage higher and then with the EE pushing out Four Threads its quite amazing and AMD has nothing like it.

Dual CPU or not; there are two Cores and this is merely Anal Probing from people who know the major differences in specs lean to Intel, and so they're trying to find something that they can make out it has a design flaw.