http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100129PD216.html
When four cores are not enough.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100129PD216.html
When four cores are not enough.
It's about time! I'm sure there will be a Xeon version of the Core i7-980X.
That will provide a much needed processing power boost for overburdened dual socket machines.
Yeah, the Xeon version is the one they're actually going to sell. Everyone assumed they'd run at a significantly lower clock speed too, but it looks like they won't.
I just wish they were also producing 32nm quad cores for single sockets. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were Gulftown quads for 2S.
Lol $1000
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is a standard version six core from intel as well. One with a locked multiplier and slightly slower clockspeed, ie "Core i7 970". Intel's high prices are a result of AMD's lack of competitiveness, it's too bad.
We'd be a lot better off if AMD's chip had a chance in hell of going head to head with intel's.
So does this mean consumer 8 cores aren't far behind or are they going to try and milk the six cores like the i7 before releasing the lower to mid-grade i3 and i5 family.
The 6 core AMD processor will also be getting dynamic speed boost technology like the Intel processors. To make the deal even sweeter, you'll likely be able to drop one into your existing AM2+/AM3 motherboard with just a bios update:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...echnology.html
Can't wait to see how these perform.
No, consumer 8-cores are still a ways off. First off, there is really very little need for six-cores on the desktop. For servers, absolutely. For workstations, maybe. For desktops, not really. intel is bringing 8-core/16-thread chips to 4S servers and AMD is bringing them to 2S. There are some 8-core RISC chips on the way too for high-end servers (Power 7 comes to mind).Quote:
Originally Posted by Liger83
AMD desperately needs a technology like intel's turbo boost, especially in a six-core. AMD's quad-core Deneb chips are already really power hungry (140w). To fit six-cores inside that thermal budget they are probably going to have to cut clock speed, no other way around it.
Cutting the clocks would get them slaughtered in applications that don't use six-cores (re: most of them) by not only intel, but also Deneb chips. I've not heard about this from anywhere else, but it makes a lot of sense for AMD to do this.
Actually, AMD has 125w quad cores at 3.4GHz at their top end, and a 65W 2.6GHz Phenom II X4 910e quad at their low end right now. 140W are the previous generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nater