AMD Plans Simultaneous Desktop and Mobile Chip Releases

wh173b0y writes "Tom's Hardware reports that AMD is planning to release both it's dual-core desktop and mobile chips at the same time. This news comes after AMD, who have been fairly quiet since the release of the Athlon FX-55, came up shorter than intel on the release dates for it's dual-core processors. Intel on the other hand has been busy planning more than a dozen different chips to release as well as pressing its software designers to embrace its 64-bit architecture."

Comments

Eff pee?

[dosius]

I would like to see a chip that would work as both mobile AND desktop...

Moll.

Re:Eff pee?

[Anonymous Coward]

My Athlon XP 2500+ M seems to work fine on my A7N8X-E Deluxe.

Re:Eff pee?

[deathazre]

people did (and probably still do) that with mobile XP 2500+'s and such because you could get them up to very high clock speeds even air-cooled due to the low power requirements.

Re:Eff pee?

[Eric Smith]

I'd like to see a product that's a floor was AND a dessert topping. But it's only gonna happen on SNL.

There are much different tradeoffs that have to be made in chip design for low power vs. high performance.

Re:Eff pee?

[MatthewNewberg]

I currently run a AMD Mobie 2600+ (forgot the wattage). The thing is great, overlocks easily (isn't clocked locked)and with pretty cheap, normal, quite cooling solutions. Not only that, but it also runs a lot cooler then the normal athlon XP which means you dont need as many fans. It is so nice to have a CPU that doesn't go over 100F, and the case temp to go with it. I really hope in the future that AMD continues to make mobile processors that you can use in desktops.

Re:Eff pee?

[toddestan]

I would like to see a chip that would work as both mobile AND desktop...

I thought all of AMD's mobile chips were the same pinout as the regular desktop chips - which means you can use either one for either application?

Re:Eff pee?

[jp10558]

IDK, my A64 3400+ for normal usage is around 90F or so. It's only under sustained full load that it hits 123F, and the mobo temp is still around 100F.

I only have one fan aside from the Power Supply fans.

Re:Eff pee?

[TodPunk]

Two words: Pentium M.

Re:Eff pee?

[Jozer99]

Step 1: Buy laptop
Step 2: Unpack laptop
Step 3: Plug laptop power adapter into laptop
Step 4: Plug laptop power adpater into laptop
Step 5: Plug monitor into laptop
Step 6: Plug USB Keyboard into laptop
Step 7: Plug USB Mouse into laptop
Step 8: Turn laptop on
Step 9: ???
Step 10: Profit

Seems simple to me.

Re:Eff pee?

[Laebshade]

You mean like the AMD Mobile Athlon XPs? I know you meant dual-core, but still.... these nice gems go in (most) desktops and laptops.

Re:Eff pee?

[Anonymous Coward]

No there arent. Intel proved this with the Pentium-M, which quite handily beats the A64 in many tasks.

Granted, they also proved that bar radiators CAN be integrated onto a processor core. Obviously this product line is being targeted at those braving the cold Siberian winter.

Re:Eff pee?

[MSTCrow5429]

They are, so you are correct.

Re:Eff pee?

[wernercd]

Whoever mod'd this funny needs to lose their mod points. Profit joke is mucho overrated.

Maybe it's just me...

[Avyakata]

Isn't that kind of a bad strategy? I mean, won't they take away the attention from each other? I'd think it'd be better to make a spectacle of one, wait for people to invest interest in it, then, once the hype dies down, release the other to a similar effect. Won't this move minimize public attention?

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

no. you market it as one and make it avalible on as many platforms as possible in order to sell the chip and the NAME as much as possible. people who are in the market for desktops can get it and people who want portability can have it, both without having to wait.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[eyegone]

If they understood marketing, they'd be Intel.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Eric Smith]

Isn't that kind of a bad strategy? I mean, won't they take away the attention from each other?

Like the way there are only a few companies making most of the brands of laundry detergent, and they each sell basically the same product under a bunch of brand names in order to compete for shelf space at Walmart?

Seems like a viable strategy for laundry detergent; I don't know why it wouldn't apply to microprocessors as well.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Che Guevarra]

The speed of chip development (Moore's law) probably doesn't permit a staggered release if both chips are on the same development schedule.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Avyakata]

For general knowledge:

Moore's law states that every 18 months, computing power doubles and the price halves.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Che Guevarra]

The difference is that each brand of detergent is not stamped Proctor and Gamble (atleast not overtly). Most people have no idea that every single detergent on the shelf at the grocery store is made by the same company. Proctor and Gamble uses this very expensive strategy to insulate each brand from negative consumer perceptions AND to eat up shelf space ANONYMOUSLY. Does AMD plan to place their name on both chips? If so, the Detergent analogy does not apply. Sorry to be a punk, I'm taking a marketing class this semester.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[mike5904]

Wrong. Although these statements are often referred to as Moore's law, they are much more accurately termed corrolaries: the "law" actually only states that the number of transistors on a chip will double every 18 months. This is after a revision process as well, since I believe the original statement used either 6 or 12 months. According to Wikipedia, in 1975 he revised his law further, to a two year doubling period.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Che Guevarra]

Geek battle begin! "In 1965 Moore observed an exponential growth in the number of transistors per integrated circuit and predicted that this trend would continue." http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.ht m

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[mike5904]

Okay, just looking at the start and end points on their chart, it appears that his law has been holding up pretty well, with a 22 month overall doubling period. What is much more interesting, though, is that it looks like in fact the rate of exponential growth is increasing (or at least did in recent history), and looking at the chart from 1997 to 2003 (Pentium II to Itanium 2) gives a doubling period of only 12 and a half months.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[jdw242b]

If they understood marketing they'd BEAT Intel is probably closer to the truth.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[jbrader]

I think it's something like yearly product lines in cars and fashion. Ford doesn't release one car at a time and Calvin Klien doesn't show the new suits this week and new jeans next week (well maybe they do but you get the idea. If you release a whole product line at one shot you can really make a spectacle.

e.g. Wow! Look at the new family of dual core AMD chips!!!!!!

Or something.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[tod_miller]

I mean, won't they take away the attention from each other? ...or maybe converge attention in a tigher spotlight previously unknown to mankind.

Maybe they are going to spend some wang on the launch, and want to smoke to ferrets with one stone in the bush. Or something to that effect.

Also, 1st to market might play something for dual core.

Was I the only one who read the snippet as:

is planning to release both it's dual-core desktop and mobile chips AT THE SAME TIME. [dun dun duuuun]

Well, it means I can upgrade my desky and lappy at the same time! joy!

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Hal_Porter]

Sorry to be a punk, I'm taking a marketing class this semester

Don't apologise for your taste in music, apologise for taking the marketing course ;-)

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[SCO STINKS]

If they understood marketing, they'd be Intel. If they used heavy marketing campaigns they would be as expensive as INTEL.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[Surt]

Yeah, sure, in intel's revisionist history.

Re:Maybe it's just me...

[iowannaski]

If they were Intel, they would have 80% market share. Whether or not they would beat Intel under those circumstances is left as an exercise for the reader, dumbass.

What would I do with $1000?

[Anonymous Coward]

Two cores at the same time.

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[Coneasfast]

two cores at the same time? forget it

you know what i would if i had thousand dollars?
i would invest half of it in norris mutual funds,
and then take the other half of it, and give it to my friend assadula who works in securities

etc..

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[indiefusion]

rofl Way to miss the Office Space quip, moderator.

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[Anonymous Coward]

You know not all cores dig money?

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[michrech]

Two cores at once? What, you want TWO of 'em pissed at you?

Heh.. :)

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[thopkins]

In Soviet Russia, cores do you!

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[DrMrLordX]

The power of Soviet Russia is strong in this one.

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[mt v2.7]

Keyboard. My office. Now.

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[wernercd]

Where does the Soviet Russia jokes originate from? Just call it morbid curiosity, but it's the only running joke i've noticed that I really don't understand.

Re:What would I do with $1000?

[boy_afraid]

Two cores at the same time.... in Japan.

Dual core laptops?

[jarich]

It didn't occur to me that we'll finally be able to get semi-affordable dual CPU laptops! :) drool!

Re:Dual core laptops?

[Splork]

keep your pants on. only one CPU core runs when on battery and most likely not even at full speed.

Re:Dual core laptops?

[drinkypoo]

Seems to me like that's up to the OEM. I don't see any reason that you couldn't build a laptop with enough battery output capacity to run both processors at full speed. Maybe not for very long, but sometimes being able to run the CPUs and the disk full-out for a short time will consume less power for a given task than wanking around with one CPU and occasionally hitting the disk for ages.

Re:Dual core laptops?

[Wesley Felter]

You better keep your pants on; otherwise you could end up with a nasty burn.

Re:Dual core laptops?

[DisKurzion]

....sooo...good battery life AND performance when power is not an issue.

Considering I'm running a 1.6 GHz 8200, almost anything is an upgrade.

(besides, power laptops are usually plugged in, often they are little more than portable desktops)

Re:Dual core laptops?

[joss]

I'm holding out for Thinking Machine laptops, I'm talking about the 686 prototypes - with the artificial intelligence Risk chip !

Re:Dual core laptops?

[psergiu]

Yeah, black cube-shaped laptops with a lot of red leds rule !

News flash

[Wesley Felter]

Desknotes use the same processors as desktops, so of course they come out at the same time. And now that all the desktop chips have power management, the difference between "desktop" and "mobile" chips is very little.

Re:News flash

[GoatPigSheep]

Well not exactly, my centrino notebook has a 75 watt power supply, for the WHOLE SYSTEM.

A high ghz P4 can use 1.5 x that JUST FOR THE MICROPROCESSOR. The power management on the P4 is just to keep your electricity bill down...

Re:News flash

[Monkelectric]

my 3.2ghz P4 notbook has a 160 watt power supply. its not even a mobile cpu.

Re:News flash

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Desktop and mobile chips mean a lot in difference, it's not just about having more idle modes. The thermal design power of the fastest Pentium M chip is 25 watts. The slower and ultra low volt P-Ms are in the mid-single digits. I am certain that the leakage power at idle of even a slow desktop Athlon 64 is higher than the fastest Pentium M running at 100%.

Re:News flash

[default luser]

You'd be surprised. I certainly was.

The numbers for the Athlon 64 Winchester core are quite impressive...but this is because they havn't cranked up the voltage to produce anything faster than a 3500+ core yet.

But take this, for example:

3200+ Winchester.
30w full-load (2.0GHz)
10w Idle.
3w Idle with Cool N' Quiet enabled (thanks to half core speed and even lower voltage)
~10w moderate load (Cool N' Quiet clocking the processor at 1GHz most of the time, 2GHz when performance demands it).

I have one, and this sucker barely tops 100F at full load (stock Antec Sonata with Zalman 7000A throttled down to %50). I have also seen no issues with the dynamic clock speed, only one of the games I've tried was affected (UT 2003).

I imagine the notebook versions are even better, as they come with more than two levels of power management. The Pentium M has some serious competition when it comes to low power usage.

Re:News flash

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm, my P4 2.0 notebook (a Medion, bought at Aldi supermarket three years ago) has a 76W powersupply for the whole system... So that does not mean that much it seems...

Arr.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Intel on the other hand has been busy planning more than a dozen different chips to release as well as pressing its software designers to embrace its 64-bit architecture."

Good luck with that.

AMD already rules the x86 64-bit market. AMD chips are currently more power efficient and produce less heat (on average, let's not compare high efficiency chips to 'normal' chips on either side of the table). Not to mention, who needs dual core, when you can have eight eight-core Opterons*? Sixty-four cores! Mmmm, there's the beef.

It's so nice to see Intel trying desperately to catch up to AMD. ;) Insert quips about mighty falling, tables turning, et cetera.

* Yeah, yeah, they won't be here tomorrow. I can dream, damn it.

Re:Arr.

[Anonymous Coward]

While AMD seems to have the upper hand in design, intel is stomping them into the dirt on sales.

You may want to look at this article.
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00698/

Re:Arr.

[SuperQ]

Unfortunately, there is one problem with that.. and that is Dell.

The first x86-64 machines we had at my work were Intel. Simply for the fact that we are an EDU and get good prices on Dell machines.

Now.. if we do pick x86-64 for a cluster solution, Intel will probably not happen.

If Dell shiped AMD procs.. Intel would die overnight.

Re:Arr.

[corngrower]

Maybe Intel is thinking 'at least one of these has got to find a market somewhere'.

Re:Arr.

[Anonymous Coward]

"If Dell shiped AMD procs.. Intel would die overnight. "

This is what makes Slashdot fun to read.
Hilarius conclusions from uninformed people.

Re:Arr.

[Anonymous Coward]

>> AMD already rules the x86 64-bit market

Rules ?
Intel outsells AMD 10x in the x86 64 bit market.

>> It's so nice to see Intel trying desperately to catch up to AMD

Hilarious. You obviously have not read the earnings and market share reports.

Re:Arr.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious. You obviously have not read the earnings and market share reports.

What is this, slashdot or investors weekly? I know that when I nerd out and go pick the processor I'm going to buy, I don't look at the numerous comparisons available and come to the conclusion based on processor peformance. No, I base my deciscion on company earnings and market share numbers. We all know that if the majority are buying something, it must be more advanced.

Just ask the mac guys. Ahem.

Re:Arr.

[Wiz]

Yup, and even better than that is that AMD's 64-bit performance is better than Intel's.

LinuxHardware

Lost Circuits

Notice how often AMD gain from running in 64-bit mode, where as Intel lose performance.

Re:Arr.

[Glock27]

While AMD seems to have the upper hand in design, intel is stomping them into the dirt on sales.

That isn't really true...AMD has been gaining marketshare again recently. It is up to around 18% of the overall market, and is rapidly increasing its sales of server/workstation chips. Opteron went from 3.5% of server sales in 2003 to 6.5% in 2004. That is almost 100% growth, all at Intel's expense.

AMD has been behind in mobile offerings, but Turion may change that - it competes directly with Pentium-M (the processor part of the 'Centrino' marketing package).

Plus, AMD is set to ramp up it's CPU production capacity quickly over the next couple years, to around 100 million processors per year. If it can sell all of them, that will put it close to 50% of the market at that point (give or take). Given the power savings and mostly superior performance with AMD chips, things are looking good...

Re:Arr.

[biz0r]

Not only that, but market share and earnings have nothing to do with who is playing catch up with who. Intel is/was behind and IS indeed playing catch up so that they don't LOSE their current market share and ph4t earnings.

Re:Arr.

[ABCC]

The company however described a dual-core gaming system system such as the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 as an "investment" that will pay off as enthusiast system once dual-core-capable games will be available. Another area in which Intel seem to be besting AMD is nonsense. Gaming Rig? Investment? Anything that doesnt depreciate by 60% in 2 months cannot be considered a serious gaming "system"

Re:Arr.

[jafuser]

If Dell shiped AMD procs.. Intel would die overnight.

Probably not happening anytime soon...

February 23, 2005 19:08:32 (ET)
UPDATE 2-Dell decides against building AMD-based computers

It is good we still have competition

[Husgaard]

It drives the market forward, forcing all parties to innovate.

But take a moment to think about the current software patent madness, and what would have happened if this had been the case with semiconductor patents in 1980. In this scenario we would be lucky if Intel announced that the 486 would hit the market next year.

If a company has a monopoly there is no incentive to innovate. Patents are monopolies, but they have to be balanced so the incentive to innovate is not taken away.

Re:It is good we still have competition

[qbwiz]

As far as I am aware, there's a patent minefield around these types of chips. The reason we have chips as advanced as they are is cross-licensing between Intel, Cyrix, and AMD, because all three (or AMD and Intel, at least) have important patents.

Re:It is good we still have competition

[Husgaard]

You may be right. At least it is a long time since somebody new has entered the processor market.

But fortunately the players in this market have chosen to compete instead of cooperating to keep development costs down.

Re:It is good we still have competition

[Anonymous Coward]

What, if Intel was a monopoly they would just stop producing newer and faster chips? And they would derive revenue from where?

Re:It is good we still have competition

[Lehk228]

actually IBM required there be more than one source for all their parts, so in order for intel chips to be used in the IBM PC they had to license the tech to AMD.

Re:It is good we still have competition

[Rob_Bryerton]

>>they would just stop producing newer and faster chips?

No, but the rate of innovation would slow to a snail's pace, but you knew that. Right?

Re:It is good we still have competition

[Anonymous Coward]

It was Microsoft who had that requirement, not IBM.

Re:It is good we still have competition

[Tim C]

If a company has a monopoly there is no incentive to innovate.

On the contrary; it gives all other companies and (would-be) competitors an excellent incentive to innovate, as direct competition is expensive (due to licencing) or impossible (for the same reason).

Re:It is good we still have competition

[wernercd]

It would be no different than Microsofts pathetic use of IE. They used their monopoly to win the browser war and they have barely touched the browser since.

The only reason they are begging to ramp up the timetable on the IE updates is *drum roll* Firefox and competition.

It's not that there would be NO movement without AMD/Intel duking it out... it would just be slower and more expensive.

Those who think it ain't more expensive look at the cost of spyware/scumware removal due to Microsofts ignoring IE due to market dominance. That's the only one example of many.

Older Laptops

[Klar]

My laptop currently has an AMD64 2800+ .. does anyone know if the dual core 64's will work with older motherboards that support 64bit single core cpu's? If so, this would be great news for people like me who already have 64bit laptops, if not.. meh.

Re:Older Laptops

[ekul.taylor]

Socket 939 and 940 will work (you will probabley need a bios update). If I remember correctly socket 754 should work as well. Thank you integrated memory controller. That is only for the first release of dual core chips. Once the cores have shared cache and the like I think you need new core logic for the northbridge

It's...

[neutron2000]

...not it's, it's its. Holy crap. And it's even an entity... It took effort to be that wrong.

Re:It's...

[neutron2000]

Uh... I guess it's not an entity, it's just rendering funny on my machine. I suck.

But it's still not it's!!! :D

Re:It's...

[TIMxPx]

Right on, brother. I don't know how that got modded offtopic. It should have been modded +3, for being the only person with the grammatical certitude to point out that /. can't get a simple thing like that right on the FRONT PAGE. That's embarrassing. Now mod me down offtopic, too!

Re:It's...

[mfearby]

I don't think that they could afford the Euro to invest in a proof reader, alas!

Re:It's...

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's" is such a common mistake... and I feel myself getting stupider every time I see it. Someday it will look right even to me. Carry on the campaign, but the fools breed faster and we're running out of sandbags...

Re:It's...

[wahsapa]

I don't know how that got modded offtopic. It should have been modded +3... welcome to slashdot! where every day is opposite day

Re:It's...

[timster]

First we lost "alright" vs "all right", and then we lost "begs the question" vs "raises the question". We are NOT losing "it's" vs "its", and we are NOT losing "lose" vs "loose". That's just going too far.

Correction

[leathered]

"..as well as pressing its software designers to embrace its 64-bit architecture."

Should read 'embrace AMD's architecture'.

Re:Correction

[aonaran]

Yes, it = AMD. You didn't expect Intel to mention the competition's name did you?

Re:Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

:-p

Look at the know it all...

Re:Correction

[forkazoo]

No, Intel is pressing software designers to embrace Intel's 64 bit architecture. Nobody needs any pressing with regards to AMD64, because lots of software is already taking advantage of it, and most of the rest will run fine in 32 bit mode.

Itanium, on the other hand, requires lots of pressing to convince anybody to write for it. Very small market, after all...

Re:Correction

[mt v2.7]

Kinda like AMD embraced Intel's x86 architecture?

Re:Correction

[alder]

Nah, that "its 64-bit architecture." was probably correct ;-) there are some (minor) differences... and they would want developers to embrace their architecture.

Re:Correction

[Junks Jerzey]

No, Intel is pressing software designers to embrace Intel's 64 bit architecture. Nobody needs any pressing with regards to AMD64, because lots of software is already taking advantage of it

Is it? I haven't noticed any kind of rush to support AMD64 at all, other. Could you elaborate on "lots"?

Re:Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish I had mod points to mod that up... Well put.

I'm glad for AMD... AMD is the best thing to happen to the x86 market, competition is good... but i wish some people would leave the AMD fanboy crap at home. Frankly the market needs both the AMD's and the Intel's of the world

Re:Correction

[akuma(x86)]

>> Should read 'embrace AMD's architecture'

Yes, embrace AMD's architecture, which is in itself a trivial extension of INTEL's original x86 which AMD has copied for 2 decades.

How does it know?

[Anonymous Coward]

How does the chip know which mode to run in? Probably a jumper.

Re:How does it know?

[Jon_E]

software - sparc64 has done this for years

Editing nazi

[Neo-Rio-101]

"We have still room to sclae the chip through 2005 and 2006 and expect the chip to be the best performing enthusiast and gaming processor," (sic) from article.

I wonder how one sclaes a chip through several years? ;)

Re:Editing nazi

[flithm]

Uhh... duh, they do it all the time. Increasing clock speed is the standard method. But this time there's additional things that could be done, ie tuning compilers to take better advantage of having more than one processor available.

Re:Editing nazi

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder how one sclaes a chip through several years? ;) Easy, silly- by crafting a femtosecond pulse consisting of one-and-a-half cycles, thereby causing the chip to interfere with itself across the time dimension and thus create an interference pattern across its entire lifecycle.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/0 2/2231215&tid=14

Re:Editing nazi

[thejeffer]

Sigh. Does no one read the subject line? The comment is labeled "Editing nazi." Gee. Let's think. Maybe the comment is NOT actually asking a question about scalability, but is ACTUALLY a cleverly disguised jab at.... hmmmm... could it be.... an editing mistake? Just maybe? Like, perhaps, the word... sclae? Just a thought.

Re:Editing nazi

[flithm]

I actually did read the title, and I knew he was poking fun at something, but I couldn't see anything, and so decided I would just respond anyway.

It annoys me a little bit at all the extreme nit-picking that goes on here at slashdot. Sometimes mistakes happen, get over it! Hell I didn't even notice the spelling error even though I read the parent post, and the post text multiple times.

Anyway sclaes, that's funny stuff. Definitely +5 worthy.

Two questions:

[MacGabhain]

When is the last time Intel met a release schedule?

When is the last time Intel failed to abandon at least a fourth of their in-development product line?

Intel anouncing a dozen different dual-core processors for a range of machines is a joke, and frankly isn't even very good hype. Even if I believed it, I wouldn't be impressed. You don't NEED 12 different lines. Make 5 and make them right: 1) Super low power notebook; 2) performance notebook; 3) main-stream desktop; 4) enthusiast-gamer desktop; 5) Hardcore teraflops. (Oh wait... this is Intel. Better skip that last one. They're not exactly known for putting their effort into general-purpose FPUs.)

Re:Two questions:

[slipnslidemaster]

It would be more like 11.33374 different ones anyway...

Re:Two questions:

[blacktower]

Uhm, nevermind Itanium then.. http://www.aceshardware.com/SPECmine/index.jsp?z=2 &s=1&v=1&if=0&ncf=1&nct=256&cpcf=1&cpct=2&mf=250&m t=3800&o=0&o=1&start=20 (ugly URL)

Re:Two questions:

[Che Guevarra]

Does anyone else smell stock manipulation in these "predictions" of future chip lines? It isn't illegal to mention future plans. Falling short is protected by law.

Re:Two questions:

[toddestan]

Make 5 and make them right: 1) Super low power notebook; 2) performance notebook; 3) main-stream desktop; 4) enthusiast-gamer desktop; 5) Hardcore teraflops.

Isn't that what they already got?
1. Pentium M
2. Pentium 4M
3. Pentium 4
4. Pentium 4EE
5. Itanium??

Oh wait, you said make them RIGHT. Nevermind.

Re:Two questions:

[MacGabhain]

Sure. And I can order the 2.6GHz Opteron that tests out about the same there for $850 (It's the 252 in the test system). Best price I can find for an Itanium 2 1.5GHz is $6500. Yes, that's the CPU price.

So, yeh, as long as you don't mind spending 7 times as much, you can get the FPU performance out of Intel.

Re:Two questions:

[Anonymous Coward]

"When is the last time Intel met a release schedule? "

Well, I don't think Intel is worse than anyone else. AMD had lots of trouble during the first AMD64 years.

The interesting thing about Intels dual-core announcements were that they had working 65nm chips.

Re:Two questions:

[timmyd]

looks like if you look at the lower end itanium 2 (1.4GHz and less cache) you can get one for $900. the motherboard might cost $1k+ though.

here

Re:Two questions:

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't check for this announcement but usually they count different speeds as separate processors. So take the 5 LINES you suggested and add a few different steppings in terms of speed and you can get your 12. A bit misleadding perhaps but hey, it's marketing!

Re:Two questions:

[tedmg09130913]

How about performance? The point was the high priced itanium 2 could match the performance of the much lower priced amd. Could the lower cost itanium 2 do the same?

But...

[Anonymous Coward]

Will they be able to run Longhorn?

Intel have 12+ new chips on the drawing board

[Anonymous Coward]

And AMD have a similar number.

- Faster Semprons
- Faster Athlon 64s
- Faster Athlon FXs
- Faster Athlon 64Ms
- Faster Opterons
- New Dual Core Opterons
- New Dual Core Athlon 64s
- New Dual Core Athlon 64Ms
- Upcoming 65nm Opterons (both single and dual core)
- Upcoming 65nm Athlon 64s (single, dual, FX)

And there are probably plans for Quad-core Opterons, etc, at 65nm, and so on.

Re:Intel have 12+ new chips on the drawing board

[st1d]

I love this marketing strategy. Advertise "Athlon" or "Opteron" using all the cool hype and stats about the most impressive chip you're making, to ensure the average consumer wants that chip [name], then sell the lowliest ones to the PC makers, and overprice the best ones for high-end servers. Pure Genius(TM).

Re:Intel have 12+ new chips on the drawing board

[kisea]

Actually yes, they have been in development on quad-core athlon64's for some time now.

Or better still:

[roshi]

..as well as pressing its software designers to embrace "its" 64-bit architecture

Catch-22

[Luthair]

Most have no use for dual cores and devs have no reason to implement support until their customers have them.

Re:Catch-22

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that is why Intel released HyperThreading way back whenever, to try and encourage multithreaded application development. They might not have realised that they had a dual-core future ahead of them, as they were still thinking that the P4 would reach 10GHz and all would be well, but hey ...

Re:Catch-22

[Grey Ninja]

I think in this case, it's much like 64-bit. If you build it, they will come. High end performance freaks like to have stuff like that. You can run Winamp and a game at the same time, or who knows what. It's not REALLY useful, but it's useful enough that people want it. As CPU manufacturers start to build them, a market will generate. As that happens, devs will begin to support the new market.

Re:Catch-22

[slipnslidemaster]

Are you kidding me??

This is the same school of thought that produced gems like "Nobody will ever need more then 512K". I mean seriously, did we need Hyperthreading, MMX, Math co-processors, etc. implemented on the chips?

I totally agree, build it and they will come.

Re:Catch-22

[swillden]

Most have no use for dual cores and devs have no reason to implement support until their customers have them.

I don't agree that most people have no use for dual cores. Sure, most applications don't make use of them, but all modern operating systems are multi-tasking and the ability to have one CPU taking care of all of the common busywork while the other one is crunching on whatever your main task is does make a difference.

If you don't believe me, find a dual processor machine sometime and spend some time working on it. It's surprising how much smoother and more responsive it is -- often, a dual-processor machine *feels* faster than a single-processor machine with far more than twice the actual performance. I have a dual 500Mhz PII box that still surprises me every time I touch it. It feels faster than my 1.4 GHz Athlon and seems about as quick to respond as my Athlon64 3400+.

For common tasks, users will find they actually prefer two cores at 1 GHz over one core at 4 GHz. The dual-core machine will be cooler (and therefore quieter) and will often be more responsive, even though it will be much slower at straight-line CPU-bound tasks.

People will like these.

Re:Catch-22

[slittle]

Unless you're talking dual 486s, Winamp uses bugger all CPU time. I've been doing that since Win95 and Pentium Classic/MMX.

Try something a little more hardcore -- playing games while HTPC software runs in the background, possibly capping a large HDTV stream, and/or feeding it to the rest of the house.

Re:Catch-22

[man_ls]

No rudeness intended, but I couldn't make heads or tails of what you meant by "uses bugger all CPU time"

That means it uses it all? or does that mean it doesn't use it all? or it depends?

I'm American, some of the international idiom is lost on me without explanation. Thanks in advance for the clarification!

Re:Catch-22

[powerlord]

They may like them, but will they know they will like them enough to purchase them?

Re:Catch-22

[slittle]

bugger all == fuck all. ie. negligible.

Re:Catch-22

[swillden]

They will after they've tried them.

Re:Catch-22

[Burz]

(crickets chirping) There's a familiar idiom for ya.

Actually "bugger all" is in very common use abroad. Loosely translated, it means: "You stupid American, who never makes a habit of reading anything foreign even if its written in English... please do get a brain."

Re:Catch-22

[man_ls]

I'm sorry sir, I'm not the President, you must have me confused with someone else...

Re:Catch-22

[Metapsyborg]

I've heard a lot of the "no one needs dual cores, one core is all we'll ever need." But I think dualies will be great, especially for AMD. Intel has HT to make multi-tasking quicker, but amd has nothing in that department. An additional cpu will be perfect to cover that deficiency.

For example, the other day I wanted to author a dvd, but I also wanted to download/install patches for an mmorpg. I decided to do them at the same time. Ugh, each process slowed dramatically; if I had a dual core machine this wouldn't have been a problem. The moderate price increase for a dualie will be worth a "moderate" performance increase. The important thing isn't making a faster one cpu style machine, but allowing multiple tasks to be done simultaneously. I would love to be able to encode a dvd while playing a game, or convert mp3s to wavs (for cd burning) while playing a game.

Re:Catch-22

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love to be able to encode a dvd while playing a game, or convert mp3s to wavs (for cd burning) while playing a game.

Hehe. My new media PC (Sempron 2400+) is, right now: transcoding a DVD movie to AVI, ripping another movie in preparation for transcoding to AVI, showing a third movie on the screen, and downloading and installing some large system updates. No hiccups anywhere.

An extra processor would be nice, of course, but having a really good OS (Linux 2.6.10) certainly helps smooth things out!

Re:Catch-22

[Metapsyborg]

"but having a really good OS (Linux 2.6.10) certainly helps smooth things out!"

That, and you don't have to worry about the whole "while playing a game" thing!

I jest, I jest.

Re:Catch-22

[swillden]

That, and you don't have to worry about the whole "while playing a game" thing!

:-)

I have played America's Army while processing video in the background (niced to 20). Not much of the video task got done, but the game was perfect. That was on an Athlon64 3400+ running 2.6.9. The 2.6 kernel is nice. Someday I'm going to get a copy of Doom 3.

But, yeah, it's going to be at least two or three years before there is a good selection of games on Linux. Given the amount of time I've wasted on games in the past (I had a five hour-per day Everquest habit for about two years), when that time arrives I think I'd better switch to *BSD. :-)

Argh! Grammar error!

[Christoff Ka Sin Chu]

It's its, not it's

C'mon.

CC

Re:Argh! Grammar error!

[Godwin O'Hitler]

It annoys me too but you have to admit its an easy mistake to make.

Intel Recovers Fast

[ackthpt]

Intel, which shrugged off the idea of 64 CPU's a couple years ago, as something people didn't need, has made up for this gaffe and is not only getting ready to sell their dual core line, but have already indicated the run of the Pentium IV is soon to be over.

Next thing you'll hear from Santa Clara, 'why, we practically invented it!'

So what kind of Las Vegas act will they enlist to push dual core? Probably twins or something, as Sigfried and Roy are shutdown.

Re:Intel Recovers Fast

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Pentium 4, not Pentium IV. Your Slashdot posting previlge is now revoked due to your unimformed comment. You can still post on Fark however.

Re:Intel Recovers Fast

[bconway]

Newsflash: People still don't need it, and they still won't even after they're everywhere. 64 bit CPUs for the home user's needs are marketing, nothing more.

Re:Intel Recovers Fast

[caswelmo]

You forgot to put "IMHO" at the end of your post. Because really, that's all that statement is credible as.

Eh... not really a big deal

[doormat]

Since its just AMD's desktop-replacement line of chips, its the same thing as if Intel putting Pentium Ds in DTR laptops. Besides, Tom's Hardware is the Fox News of tech news, heavily intel/nvidia biased.

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[Anonymous Coward]

"Besides, Tom's Hardware is the Fox News of tech news, heavily intel/nvidia biased."

They're hardly Intel biased -- if you read the benchmarks on most everything they do, they show that AMD usually beats Intel. They also have an article about how the best bang for your buck is to get a Socket 754 Sempron 3000+ and overclock the hell out of it. The article also talks about what else they reccomend hardware-wise to make the best system you can for only a few hundred dollars.

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[crimson30]

I stopped going to Tom's Hardware after this article:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_6 4-53.html

How about just benchmarks without the pessimistic commentary? Perhaps I'm reading a little much into "Uncertain Future for AMD", but it doesn't sound pleasant to me.

But, then again, maybe I should see if Tom's Hardware has changed its tune as of late and give it another chance.

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Besides, Tom's Hardware is the Fox News of tech news, heavily intel/nvidia biased.

POT, KETTLE, BLACK.

If an alien landed on earth and read slashdot for a day they would think :

Apple dominates the market.
Wrong. Reality is apple = 3%

AMD dominates the market.
Wrong. Reality is Intel just had record profits. AMD lost money.

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[Anonymous Coward]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!! WHEN DOES IT STOP?

Since IT'S just AMD's desktop-replacement line of chips, IT'S the same thing as if Intel...

WHY CAN'T YOU JUST SPELL CORRECTLY?

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[Glock27]

Besides, Tom's Hardware is the Fox News of tech news, heavily intel/nvidia biased.

First, being the "Fox News" of tech news isn't necessarily bad - after all Fox has the highest ratings of any cable news channel. ;-)

Further, having an NVIDIA bias isn't a bad thing either - NVIDIA has the best graphics tech right now, it makes *great* AMD64 chipsets, and it aggressively supports Linux with the best graphics and system drivers available. What's not to like?

On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of Intel at this point. Its chips are expensive, power hungry, and underperform AMD chips running at 2/3 the clock. I've hated the P4 design ever since I found out they created such a long pipeline merely to boost clock speeds without actually providing more performance. If Intel was smart, they'd start with the Pentium-M design, make it 64-bit, then improve it from there. It seems like a good chip, and uses very little power.

That's enough of a rant for now. ;-)

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[Surt]

The problem with biases is, they stick around even when they're wrong. And fox news having the highest ratings doesn't make their news any more accurate, it just means they're misinforming more people.

Re:Eh... not really a big deal

[Glock27]

The problem with biases is, they stick around even when they're wrong.

What, exactly, is the difference between "opinion" and "bias"? Further, do you understand what an "editorial policy" is?

And fox news having the highest ratings doesn't make their news any more accurate, it just means they're misinforming more people.

I didn't state that its news was "more accurate". However, I would say that it's clear that more viewers prefer Fox's presentation of the news, than that of its competitors. The other channels also have their share of "bias". The fact that more people prefer Fox should tell you something, especially if you think democracy has merit. (Of course, there is the "masses are asses" theory as well...;)

Ironically, many people don't like Fox simply because of their bias against Bush et al.

Who cares...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dual core...

I need like 8 or 9 core...

Re:Who cares...

[Anonymous Coward]

Me and my mate have been dual coring your mom.

Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Intel's 64 bit architecture actually is just AMD64's 64 bit architecture. When they say "pressing software designers to embrace 64 bit architecture" they don't mean "convincing software designers to develop for their architecture" they mean "convincing the software designers already developing for that architecture because it's AMD's that they should market it as if Intel invented it".

Re:Well

[PantsWearer]

Actually, Intel's 64-bit instructions are the same as AMD's. I wouldn't say that their architecture is the same. From what I've read, Intel's first forays into x86-64 have been less than stellar performers.

Coming from a gamer

[cr0y]

A highend mobile chip would be awesome, I would happily toss the extra money for a desktop replacement if it ran the games just as well as my current desktop, (which shouldnt be hard, A64 3000+, 1024,R9800Pro)

I have been waiting for an athlon 64 notebook with a mobile radeon x800 for months...anyone know when this thing is due for release?

Made me think of

[ccharles]

You immediately made me think of this :P.

Alan Cox

[hot_Karls_bad_cavern]

Totally just pictured Alan Cox saying, "Well, the type a' cores that'd double-up on a dude like me do."

My face hurts now.

Intel is beating AMD in sales...

[martian265]

because of those damn dirty blue people.

ooh I hate those blue people with their secret blue handshakes....

Re:Intel is beating AMD in sales...

[PantsWearer]

Two by two,
Hands of blue...

So BRING IT ALREADY!

[eWarz]

I've been holding back on upgrading for a LONG time. I Almost upgraded when PCI Express and DDR2 came about, but with the news that dual-core CPUs were just around the corner, i decided to wait for that. I'd prefer AMD over Intel.

FYI running on an AMD Athlon 2400+, MSI K7T-Turbo2 (KT133a chipset), 3 GB RAM, Geforce 6800Ultra, SB Audigy, Maxtor 80 GB special edition. While this PC isn't exactly a slouch in it's own right. (tends to outrun every machine i've touched, and since i do freelance computer repair, i touch alot of them!) I feel that new technology has passed me by and it's FINALLY time to catch up!

Bring it on!

Windows XP Uptime: 11months 2days 17hrs 41mins 37secs

Re:So BRING IT ALREADY!

[Anonymous Coward]

You fool.

When they finally come out, you'll have to wait until they're affordable. So you'll have to wait at least another year.

Get a socket 939 system now ... and pop in a dual core cpu later.

Re:So BRING IT ALREADY!

[kisanth88]

Sig of above:

"Windows XP Uptime: 11months 2days 17hrs 41mins 37secs"

Dude, you are missing like..... a billion patches.

Security > Uptime.

Sheesh

-Kisanth

Re:So BRING IT ALREADY!

[Roliverio]

Troll

Re:So BRING IT ALREADY!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Windows XP Uptime: 11months 2days 17hrs 41mins 37secs"

Wow! And I thought my 6 year + change uptime for Solaris 1 was impressive!

Intel Roadmap?

[Anonymous Coward]

While it seems nice that Intel has tried to pass off AMD's 64-bit solution as theirs and tried to pass of the idea of dual-cores as theirs, it seems clear that one of these companies is executing its roadmap and one is trying not to get runover by the competition.

I still see clear technical advantages due to foresight in AMD's architecture (NUMA, Hypertransport) that support their dual-core designs. I see no such a roadmap/foresight from Intel. How do they plan on getting data to these dual-core Xeons fast enought so that their buses are not the bottleneck?

Re:Intel Roadmap?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah your right... Intel doesn't know how to build chips at all... I mean... just cuz they've been doing it for.. how many years is it now? Ya AMD is going to pwn the market, Intel should just close up shop right now and start bowing down to AMD

Stop with the fanboyism already... without Intel AMD would turn into Intel, and without AMD, Intel would still be selling 1g processors. I seriously doubt Intel is as clueless as you say... and frankly, isn't it AMD that originally had to make "Intel Compatable" chips way back when? I guess that was ok then, but now it's not huh?

Process maturity?

[brucmack]

Well, even if it is the same chip, all designs benefit from a matured manufacturing process. Normally after a few steppings, a core will be capable of lower power operation, since manufacturing defects would be lessened.

Who currently sells an AMD 64-bit laptop?

[Anonymous Coward]

64-bit dual core processors in an laptop would be a dream come true (since I am stuck on my desktop for 64-bit app. development). To bad the article doesn't mentions any hardware vendors that have made a commitment to releasing laptops with this architecture. Note: The following contains nothing but wishful thinking - Please let IBM offer a X or T series laptop in this new architecture before it turns over it's PC business. - end of wishful thinking.

Does anyone know who would be offering this in a laptop? Is anyone currently offering any of AMD's 64-bit processors in a laptop?

Re:Who currently sells an AMD 64-bit laptop?

[Jollyeugene]

Try HP zv5400 or Compaq R3000Z series, among many others.

I am posting from my Athlon3000+ 64bit laptop with its sick 1.6 GHZ BUS. I purchased this a month ago for $950 dollars from Staples. Yes 64bit laptops are out there-- and they can be found for cheap.

And, yes it is fast. And, yes it runs a 64bit OS-- debian pure64.

I would HATE to think of what I would have had to spend on this machine if I had gone with a Pentium 4 with HyperThreading. Compairing compiles with a friends Dell Pentium 4 is truly hillarious-- this thing murders it. The Athlon64 runs fairly cool too-- idles at 98 degrees in Linux.

64 is the way to go, IMO.

Re:Who currently sells an AMD 64-bit laptop?

[Anonymous Coward]

I got my Acer Aspire 1510 back in August. 3400+ desktop replacement, geforce fx5700 64mb, 512mb, 60 GB UltraATA, 15" XGA, Full DVD+-RW, built in memory card reader, 802.11g, gigabit ethernet. I'm still looking for a gigabit ethernet port to use it with...

A steal of a machine for under $1900.

Re:Who currently sells an AMD 64-bit laptop?

[kf6auf]

I sure hope you are talking about Fahrenheit there as I think most people would assume that when not specified CPU temperature is in Celsius and 98C is pretty warm (and I don't even know if a pair of pants would protect your jewels from that furnace). Anyway, metric is the way to go -- but then maybe I should tell that to the JPL engineers across the street, so I guess for now I will settle for not making the rest of the world think we are all stupid for being American by at least letting them know we are using Fahrenheit.

Now, since /. is primarily American, mod me to hell just for asking for the units.

Re:Who currently sells an AMD 64-bit laptop?

[Hal_Porter]

If you were a real geek, having your crotch heated to 98C would be a small price to pay for all that computing power.

Re:Who currently sells an AMD 64-bit laptop?

[Jollyeugene]

Sorry, it was Fahrenheit...

Speaking of Spelling ...

[Anonymous Coward]

From the original blurb:

release both it's dual-core desktop
release dates for it's dual-core processors

"its".

Dual core used by what

[smallguy78]

To quote the intel article:

Parallelism will allow to chip developers to speed up processors ten-fold between 2005 and 2008, the executive said. "By the end of the decade, mainstream desktops will handle eight threads, mainstream servers 32 threads"...

Although great news for games players, developers and media users, how is 8 processors going to be any benefit to the average corporate desktop that uses MS Office, IE and handful of other non-processor-intensive apps?

It seems like dual and multicore technology will be a complete waste for these machines, which probably make up the majority of the desktop market.

Re:Dual core used by what

[JBv]

Look at apple dual cpu systems: one for the gui special effects and the other for the actual work.

Re:Dual core used by what

[Trinn]

In a way you're rather correct, though its more that having two cores would keep the system under most conditions from blocking on typical operations, and leave it free to "instantly" respond to user input. Admittedly that is a generalization, and during CPU-bound actiivty it isn't true, but for the average desktop user it will make a fairly obvious difference.

Re:Dual core used by what

[ocbwilg]

Although great news for games players, developers and media users, how is 8 processors going to be any benefit to the average corporate desktop that uses MS Office, IE and handful of other non-processor-intensive apps?

Because most modern operating systems are written to allow for executing multiple threads simultaneously. If you run two or more apps at once you will see a benefit. When I'm at work I tend to be running 9 or 10 apps at a time, and I'm by no means exceptional in that regard.

I guess /. is the movon.org of tech then?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Toms is Fox then /. is obviously the same as moveon.org (ok, not a news agency but /. no longer reflects the news - its apple centric to the point it nearly forgets its linux roots)

Re:Eff pee? I'm using one!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got an Athlon 64 3200+ DTR processor from newegg (with 1MB cache, too!) in my desktop. Not all heatsinks fit it, but it runs fast & cool. Does that count?

Not quite Intel is selling more 64bit chips

[Anonymous Coward]

AMD already rules the x86 64-bit market

Actually, they don't. Copying from http://news.com.com/IBM+extends+lead+in+server+mar ket+-+page+2/2100-1010_3-5587722-2.html?tag=st.nex t:

"AMD pioneered the addition of 64-bit extensions to x86 in 2003 with its Opteron. Intel followed suit halfway through 2004. Despite AMD's earlier arrival, more revenue came from servers using Intel's 64-bit Xeon chips, McLaughlin said: $1.3 billion for Xeon servers, compared with $838 million for Opteron servers"

Notice that Intel has a huge market share in the x86 world so all people who bought servers before Opteron bought Intel, and they continue doing the same despite of the Opteron goodness. If you look at the desktop processor market, is going to happen the same: Intel has 80% of the market share, and as soon as they start selling 64-bit enabled P4s, most of the x86-64 installed base will be from Intel, not from AMD.

Re:Not quite Intel is selling more 64bit chips

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

Intel has 80% of the market share

Yeah but a few years ago, Intel had over 90% marketshare. AMD has come a long way. People used to give me strange looks when I told them I preferred AMD over Intel (this was in the Super Socket 7 days, when AMD had PC-100 and Intel was still using PC-66).

There's nothing wrong with Intel products (FDIV jokes aside), they make solid chips that perform decently. But the price/performance award goes to AMD hands down, and has for some time.

I wish I would have known 2 years ago

[Meziked]

You know,
I use to like reading Tom's until their bias postings convinced me to buy a 850 chipset. Rambus was going to be the best thing since sliced bread...... Way to call that one guys...

Socket Types and Intel

[ChronosJB]

Isn't Intel making new socket sizes for their new CPU's? I thought I read that somewhere that Intel was not going to keep their current socket sets for their Dual-core CPU's. Anyone know? I know AMD is gonna keep their 940 and 939 Socket sets for their Dual-core CPU's.

Re:Socket Types and Intel

[Anonymous Coward]

Intel are using the same socket, but I think they require a new chipset which is about the same for the end user.

About, AMD, they will introduce a new socket next year as the current ones 939/940 has too few pins to make dual-core shine. The dual-cores they release this year will though be compatible, but a bit limited.

Re:Socket Types and Intel

[ChronosJB]

Ah, so Intel is gonna require customers to purchase a new motherboard before they think about using dual-core CPU's, how quaint. So, AMD's dual-core CPU's won't be spectacular until next year sometime, but they will be pretty good this year.

Learn to spell "its", darn it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you go to grade school?

Brilliant

[V4Victory]

Two Chips at the same time...Brilliant!!

units

[Anonymous Coward]

You are right. I've always seen CPU and other temps referred to in Celsius. (In America). Not sure why the parent poster said 98F.
98F = 36.67C

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Eff Ewe!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody cares what you think. That's why you're posting on slashdot.

Re:Eff Ewe!

[wernercd]

Yeah, I know. But just like you I'm posting anyways. Atleast I'm not ac :P

Vhat a country!

[Thud457]

" Where does the Soviet Russia jokes originate from?"

Moscow -- via Branson, MO

Re:Vhat a country!

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy moly, I realized that he was a regular on "Night Court", but I totally forgot he was in "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension"! Hey, he's SOMEBODY!

Multi-core mobility

[NerveGas]

I think that multi-core chips have an even larger potential in the mobile market than in the desktop market.

With current processers - and even some not-so-current processers - there's not really much that an average person does on a laptop that actually uses all (or even most) of the CPU cycles. DVD playback, email, web surfing, and word processing tend to be the big apps - and none of them require much of a CPU at all.

However, once a person starts trying to do several things at once, then issues like context switches and interrupts start to make the machine feel sluggish, and having an extra CPU *does* make a difference in that area - and improvements to a machine's responsiveness (as opposed to just raw throughput) tend to make the user's "experience" much more pleasant - just look at the efforts in the Linux scheduler world to provide interruptable kernel and other patches which increase responsiveness at the expense of a little bit of throughput.

So, here's my idea: Take small, modestly-powered cores, and put two - or even more - on a chip. Scale the frequency of each core independentyly, turning the unused ones as low as possible (perhaps even OFF) when not needed. You'd be able to have a much more responsive machine and run off of much less power (on average) than with current chips.

As for the responsiveness of dual-CPU machines, I have a dual Pentium 133 that I picked up years ago, and it's not bad at all to use. It's not going to fool anyone into thinking it's an Athlon64, but when I tell people that they're using an original Pentium, they're surprised at just how nice it is to use.

steve

If by "dual CPU" you mean "single CPU", yes.

[adb]

The whizzy Apple effects mostly happen in the whizzy graphics card.