Slashdot Mirror
Core Duo - Intel's Best CPU?
Bender writes "How good is Intel's Core Duo mobile processor? Good enough that Apple chose to put it in the iMac, and good enough that Intel chose to base its next generation microprocessor architecture on it. But is it already Intel's best CPU? The Tech Report has managed to snag a micro-ATX motherboard for this processor and compared the Core Duo directly to a range of mobile and desktop CPUs from AMD and Intel, including the Athlon 64 X2 and the Pentium Extreme Edition. The results are surprising. Not only is the Core Duo's performance per watt better than the rest, but they conclude that its 'outright performance is easily superior to Intel's supposed flagship desktop processor, the Pentium Extreme Edition 965.'"
It might perform well now, but how long will it last under a load? Will something happen over time that they do not forsee?
Intel makes great stuff, but I think it is far too early to say it is the best chip ever...give it a few months in production and let the user decide.
I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
I have to say the Intel Dual Core Processor is quite impressive. It's fast enough to run just about anything I throw at it, and still keep chugging, but I believe that the article negects the fact that the dual core processor runs extremely hot vs other Intel processor. My old Sony VAIO never got as hot as my MacBook Pro does, and it is something that should be considered.
This signature was left intentionally blank.
I would argue that the 8080 was. If you normalize for date/speed that is...
The new core microarchitecture, if you read the Ars Technica article in the previousl
You're forgetting all those students with Laptops, one I know said his laptop was so hot, he'd leave it on his bed before going to sleep, as the accommodation had substandard heating (the norm for all student places, no?)
--- Duey Finster http://www.dueyfinster.com
More reviews here and here.
I thought this was commonly known or assumed. Is this news to many people?
I thought that the only reason the P4 had not been totally abandoned already was that it takes time to switch directions in such a massive company. (and with so many partners that design around your product)
Of course its Intel's best performing desktop processor. It is not like the P4 has set the bar particularly high, with the unfavourable heat production these processors have. Maybe if the P4 scaled as well as Intel initally hoped for, it would be a more difficult task to design a better processor.
...actually show ANYTHING really well, then it's the absolute neglibility of recent synthetic benchmarks. Looking at the numbers SiSoft Sandra spills out, the clocked-to-the-brim Netburst-cores should take the performance-crown with ease in FPU and ALU-applications alike. In reality though, said CPUs hardly matter at all when it's about uncompromising peak-performance. I fail to understand why benchmark-suites this far away from reality still matter in reviews like this.
Sad, in an awkward way.
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
Core Duo actually seems to be a good architecture. Let's challenge it before any opinion!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
Core Duo is a 32bit processor.
Athlon 64 X2 is a 64bit processor.
I care not how much power it uses or how well it runs Word or whatever else they are doing to test these things.
The Core Duo cannot do the same things the Athlon 64 X2 can. Largely because (gasp) it cannot run 64bit code.
What the hell is the point of this comparison?
Say bad words about my book, in cold oatmeal, or I shall sue!
I already posted some benchmarks of a Core Duo Mac Mini running Windows (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=182379&cid=15 077120) and to be honest I was fairly impressed. The gaming benchmark was obviously miserable, the "general purpose" benchmark (zipping files, encoding audio/video, etcdid very well. The Apple zealots may say "it's because it's a Mac", but really the hardware is almost identical to your average Intel laptop. The only major difference is the Core Duo, which not many laptops have (although that's increasing all the time), and that's what I'm putting my money on. Can't wait to see a benchmark with this thing in a gaming rig.
So, Intel's new 65nm process is better than their older processes? Weird...
I just got a new 2.0 Core Duo iMac and it feels a lot more powerful than my old P4 2.8 GHz Sony PC.
I know it's subjective, and I'm now running OS X instead of Windows, but still -- I definately *feels* more powerful.
boxlight
if the tests were run on Linux?
"But Yonah also supports the group of 13 new instructions known as SSE3, handles some SSE2 instructing like Shuffle and Unpack up to 30% faster, and is capable of using its instruction-grouping abilities (known as micro-ops fusion) on some SSE instructions, improving overall throughput."
SSE3 has some very nice hardware thread synchronization instructions. These are important (and AMD has them now). As for the instruction grouping, that sounds rather suspiciously like the double dispatch operations that were added to Opteron:
"Appendix C of Opteron's Optimization Guide specifies to which class each and every instruction belongs. Most 128 bit SSE and SSE2 instructions are implemented as double dispatch instructions. Only those that can not be split into two independent 64 bit operations are handled as Vector Path (Micro Code) instructions. Those SSE2 instructions that operate on only one half of a 128 bit register are implemented as a single (Direct Path) instruction."
Assuming AMD can tune Turion64s to be more power friendly, they'll be able to best Intel's fancy new Core Duo. If they can't, then Intel may be the best game in town for the first time in a decade (assuming they price competitively).
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Looks like AMD still has them beat. From my take on this, on pure performance, the 3800+ X2 is going toe-to-toe and the 4800+ X2 is beating it every single time. So again, not that impressive. Now the per watt performance is important in some applications, so I can see why it would be a better, say, mobile platform than the AMD chips. But let's not pretend that Intel is winning the benchmarks with this quite yet.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
I think we could all see this coming. The Prescott Pentium 4's were never that great compared to the competition. They sucked tons of power, were hotter than hell, and the performance really wasn't all that great compared to the competition.
The Pentium M on the other hand had a much better core design. It just lacked the connectivity of the Pentium 4 because it used socket 478 and similar older technologies. These new Core Duo's are the logical extension to the already good Pentium M line. I wish Intel would just kill all those Prescott processors already.
I have been waiting many years to dump my Opteron machine for an Intel based version. I love the Opteron processors but you just can't get a decent motherboard for them. Hopefully in the near future I can switch to one of these newer Intel procs.
The ratio of people to cake is too big
At the time it was introduced, there was no other microprocessor that came close to matching it.
It was indisputably not only the best microprocessor Intel had produced to date, but the best microprocessor on the market.
Simply no contest. No argument. It superlative in every way, the fastest, the cheapest, the lowest in power consumption, the most advanced in architecture, the widest path. It was king of the hill, the top of the tree, the Cadillac of microprocessors, the ne plus ultra, it bestrode the world of microprocessors like a colossus.
The world will never again see the day when one manufacturer so dominated the microprocessor market that a single product had a 100.0% market share.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
That sure is a nice 8-bit CPU you are running there. It is four times as fast as a 32-bit system cause you get to use 4 registers at the same time to represent 32 bits.
Our QA department is testing my universal application right now (AppKit based). They've recorded a 20 to 30 percent increase in performance of a 1GB MacBook Pro over a 3GB 2Ghz Dual G5 doing a particular operation (mostly mathematics based done in cross-platform C++). It's single threaded, I might add, since OpenMP isn't here yet. The *ONLY* difference in the XCode settings between the two architectures that I made was to enable SSE3 for the Intel build. I can't believe that it's that alone, of course, and suspect it's just better code gen for the Intel architecture coming out of GCC.
From the article: ...The T2600 can't quite take the overall performance crown from the likes of the Athlon 64 FX-60 or the X2 4800+, but jeez, it's startlingly close....
Given the T2600 runs at 2.16ghz
Compare this to
AMD 4800+ 2.4ghz
it really does seem the 'Mhz = performance' is well and truely over...and for the first time Intel seems to be saying to AMD "We too can play your Mhz mean 'nuffin game'"
Again...the test results maybe affected by the chipsets used for the different processor architectures, which in turn affected the the types of memory used (DDR2/DDR) etc etc...
So far the only way these slow Duo chips are winning benchmarks are:
1) The usual bogus Intel SPEC compiler marketing games
2) Comparing Duos to single core chips
3) Outright lies on Apple's part
What is most pathetic about the Duo Macs are they are barely outperforming OLD G4 systems, have worse battery life, and are almost too hot to touch in the MacBook Pro systems.
Dual and Quad 970s and AMD systems utterly destroy Duo based systems in real world tests.
and if only I was the owner of a Sun T1 ...
#include "coucou.h"
RTFM. It whomps the tar out of a A64 X2 3800. I'm an AMD fan having owned nothing but AMD from as far back as the K6-2 but this Core Duo will definitely be the next CPU I purchase. I'm just glad that AMD was able to push Intel to actually develop a decent CPU for the firat time in recent memory and I hope that AMD is able to keep putting pressure on them. If the battle between Intel and AMD stays close, then consumers win.
That Tech Report article is so infested with Flash ads that it discourages me from reading it, or even taking Tech Report seriously.
It seems to me that a company has to be very, very stupid to believe that trying to force people to read ads is productive.
I was trying to do without the FlashBlock extension because Firefox developers tend to blame the instability and CPU hogging of Firefox on extensions. However, I've installed it now.
--
Before, Saddam got Iraq oil profits & paid part to kill Iraqis. Now a few Americans share Iraq oil profits, & U.S. citizens pay to kill Iraqis. Improvement?
Just this week, I received a brand new HP nx9420 laptop with a 1.83Ghz Duo processor. I use this laptop for 3D Solid CAD/CAM applications. For my application, it is definately faster. The CAM rendering is faster, the part rotation is smoother. Overall very efficient. I have done some stress testing by doing some long database queries at the same time I am rendering a part. My old computers would have joked. There is a noticable hit on rendering performance, but it is still able to complete both tasks in a reasonable manner. We have the same CAD/CAM software on a 1.6Ghz PentiumM Laptop and two 2.8GHz Pentium-4 desktop machines. All the machines have 1024MB of RAM, and the two Desktops have 256MB video cards. I have not noticed that heat issues that other folks have mentioned, but I don't hold it in my lap either. So far I am very impressed.
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.a
Note the difference in code names. Processors based off the Core microarchitecture were codenamed Merom. However, processors based off of dual-core Pentium M's were codenamed Yonah.
:(){
It sure the hell is. I have a 2.0x2 G5 desktop machine and one of the new 1.66 GHz Core Duo Mac Minis. Running Handbrake, the mini is easily twice as fast.
There are likely lots of niche markets where one microprocessor has 100% market, share, it's just that the home/desktop PC market isnt so much of a niche anymore.. and even so, was it really 100%? I just can't help disagreeing with gross generalisation, sorry :p
which is totally what she said
I think its extreme pricewhore time for AMD, apart from a new Socket with DDR2 - which solves a problem which has never really existed at AMD* (I still enjoy my Opterons NUMA as much as the next person though :) ), although DDR2 still brings some benefits none the less.
* Apart from the Athlon MP, whose usefullness apart from a low low cost SMP server platform disappeared when stuff started to demand more bandwidth. A Uniprocessor Duron on an nForce2 owns it on anything where AGP and memory bandwidth comes into play!
Its hard to believe anything outside the orbit of Mercury could run hot when comparied to Intel's other products. WTF? Does this thing actually brand "Intel Inside" directly onto your thighs if you actually hold it on your lap? Are all laptop cases now going to be made out of left over tiles from the Space Shuttle program? Will I need to wear my fire department issued gnomex bunker pants to use this thing? Will they be selling carbon fiber tablecloths as accessories? Will I need to carry a 5 gallon water pack on my back and connect it to cooling ports on the laptop if I want to run a game?
I'd already switched from Intel to AMD based largely on heat and power issues -- this won't help Intel's cause at all.
I can't imagine anything running so hot they'll need a magnetic bottle instead of a processor slot to hold the chip is going to be low-power consuming.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
Not only does SSE3 have those hardware thread sync instructions (which I thought were mainly for HyperThreading) but the other math instructions are supposed to be helpful for complex numbers.
SSE3 isn't exactly new, either...it's been around since Prescott (about two years as of now).
I recall that Intel's internal data paths were 64-bits wide, which meant SSE's 128 bit operations were actually hacks. I'm not sure if AMD had a similar hack, or if they included real 128-bit data paths. I know Merom/Core/NGMA is supposed to have true 128-bit data paths, so SSE will be even better.
:(){
But dollars for power still goes to amd.gimme 64bit x2.It's a feel good article for the inTEL fan boys.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
Son, I say, son, that's a joke, son, when it was the first microprocessor on the market, with no competitors. By definition, it would be the fastest, cheapest, coolest, et cetera, as there is nothing else for means of comparison.
Goddamn, are all the UIDs over 500000 stupid 13-year-old kids who don't understand English?
is it allows large files to be mmaped.
mmaping is often both simpler and lower overhead than reading from the file into a buffer only to pass the data straight back to the OS to send down a socket or whatever.
however on a 32 bit architecture you can't mmap anything above a few gigabytes and thats assuming your only handling the one large file in your process at a time.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
I wish there was a mod option for 'Blatantly Incorrect'.
No, I'm a 22 year old native english speaker (well, Scottish), but when I only started using PCs about 7 years ago, before that I thought that they were trash (well, mostly I still do :p ), since I was brought up on Macs and Commodores/Amigas. x86 is slowly improving though.
which is totally what she said
Sun has a 60 day try and buy on T1 systems (T1000 & T2000), go check it out at sun.com. Late last year they were running promotions where they shipped you a T2000 for doing benchmarks and blogging about it. Some of the best bloggers are going to get to keep the systems.
It was 100%.
It was 100.0%.
It was 100.00000000000%.
Everything I stated was indisputable objective fact, not opinion.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
He was comparing the Core Duo to the ULV Pentium M in the Vaio. The Core Duo is still cooler than any Pentium 4 processor.
The fascinating story of the world's first microprocessor.
Late Model PowerBook G4 battery life was not all that great -- similar Pentium M laptops were better.
Intel is massively better than PPC for Integer ("General Purpose") tasks, you're probably right about FP and "media" (Altivec). The problem is that Apple primarily sells consumer computers, and you can't move those just on media performance. Especially when the competition is "fast enough" to play HD H.264 etc, there's little need for specialized chips like Altivec anymore.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
I did a comparison with my desktop PC (an AMD Athlon 64, 3200+ running at 2GHz, 1GB of speedy memory) versus my MacBook Pro (Intel Core Duo at 1.83GHz, 1GB memory) with VRAD on the second MINERVA map, with the Source SDK running on Windows XP Pro.
VRAD definitely takes full advantage of the dual-core nature of the Intel processor - typical compile times on the desktop PC were around 50-60 minutes, while on the laptop they were just over 30 minutes. It's a fairly artificial test, admittedly (although I'm really happy with the increased speed) - but it certainly shows it's a rather fast processor at certain floating-point-intensive tasks, anyhow.
Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
Intel's lead is mostly a manufactoring one -- 65nm process. AMD still uses 90nm. Not to discount Intel's advantage, but AMD doesn't need a new core design to continue their dominance -- merely a new manufactoring facility (which is hard, but not as hard as the design).
It was indisputably not only the best microprocessor Intel had produced to date, but the best microprocessor on the market.... The world will never again see the day when one manufacturer so dominated the microprocessor market that a single product had a 100.0% market share.
Indisputably if you ignore the Motorola 6800 and the MOS 6502 and the Z80. Even if you did ignore them, you still wouldn't end up with 100% microprocessor market share for the 8080.
It could be a RAM latency problem. Right?
I installed FlashBlock and AdBlock and read parts of the article.
Summary: AMD processors are faster.
100% if it created its own market, sure. I've not traditionally been interested in the history of PCs (when I say PCs I mean x86 'IBM PC's, not personal computers in general), but thankyou for informing me :p
which is totally what she said
Dude, he wasn't talking about the 8080. He was talking about the 4004. And trust me, that processor really did have 100% market share.
Dirty Troll. Care to point out the benchmarks where the Core Duo is humiliated?
For the record, the FX-55 and FX-57 are single core. The FX-60 is essentially a dual core chip constructed from a pair of FX-55s (with the standard AMD dual-core tweaks).
Audio apps (e.g. Logic) running on similarly-clocked dual G5s and Core Duos are about on-par in performance, but that's comparing a full tower to a notebook. I'm looking forward to seeing what the new PowerMacs will do.
But if the CPU architecture really is that good, it should be easy to make a cool low voltage version that still has enough power to.. say... run Windows Vista (scnr ;)
And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
Intel's Duo Core processor was the reason for my purchase of a MacBook this week. As much of a die-hard PC fan as I am, I'm very impressed with the functionality of the Mac OS along with the performance of the laptop.
[%] Cingular Ringtones
These were the benchmarks left by an Intel Core Duo. Compare that to the benchmarks left by the G5 laptop I built out of my old iMac. Clearly, the G5 burns Intel Core Duo out of business. That's why Apple had to stop making them, G5 was actually too good for its own good - there wasn't the technology to keep those blindingly fast processors cool. Some days, I'd go to work only to find my computer was so fast it'd already opened my apps, written my code, saved the changes, compiled the new build, shut down, and caused a fire hazard, all before I'd finished my morning coffee. Clearly Apple no longer cares about it's customers, that's why it's downgrading to Intel. Clearly Apple is embarrassed by the fact that the G5 iMac outperforms the Intel iMac, that's why they stopped manufacturing the G5. Clearly, and I'll use a programming construct to phrase this because I'm so much more iNtelligent than you (though I'm loath to use those 5 letters that spelled the downfall of the Apple empire in the eyes of yours truly), the difference between (the difference between the announced iMac processor speed and the then G5 processor speed) and (the difference between the released iMac processor speed and the G5 processor speed) is revealing of the fact that Apple actually opened up all the old G5 units and removed the welded-in processors to downgrade them rather than upgrading the Intel machines between announcement and release...
etc.
When the mac book pros first came out one of the mac journalists did a compare with the Dell dual core 17" laptop and found the Dell to be more expensive than the 15.4" mac. Dell now offers a 15.4" dual core laptop. If you configure it with Windows media edition and similar hardware it is about $300.00 less than the mac book pro. My guess would be that the Apple hardware is probably a little higher end than the Dell, accounting fo rthe difference. Still $300.00 bucks is a small difference for a top of the line mac OS/x machine compared to a Dell with Windows. You get all the developer tools on the OS/x dvd. Do Windows users get a full version of Visual Studio .net?
You can get the Hyundai for $1699.00, or the Mercedes for $1999.00. Which one is the better bargain?
There still out of my price range.
All I know is that Rails works well on Macs, Windows and Linux. So I've got an amd64 3000 Turion w/1Gb ram (self upgraded from 256MB), running Mepis Linux for under $900.
I do have TextMate envy, though!
The iMac is very impressive - fast and responsive even with a full load of video encoders going (handbrake & ffmpegx). Even with those going I was still able to get Firefox open and loaded a site before the pc could get started getting the graphics for a site. The pc was only busy copying a 1.2GB file from the iMac.
Pc specs - 3.0Ghz P4 w/ HT Northwood core, 1GB memory.
iMac specs - stock Intel iMac with 1.5GB memory (+600MB memory unused).
The combination of OS X and CoreDuo has made me a very happy customer.
Eeek! It was great until I saw the $700+ price tag. Then I dropped a brick.
Well, it wasn't just important in the history of PCs. The introduction of the 4004 was a pivotal event in the history of electronics (right up there with the Audion, the Klystron, and the transistor itself) and in the history of computing (same league as the Norden bombsight, the ENIAC, and the IBM 360).
If you don't know what those are, either, you may find that they are really quite worth finding out about.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Per watt it's the most powerful thing ever. When measured in "mips per engineer sleeping on futons", it's nearly 4 times as fast as the next best, and when you multiply its cycle length it by the number of years Windows has been around and divide by the number of letters in the name its by far the shortest cycle length.
Otherwise its way behind and may turn out not to scale very well.
You don't read much, do you. If you can get your nose out of Jobs's ass long enough to read some reviews and discussion, maybe you wouldn't be so ignorant.
But laptop heat is a major threat to male fertility. See this article for more details.
The world will never again see the day when one manufacturer so dominated the microprocessor market that a single product had a 100.0% market share.
It will, when Cyberdyne finds the T-1000's microprocessor.
My other post is a First.
...with those awesome CoreDuo laptops you can get your testicles burned to a crisp at that great "performance" peaks.
Turion X2, that's what AMD's going to do. Dual core within the same 35W TDP that the Turion ML singlecore uses, so it'll run cooler than the Core Duo. The rumored ship date is May 9th but without details of, say, new HP notebooks built around that there's no way to know how accurate that date is.
;-))
Wanna run 64-bit Windows Vista when it comes out? Intel's current notebooks chips can't play there. Want to run 64-bit Linux? AMD notebooks have been doing that for years.
AMD doesn't need 65nm as badly as Intel does (better design that's less dependent on massive L2 caches), so they can take their time and get it right before ramping 65nm production. Intel's 65nm yields are likely awful, but they have so many fabs that they can crank out an adequate number of working chips, even if it's terribly inefficient.
Fun test: try playing a 1080p Quicktime movie trailer with 64-bit VLC and 32-bit VLC. See how much less CPU time the 64-bit version burns. AMD64 does very nice things for codecs, crypto, and Java. It's not all just about breaking the 4GB barrier. Steve Jobs really screwed up by starting out MacOS x86 on a 32-bit codebase that's already obsolete.
(Not just responding to your post, I just like to dump everything into one reply
Almost all serious linuxes are pretty good at x86_64 mode. And almost all production/server stuff now have all that optimisations for 64 and/or N-way systems.
This is an excellent review. The time and effort put into it are obviously substantial. However, I do have one complaint about the review.
SDTV and DVD decoding are a given: any modern PC can decode them, so I understand why such tests were not performed. However, the reviewers are quite insistent on this processor being an excellent HTPC platform, so it puzzles me that no benchmarks and real world tests were used to document 720p and 1080i HDTV decoding (including de-interlacing for 1080i content). Decoding video is the most important thing a HTPC does, yet these tests were excluded?
I run MythTV on an Athlon 64 3700+ (2400 MHz), and this processor is just barely able to keep up with software decoding & deinterlacing of 1080i content while ensuring sync to prevent horizontal on-screen tearing. It would be of value to their readers to include software decoding processor utilization for 720p and 1080i content before announcing it an excellent HTPC platform.
...that is just like HP pr. liter... my Lupo is as good as a Corvette... COOL.
I'm sorry but I am not impressed... and the fact that it is a dual core does not do it better.
I will agree that it is Intels best mobile CPU but it is not Intels best CPU... it probably will be when it get 64 bit...
It was 100.00000000000%.
:-P
On a Pentium 60 it was 100.0067482902%
I'd already switched from Intel to AMD based largely on heat and power issues
Then you are an ignormaous, because Intel Core soundly beats AMD on these factors. I suggest reading the article.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
The Z80 and 6502 were done well after the 6800 and 8080, because they were done by some original designers of the 8080 and 6800 (Fagin and Peddle) who later left to start up at new companies (Zilog and Mostek). Not sure how far apart the intoduction dates of the 8080 and 6800 were. The 8080 may have had a time window alone as a shipping fully usable 8-bit CPU (unlike the harder to interface and program 8008).
I'm impressed that you can determine my mental capacity so easily and at such a distance. I have not yet purchased a MOBILE chip of either sort (not in a few years anyway) as I've been waiting for this to sort out. I have switched in my purchases on Desktops and am very pleased to have done so. If intel produces the best desktop processors again (and I'm talking about common use, not bleeding edge overpriced ones) then I'll switch back. When AMD or Intel gets someone producing dual core mobile chips with reasonable heat and battery life at reasonable cost -- and in units under 10 pounds with a 15" tablet screen -- I'll by my new laptop. For now, I remain unimpressed.
As for your comment, I'll remind you that keyboarding at a distance is a bit like Tequila. It makes a big man seem seem little, and a little man feel big. I guess I know which that makes you.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
By the timing and the phrasing, I'm betting he switched before the Core came out.
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
Because the article clearly showed a desktop Core system being tested.
Face it, you're just an douche reapeting generic INTEL IS SO HOT, RITE? LOLZERS! crap from 2 years ago in *exactly* the wrong article, and now you are bitching like big bitch because you got called on it.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
I'm looking to build a new desktop soon.
Would like to put a pair of dual core CPUs on a dual processor motherboard for a total of 4 CPUs. Have these hit the market for Intel's Core Duo chips yet? Otherwise I may go for 2x of the X2 Opterons.
Us silent pc enthusiasts have known about this for a long time.
I highly recommend this site: http://www.silentpcreview.com/
(I don't work for them)
Assuming AMD can tune Turion64s to be more power friendly, they'll be able to best Intel's fancy new Core Duo. If they can't, then Intel may be the best game in town for the first time in a decade (assuming they price competitively).
Wait a minute. If AMD can't do something it isn't currently doing, then Intel will have the better chip? Doesn't that mean that, right now, Intel has the better chip?
I make no claims about the CoreDuo being the world's best x86 chip, I'm just following your logic.
I also take exception to your "first time in a decade" quip. It's wrong in two ways. Ever since AMD first overtook Intel in overall quality (price/performance/power), the lead has shifted back-and-forth (with, recently, AMD holding the lead for most of the time). But beyond that, in '96, AMD did not have the best chips on the high-end. They were quite competitive (but not clearly superior) price-wise on the low-to-mid-end, though. It wasn't until a few years later that AMD really began to take a definitive lead over Intel.
Troll? Gee, sorry, I was only joking around!
omg hi2u ltns lol@911
irc?
I'm waiting for the Intel Hard-Core Extreme Edition: Keep your servers up and running all night, watch them scream.
Uhmmm... count me in.
Thanks,
Leabre
the poor poor 8080 was not able to stop the 25 dollar,2 cycle per instruction beast
100% market share?
Wasn't that the time of the Zilog Z80 chip as well? I recall a good number of CP/M machines around that time, as well as a lot of home microcomputers (ZX Spectrum, for example) that used it.
...I'm looking forward to having one machine where I can run ProTools and/or Logic, then "once in a while" load up a DX plugin or virtual instrument on a BootCamp session. Fun times!
And I'm... too sexy for a sig...
2.0 ghz pentium-m's easily compete with 3 ghz p4's. The core duo is an improvement on the pentium m, plus you've got newer motherboard architecture and probably memory too.
Faster processer, faster chipset, and quite possibly faster memory. Why wouldn't you expect it to be faster?
Hmmm... Pie...