Slashdot Mirror
Core 2 Extreme 40% faster than Pentium EE 965?
Marc writes "As far as I know, this is the first time that Intel has talked about what we can expect from its new gaming CPU, Core 2 Extreme. For once, there is no word on power consumption on this new chip, but Intel talks about raw speed and a 40% gain over the current 3.73 GHz Extreme Edition 965 - which would be rather impressive and could indicate a problem for AMD. In this interview with TG Daily, Intel also claims that a Core 2 Extreme-based enthusiast PC will leave the pixel power of a Playstation 3 in the dust. Gamers, this appears to become the most exciting year for you in a long time!"
The demo system Intel is showing at E3 features a Core 2 Extreme processor, which, judging from past pricing strategy, will cost slightly over $1000, as well as a Quad-SLI graphics card (i.e. probably two dual Nvidia graphics cards at around $1000 each).
Now, when you build such a high-end system you probably wouldn't skimp on the case ($200), motherboard ($200 & up), memory ($300 & up), power supply ($100 & up) and peripherals, either, so let's allow another grand for these things and you wind up with a $4000 PC.
Put in a Blue-Ray drive (expected to cost around $1000 initially) and you just hit 5 grand.
I'm not a Sony fanboy, not by a long shot, but comparing a 5 grand PC to a 1/2 grand PS/3 does seem a tad unfair, now doesn't it?
And yes, a quad-SLI system with a Core 2 Extreme *is* expected to blow the doors off a PS/3. No surprise here.
Dedicated Linux servers (root access) $45 p.M.
They always say "this will be XX% faster than the last chip". I'm waiting to see some real numbers...
http://www.revmediaphotography.com
The x86 instruction set is so inefficent compared to RISC processors like the PPC. Are they finally droping it to get preformance? or will they just throw more heat at the problem. That only works in plumbing.
Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
I wonder how many FPS i'll get on space invaders
There are still reasons why one would prefer a console to a PC. A console will be optimized for group gaming. Having a good time. A PC is optimized for typing, alone, and in the dark, in a barren Linux console session, with ASCII porn streaming down your screen.
Besides, once you separate your gaming machine (PS3) from your PC, you can optimize your upgrades for what you actually use the machine for.
You can use a lower-end video card that's well supported in Linux, but not great for games. And you don't really have to worry about upgrading the PS3 at all.
Although one must wonder why AMD would be scared of a 5.2 gHz rather than a 3.7 when CPUs that fast are never, ever the system's bottleneck. Seems like a lot of posturing.
I'm sick of hearing about power consumption and yadda yadda yadda. I buy processors based on performance, not on how many watts it eats up. Sure, it's nice to have a cpu that draws less power but why should that have to be one of the main marketing points unless the cpu is for a laptop? I'd rather have all cpus rated by megaherts again.
So the high performance crowd will be wanting a PC by the time the PS3 comes out. The group gamers will want a Wii, and the "hard-core" console gamers probably already have an XBox 360. Who then is Sony hoping to sell the PS3 to? (not counting people with too much money)
Philosophy.
I've read over the article albeit briefly and I find myself thinking that the quote in the summary is total hype for a chip, sure a PS3 will cost about 600, but I seem to recall those EE chips being as much if not more and given that this chip is newer then the P4ee's no doubt it will cost even more. And that's not counting the cost of video cards etc.
2 is always smaller than 3 - even for larger values of 2.
. . . until next year. : )
harmonious design
The article summary states:
"Intel also claims that a Core 2 Extreme-based enthusiast PC will leave the pixel power of a Playstation 3 in the dust.
but then I also see in the article:
"[I don't know off the top of my head] the number of polygons it can draw versus a Cell, but I think it's going to be higher, because there's a lot more bandwidth on the quad system than on the Cell system."
That doesn't sound like much of a claim to me.
Intel took a processor that their Isreali design team took a lot of effort to make as efficient as possible and turned it into a power hog because Netburst doesn't scale, great......
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
I would expect in actuality we would be seeing something like a 60-70% increase in speed. A company like Intel would probably estimate conservatively so as to not over-hype a new product.
..that using the word extreme should be illegal?
A tiny huffman module seems like it could do wonders for code compression and also take negligible silicon these days.
I remember some papers on that from the guys at Colussa (the guys that Microsoft bought to be their CLR) that seemed impractical at the time, but now.... hmmm... double your cache for free.
Moore's Law appears to be alive after all.
First the Pentium D 805 running at 4.1 GHz and now this.
We are alive yet!
Fascism is the greatest political ideology ever conceived. Sorry.
There's a bit more design elements going into a PS3 than just the raw pixel pushing. I still don't see many FPS games on a PC that can do let 4 players play on the same computer screen.
today is spelling optional day.
AMD's Athlon 64 is 36% faster than Pentium 965 EE in UT2004 http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&m odel1=238&chart=71&model2=329
Is Intel's new Core 2 Extreme only as fast as AMD's FX-57?
It's like guys buying gas-guzzling cars and laughing at those who drive economic compacts...they can't even see that the joke's on them.
The vast majority of users do not need the higher clock speeds, but they could sure stand to save some money on power bills, especially if you have a room full of computers. My departmental budget loses a big chunk to power costs (and cooling, which is related), so we have no plans to 'upgrade' to faster, power-gobbling, heat-blasting CPUs, since we have no foreseeable need to.
Honestly folks, if you're not an insane gamer, or crunching numbers for the Next Big CGI extravaganza, don't waste your cash.
Is that the standard? What about the X-box? (or the next X box by the time this gets out into market)
given the investment that anyone makes in a computer system designed for gaming, how it is a "most exciting year" to be faced with the possibility of yet another set of continuing reasons to spend more money on yet more gear? wouldn't a really exciting year in gaming have nothing to do with new hardware and everything to do with cool, inspired and inspiring new games?
I'm glad the names for processors are getting a little more exciting.
'Core 2 Extreme' is a techy name, and will date rather quickly, but better than the mundane 486, pentium III, pentium M etc. I always liked 'Athlon', there is something inoffensively sporting about it.
Now all I need is a few more nouns.
Words like 'pulsar','shard','gyroscope','peregrine'....
Car companies take care to have an imaginative and memorable name for their new product, I'd like to see more tech companies doing the same thing.
The demo system Intel is showing at E3 features a Core 2 Extreme processor, which, judging from past pricing strategy, will cost slightly over $1000, as well as a Quad-SLI graphics card (i.e. probably two dual Nvidia graphics cards at around $1000 each). Now, when you build such a high-end system you probably wouldn't skimp on the case ($200), motherboard ($200 & up), memory ($300 & up), power supply ($100 & up) and peripherals, either, so let's allow another grand for these things and you wind up with a $4000 PC. Put in a Blue-Ray drive (expected to cost around $1000 initially) and you just hit 5 grand.
Let's not, I don't want Blue-Ray. I don't want $1000 video cards, you can compete against PS3 with far less. You are effectively creating a gold plated PC that no one really goes shopping for, a tactic once commonly employed by Mac advocates. It was a bogus tactic then, it still is now. Peripherals, are well peripheral. You components are inflated. You can do the job with a $2500 PC and that is with name brand components, Antec case/PS, Intel mobo, Plextor, etc, and of course that $1000 CPU. And of course using today's prices. If you wait for when PS3 ships you could probably do just about as well with a $300-$500 Intel dual core, so we're really talking about a $2000 contempolrary PC.
The PS3 still costs a lot less, but now it is a reasonable comparison. Now folks can argue about practical issues, like will they get $1500's worth of value out of the computer with respect to non-gaming activities.
it isn't quite what you thought is it?
Code size? Memory usage? Execution speed?
These all affect each other. The binaries are different between different arches, duh! The fact is that you invalidate fewer cache lines with smaller x86 instructions, and those Intel-based Macs are way faster than the PowerPC ones.
World of Warcraft on my friend's 15" MacBook Pro blows the doors off my 12" Powerbook G4 of the previous generation. We're talking 20fps average vs. 50!
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Actually, power = heat/time since heat is thermal energy (disordered kinetic energy) and power is energy per unit time.
You really should stay awake is physics class. After all, knowledge is power.
39% by my calculations
Give me good ratings or I will close down the internet.
The Intel Core Peregrine Duo versus the AMD Pulsaron64 X2 !!!
:-P
The most exiting round of CPU battles yet!
This sig rocks the casbah.
Many people decided to buy the PS2 in part because they needed a DVD player.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
"Intel also claims that a Core 2 Extreme-based enthusiast PC will leave the pixel power of a Playstation 3 in the dust."
Even if technically true, given the 'lowest common denominator' style of PC games, would that really mean a flippin thing for a year or two?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Even Grammar Nazis have been outsourced. j/k
Nonsense bring it on and add extra adjectives. For example the new Gell-itte Super Mondo Xtra Extreme shaver now with 20 blades!!!!!!!
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
Ok so the clock speed rocks. But does the rest of the system keep up? The big advantage I see with AMD is Hyper Transport and the newly ratified Hyper Transport 3.0. You can have a THz CPU but if you can't feed it data/instructions it's just going to waste most of it's potential.
I'm not familiar with any possible new bus technology coming out with the new Intel CPU's, but based on my current experience with the latest Dell boxes (Intel) and our new Penguin Computing and HP AMD boxes Intel has a lot of catchup to do to outperform AMD and their whole architecture.
We are using these boxes as MySQL database servers with each server containing 100+ 500 MB to 50 GB databases attached to fiber channel disk arrays. These boxes are mostly doing I/O, but a fair amount of CPU is used for sorting/math done at the database level. The AMD boxes smoke the Intel ones.
Unless Intel also releases a whole new architecture that can compete with Hyper Transport the extra speed will most likely be wasted.
...but I do care about the release cycle. The quicker they're released the more they bump the price down for slightly older processors which have hopefully gotten over their teething problems. In my book, that's excellent. Probably the only thing which bothers me significantly is the (virtually) two company monopoly on processors. It's just not very good for the consumer, but at least it isn't solely Intel or AMD...
I have one of those - $4400 actually; it's a PII450. Has 128mb & it's still all original, from the paint to the case screws.
Pi Ran Out
Even Grammar Nazis have been outsourced.
But, hey, the grammar Nazi Nazi is still a good old boy. Which makes me a grammar Nazi Nazi Nazi. I'm not telling where I live.
How did outsourcing get such a bad name in the first place? Reproduction requires outsourcing. I thought most people liked it that way. I mean, insourcing is a great just-in-time tactic for a few years, but it starts to seem, I don't know, a little bit xenophobic and self absorbed?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Usually, that's not what happens for us. Generally, when our performance goes up, so goes the power.
Oh yes, quite a claim there. You could limbo under the Prescott power budget on stilts.
Now write some games that don't suck.
Hey stop that! I trademarked that clue long before *you* got to it.
What's interesting is how the converse stupidity was established in the first place. Proponents of the RISC camp were so busy announcing their imminent victory they forget to extrapolate more than one or two die shrinks into the future. A design parameter that makes you pull your hair out today can evolve into a subtle advantage a few shrinks later.
I'd rip apart how x86 handles the flag register (partial register stalls and truly Byzantine retirement logic) long before I'd replace the x86 instruction encoding format (except perhaps the prefix bytes, which are super annoying for decode alignment). The stack based floating point register file and instruction set is one of the few x86 features that was beyond redemption at any scale (do I sound like Ralph Nader or what?)
The bottom line is that the flawed nature of the x86 instruction set had a much bigger impact on thermal performance (MIPS/watt) than it ever had on top speed. Now that thermal performance determines top speed, that old shoe is beginning to pinch in new places.
You are so backwards. The 8088 was the cripple-chip used in the first IBM PC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8088
Wang made a PC clone with the 8086 for a while. It was lacking compatibility on a number of fronts, so it died of a not-so-slow terminal illness. It ran about 60% faster than an 8088 PC at the same rated clock speed.
It's amazing that IBM looked at the 8086 and decided it needed an additional whack to the kneecap. As if it wasn't hobbled badly enough already.
Here's one small defect that greatly enhanced the Propecia sales among a generation of early adoptors. The segment registers were designed with a four bit offset from the address registers, yielding a 1MB address space.
If that offset had been six bits instead, the machine would have had a 4MB address space. Each of the eight ISA slots could have had a dedicated 64K address mapped I/O space (consuming 512KB). A 4MB address space would have nicely bridged the evolution to 32-bit multitasking operating systems, which become viable somewhere between 4MB and 8MB.
That four bit offset cost the industry billions of dollars that could have been far better invested elsewhere. There was precious little advantage to a 16 byte segment alignment granularity that I ever noticed.
Well, for one thing, high power consumption results in a lot of wattage dumping into the room. It also runs up the electricity bill. It demands beefier PSUs, which must be larger. Larger PCs take up more room, which may not be a problem, but may be, especially in smaller abodes. High power output also creates thermal hazard problems, as real as cooling failure resulting in components melting and catching on fire, etc.
Right now, Athlon 64 X2s wipe the floor with P-Ds, in both power consumption and performance. Why settle for less? I've got a 3800+ X2 @ 2.4GHz and it consumes very little power for such an amazingly fast chip. It runs off a 220W PSU in a low-profile case with no problems, fan speed on half. A Pentium D would struggle with such a setup, that I know for sure.
A conroe (Core 2) may wipe the floor with AMD. In fact, it probably will. But you know what? That's good, it pressures AMD into releasing K9/reverse SMT chips sooner. A little competition never hurt anyone.
$60 dual core chips? Sooner than you might think...
Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
What do you live in, the 80s? The disks in this clunk de munk run at 7200
Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
I'm glad I'll finally be able to play solitaire at 800 FPS.
"Gamers, this appears to become the most exciting year for you in a long time!" Games on the PC are for 99% of the time restricted by the video card, only in rare cases the CPU will actually be the bottleneck, if you run a game at higher details (AA/AF) and resolutions you will put more strain on the VGA card, and an increase in CPU power will not translate into a boost in performance worth mentioning.
"Hell, it'll also fill my wallet with dust with it's pricetag ALONE!" lol :)
Us REAL gamers have become pre-market suckers.
Ever-vaunted realism is cycles per second, lapping at the shore of capability, GPU aside, what has DX done for us lately? If I could donate every wasted or pointless cycle to BOINC I bet the world would be a better place. I dunno, I'm no scientist, but I think I know when I've been ripped off. Direct X is a software manipulation, GL is a driver fabrication and "anything else" is new-keyword-bullshit. I think I'll just stop playing these silly games and go Linux, Ubuntu-style.
Hey, let's be fair. This is an exciting year. The Nintendo DS is becoming cheap so even gamers who'd laugh in your face if you asked them to shell out 200 bucks for a piece of gaming hardware can buy one. That's the first non-Gamepark console since the original Playstation that's actually worth buying!
;)
Let's face it: All serious computer gaming was done under MS-DOS, Direct3D is for weenies without imagination.
By the way, apparently I can't post anything with a subject line of "Score: +1, Retrogaming Elitism". A Slash bug?
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
That should've read "Intel Yugo Dual Extreme Edition". Although an Intel Yubo would be cool, too... Powered by Karavan technology.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Ok I've been keeping abreast of the whole new Intel chip, but readin the article does anyone else get a de'javou feeling? I seem to remember AMD bringing out their AMD 1700-2200xp chips with their low clock rates, and telling us performance mattered not clock speed. Intel then got carried away upto 3.7Ghz, telling us we needed faster and faster chips that cost 3 or 4 times the AMD ones.
AMD is finally ahead and while I don't do any network service work or place my PC understrain I've found the AMD64 3700+ does everything I would want, it doesn't slow down it runs everything very quickly and every game I own runs maxed out wiuth a decent frame rate. The one bottle neck in my system now seems to be windows itself (xp64 is an awful OS) and the hard drive access times.
Has Intel got lost in the 'MHz = l33t' attitude again? Or have they come up with something that competes with Hypertransport yet?
Well outside the MAC, Servers and your elite gamer can anyone see this chip selling? Its unlikely your average joe is interested eith the price tag being so high. The elite gamer seems to be a dieing breed, and does anyone know its performance against a AMDFX 62??
As for the 'who will buy a Sony?' comment, I will be, once the top notch one drops to around £200. My PS2 cost that and the years of enjoyment its brought me, coupled with the out of box games like singstar,buzz off etc show sony are thinking about me and my mates. It comes with Blu-ray since the 360 seems to be trying to pass itself off as a entertainment hub its lack of next gen drive is very very poor. Sonys Blu-ray, and general 'hype' seem to sugegst it can be a true entertainment hub that happens to play fantastic games. No i don't have a HDTV nor do I plan to buy one, but I'm pretty certain that the Movie industry is going to force this on us so would rather save the cash now and get it in my console.
the 20'000 aren't necessary in the same room to make a difference.
:it'll lowers their global bill).
If the 20'000 hardcore gamer that are living in the same city as you use 50W CPUs instead of 150W one, maybe they'll get 3FPS less on the screen, but on the other hand will consume 2 MW less.
Which will put less strain on the power plant, will be more ecologically friendly and will contribute less to the global warming.
(That's why enterprise are also interested in more eco-friendly CPUs
Same reasonning also goes for the SUVs. Appart from having a bigger toy than you neighbours, what's the point in using a vehicle that consumes more gaz and is less secure in case of crash than everyone else ? You're ruining the environnement with your bullshit. Not you as a signle person, but you as a member of the greater group of dummies who feel obligated to drive the car that looks the biggest and most impressive.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I'm so glad that AMD became a powerful player in the desktop PC and server market... not because I love AMD but because now we are really seeing some earnest competition and innovation. Before, we were happy with Moore's law, but then AMD beat Intel to 1GHz and the ensuing struggle for mind and market share has brought about some truly phenominal changes.
Keep up the excellent competition... maybe we can have a third player jump in with some new ideas? IBM? Sun? Let's see you what you have...
"...on paper, they can generate a lot more polygons with that product than we can with a single graphics product. I think some of these quad-graphics systems can get there now."
Its a non-story. A core2 with a quald sli setup they "think" can match consoles now? Lets see. Thats a minimum of a $4000 system compared to a $399-599 console.
The real question is why are we paying so much for the same power in a PC or getting so little power for the same price (you can't really game on the $399 PCs)?
If the memory controller isn't on die then it has to be in the northbridge chip right?
Who makes those northbridge chips? Answer: Intel (almost exclusively I think)
So they sell more chips and make more money. It's just that simple.
I'm getting an EXTREME RASH from the use of the word EXTREME. But the other possible marketing buzzword candidate was taken.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Enjoy!
r mance-claim-being-busted.html
o es-guerilla.html
c ores-revealed.html
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/conroe-perfo
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/intel-exec-d
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/clovertown-s
What Gamers? The Sims 2 Game will not play on Dual-Processor Machines.
My daughter has a Dual PIII 900MGz PC and SIMS will not play. It deadlocks right on start.
One good thing about it is that now she knows how to Go to Process-Explorer (Sysinternals replacement for TaskManager) and set the Affinity of SIMS2.EXE to use only one CPU. And we had a long talk about multi CPU/CORE computing and how it is done. And we had a long talk about computers in General.
But still a company like SIMS2's releasing a one CPU game. I can't even start to describe what I feel. Shame on you SIMS2.
Free Life
Boaz