Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel's Quad Core CPU Reviewed

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the core-buzzword-bingo dept.

Gr8Apes is one of many to let us know that Tom's Hardware Guide has posted a review of Intel's new Kentsfield quad core processor. From the article: "Even expert opinions are deeply divided, ranging from 'more cores are absolutely necessary' to 'why do I need something more than my five-year-old PC system?' Although the Core 2 quad-core processors are not expected to hit retail channels before October, Tom's Hardware Guide had the opportunity to examine several Core 2 Quadro models in the test labs. We would like to make it clear that these samples were not provided by Intel."

7 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Props for Intel for being early by elh_inny · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Some nice example where more processing power (even in parralel) is nice is virtualisation, whether at home or on servers. Running multiple OSes in parallel will saturate all your processing power nicely.
    What's more quad-core surely gives more processing power per watt and per cubic meter which is a very important factor for big folks like Google or whereever hosting space is expensive.
    Even John Carmack who used to be very much against multi-cores for gamins recently elaborated much on this area in his keynote. Practically any modern (lets call it nextgen :D) gaming platform is now multi-core.

    So I'd say overall it's nice that Intel is pushing this so fast, if developers start to realize that multi-cores are hitting mainstream, they will have to take that into account and by the time Intel and AMD launch 8-cores, there should be more software to take advantage of it.

  2. If not Intel... by abshnasko · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "We would like to make it clear that these samples were not provided by Intel"

    Then who were they provided by, exactly?

  3. Duo 2 Sexo? by BikeRacer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    TFA spends a little time describing that Intel doesn't have enough package area to use this iteration of the Core 2 Duo to make a 4 die, 8 core part. So, my question is: Ignoring likely heat and bandwith issues, is there a SMP architectural reason they can't put 3 dies in one package?

  4. Re:Same old dilemma, new format. by bangenge · · Score: 3, Interesting

    so does this mean that the parent is gonna be modded flamebait?

    --
    . o O ( TwO hEaDs ArE mOrE tHaN oNe... )
  5. One thing they didn't benchmark on it.... by gsasha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is Linux Kernel compilation. It should rock there, that's an inherently parallelizable task.

    As a programmer, I want one. No, I want two :)

  6. Exactly by joss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I grew up programming transputer clusters cos I figured Moore's law wqould have to slow down sometime and then we would have to move to multiprocessor systems. Efficiently using more than a couple of cores is *not* easy.. and it opens up a whole realm of interesting algorithmic work where basic problems with established solutions suddenly become open again.

    Its about fucking time...

    --
    http://rareformnewmedia.com/
  7. How long will it be ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    before Microsoft starts charging more for multi-core installations? Seriously, if quad core means fewer boxes in the rack, it means fewer licenses.

    --
    The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.