Kentsfield @ tomshardware

[brucedeluxe169]

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/

 

[Marvelous]

video wise it does good... But games is another story... Incompatibility issues but I'm sure there's a work around..

 

[|CR|Constantine]

Rumor is a mid October release?

Hmmm this is rather interesting. Why would Intel be pushing the release of this chip so early. Surely this will begin to eat in to CD2 sales.

Unless of course the big green machine is releasing something earlier than expected...possibly 4x4?

 

[Poncho]

Rumor is a mid October release?

Hmmm this is rather interesting. Why would Intel be pushing the release of this chip so early. Surely this will begin to eat in to CD2 sales.

Unless of course the big green machine is releasing something earlier than expected...possibly 4x4?

A $1000 dollar CPU isn't going to eat into the sales of anything.... except AMD. 99% of buyers will think that 1k is too much, regardless of performance or E-penis enlargement. This, like ALL extreme editions of past, are out there to say that we did it... it's all marketing.

 

[starbuck8968]

sign me up for 10!

 

[JBavousett]

Wow...If all the cores share the cache there's room for 8 cores with some squeezing...Now thow hyper threading on them and give me a four socket motherboard and I'll crunch Seti WU's like a madman.

 

[vanilla_guerilla]

it does most (not all) video stuff the best. but all other real world and games it was beaten by the stock 6800 and matched by the 6700.

 

[Poncho]

it does most (not all) video stuff the best. but all other real world and games it was beaten by the stock 6800 and matched by the 6700.

Well... considering most apps and games can only take advantage of 1 core, when you figure the clock speed of that single core is the same as a 6700 the results are not surprising.

 

[vanilla_guerilla]

intel is not taking that into consideration, or it would not be rushing a quad core out into a retail market that has very few, if any multi-core optimized apps.

 

[Poncho]

intel is not taking that into consideration, or it would not be rushing a quad core out into a retail market that has very few, if any multi-core optimized apps.

Let me just preface this by saying that they WILL have multi threaded apps for the mainstream market in the future... how long I have no idea.

As for Intel.... they don't have to take that into consideration. The people who buy this CPU will be 2 different types of people. First you'll have the "I've got to have the biggest E-Penis" crowd and then you'll get the "It's got 4 CPUs? It must be better... that's like 10ghz." They are rusing this to market because they HAVE to be the first ones with quad core for marketing reasons. This is 120% about marketing....

 

[LstBrunnenG]

The way I see it, a Kentsfield system will likely be cheaper than a decent server motherboard + 2 Woodcrests + FB-DIMMs.

 

[Poncho]

The way I see it, a Kentsfield system will likely be cheaper than a decent server motherboard + 2 Woodcrests + FB-DIMMs.

And it won't perform as well if your aplications are multi threaded. See... most people who will benefit from quad core would be smart enough to buy a DP system. If you need serious multi tasking, then quad core just won't work the best for you... at least not at the moment.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

...but it's cheaper. An E6700 would do just about anything faster than an E6300, but some people buy E6300s out of budget considerations. True, maxing out all four cores on a Kentsfield would place an ungodly load on the FSB, but it would do better than a single Conroe.

 

[shoman24v]

4 CPUs on one silicon FTW.

2 Dual Core CPUs piggybacked FTL

Just my opinion. I hope AMD does it right and puts 4 chips on one silicon.

 

[Poncho]

...but it's cheaper. An E6700 would do just about anything faster than an E6300, but some people buy E6300s out of budget considerations. True, maxing out all four cores on a Kentsfield would place an ungodly load on the FSB, but it would do better than a single Conroe.

Again... most people who would benefit from quad core, truely benifit, have already probably gone to a DP solution for their needs. We are not talking about people who consider a few hundred dollar difference that big of a deal. We are not talking about the college kid. These are PCs used by professionals who make money because of their system.... and will not quibble over a few bucks if the more expensive system is better.

 

[Celestial Avenger]

I like the 3dsmax 8.0 benchmark. I likes it good.

99.99% of PC users, however, don't care about this one.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

Again... most people who would benefit from quad core, truely benifit, have already probably gone to a DP solution for their needs. We are not talking about people who consider a few hundred dollar difference that big of a deal. We are not talking about the college kid. These are PCs used by professionals who make money because of their system.... and will not quibble over a few bucks if the more expensive system is better.

Okay, well, I was talking about enthusiasts. A dually rig is the kind of thing most dream of but few can afford. Now, quad core is about to get a little more affordable, with a lot more affordable just down the road.

So, just a little off-topic, when does Intel plan on introducing a single-die quad core chip?

 

[Poncho]

Okay, well, I was talking about enthusiasts.

Yea... I covered that group in an earlier post. The "I've got to have the biggest E-Penis" crowd. LOL

So, just a little off-topic, when does Intel plan on introducing a single-die quad core chip?

It's coming... but there are a few things that will come along with it. Can't really say much more about it.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

Yea... I covered that group in an earlier post. The "I've got to have the biggest E-Penis" crowd. LOL

Meh, I think of the e-penis crowd as a small subset of the wider enthusiast class. I mean there are those on here with dual dual-core opteron rigs for personal use, and I doubt they're all the benchmark whore type. On the other hand, that rig will likely be extremely usable after the release of K8L and beyond.

 

[Poncho]

I mean there are those on here with dual dual-core opteron rigs for personal use, and I doubt they're all the benchmark whore type.

No... they are exactly the "e-penis" crowd, though to a lesser degree. If they are using a DP system for personal use then there is NO reason for them to do so.... other than to say they did/have it.

 

[Noetic]

Justification comes easy for any enthuiast and [H]ardforum is for the performance minded user. Multiple CPU systems excel with multitaskers. I definitely want one of these.

 

[Poncho]

Justification comes easy for any enthuiast and [H]ardforum is for the performance minded user. Multiple CPU systems excel with multitaskers. I definitely want one of these.

That's just BS. Any Dual Core, or HT, system would more than likely work identically for a majority of these "enthusists." I've used everything from Single core to Dual Core to DP to Quad Core to DP Quad Core and I can tell you that most won't notice the difference once you get past single core.

 

[ilkhan]

No... they are exactly the "e-penis" crowd, though to a lesser degree. If they are using a DP system for personal use then there is NO reason for them to do so.... other than to say they did/have it.

And to those that regularly encode TV shows, movies, etc. Encoding audio/video while only having one uber machine requires DC+ machine.
And those who fold? What about them?
There *are* people here with DP/DC machines who make good use of them.

 

[Poncho]

And to those that regularly encode TV shows, movies, etc. Encoding audio/video while only having one uber machine requires DC+ machine.
And those who fold? What about them?
There *are* people here with DP/DC machines who make good use of them.

Wow... people don't read do they.

See where I say "most people who would benefit from quad core, truely benifit, have already probably gone to a DP solution for their needs"

 

[Noetic]

That's just BS. Any Dual Core, or HT, system would more than likely work identically for a majority of these "enthusists." I've used everything from Single core to Dual Core to DP to Quad Core to DP Quad Core and I can tell you that most won't notice the difference once you get past single core.

You are entitled to your opinion, perhaps you are correct. I lack faculties to know the habits of all other users. Assume that there are analogies to owners performance cars who seldom press their machines to their limits. Speaking empirically, video editting, DVD authoring and other large scale data pushers enjoy the additional speed and cpus. You may call it BS, but the appeal of this site is performance. Whether or not either of us think it is excessive, it is the acumen of HardOCP.

 

[Noetic]

Wow... people don't read do they.

See where I say "most people who would benefit from quad core, truely benifit, have already probably gone to a DP solution for their needs"

Well, I have had 3 dual CPU machines in the past. Typically, they require motherboards, ram and other parts that are far more expensive than single processor system, without the benefit of being able to eke any o/c potential.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

Wow... people don't read do they.

See where I say "most people who would benefit from quad core, truly benifit, have already probably gone to a DP solution for their needs"

By that logic, all anyone ever needs, outside of a professional who does rendering or other such work, is a simple P4 with HT or a single-core A64. After all, who needs to do virus scans or encode video whilst playing a game? Who needs to cut their encoding time in as much as half, when they can simply wait an hour or so more for it to be done? Who actually does more than one thing at once whilst using their computer? Who needs to run code that an Athlon XP or a Pentium III couldn't execute? Who needs more than 640k of RAM?

Back in the day, a dually rig was a luxury, but one with very tangible benefits. I would call paying a $500 premium for an extra hundred MHz or buying an extra video card for an extra ten FPS trolling for e-penii. A quad core processor, however, is something that can make anyone more productive, from the professional designing images in Photoshop to the end-user doing a virus scan, encoding the TV show their tuner just captured, and compressing backups, all whilst playing a game for some recreation. While an extra 100 MHz stock is rarely noticable in games and easily made up with overclocking, adding more cores gives a readily tangible benefit to the power user. No, they don't need it, but neither do they need anything more than an old PIII or Athlon XP. Yet, believe it or not, processors faster than the PIII actually sell because people have better things to do than sit around and wait for their computer.

Also, some people over-build. Back when Prescott first came out, I ordered and built my mom a PC with a 3.4C and 2 GB of RAM. This was when 1 GB was a luxury and some were still happy if they could get that 2.4C up over 3 GHz. Even I balked and tried to talk her out of spending $400+ for that processor. These days, that's nothing for a CPU, but that's another topic for another time.

To this day she only mostly uses it for MS Office, e-mail, and browsing the Internet. Three years later, though, she's still using it. In fact, with a little help from my old 9800 Pro, it was able to run CS:Source at 1600x1080 at a playable framerate. When Vista comes, and everyone else is scrambling to meet its memory requirements, it will handle it without a sweat. She'll get three or four more years of use out of it, easily, without the need for any upgrade.

 

[KaptainBlaZzed]

I have 3 dual CPU's comps and a Kentsfield. I use the crap out of all 4 of them, they are at 100% load 24/7. If you have not figured it out yet i run distributed computing projects for XtremeSystems. I am planning on getting more Kenstfields when they come out retail. For most of you electricity is not a concideration when running your computer, but for us Dc'ers it is a very big concern. We are very interested in performance per watt and when it comes to that Kentsfield OWNS ALL.

If you are really interested in what a Kentsfield is capable of go to XtremeSystems.com and read one of the many threads about the many different Kentsfield we have over there. There is even a Dual Clovertown if you are interested.

 

[deeznuts]

That's just BS. Any Dual Core, or HT, system would more than likely work identically for a majority of these "enthusists." I've used everything from Single core to Dual Core to DP to Quad Core to DP Quad Core and I can tell you that most won't notice the difference once you get past single core.

What about .. someone who uses a program to encode video that makes use of two-threads (therefore two cores) and also runs distributed computing in the background? I don't think this is a far fetched scenario. Even winrar is multi-threaded now.

people who would benefit from quad core, truely benifit, have already probably gone to a DP solution for their needs

Not all my brotha. There are tons of small businesses who use some complex programs but don't have the budget for a full fledged xeon machine. Someone just asked me to build them a machine to run their cad programs. I'm still trying to figure out if that would even take advantage of 4-cores, but her budget would not allow for a full-fledged DP machine. For every big business with capital there are tons of small shops with none.

 

[MrWizard6600]

A $1000 dollar CPU isn't going to eat into the sales of anything.... except AMD. 99% of buyers will think that 1k is too much, regardless of performance or E-penis enlargement. This, like ALL extreme editions of past, are out there to say that we did it... it's all marketing.

if its a joke haha.

if not, dumbist statement today.

 

[Orayn]

So, the Quadros pwn at encoding, but the extra heat and money probably aren't worth it for gaming, at least not right now. Gains are minimal. If OCed to the same speed, the Duos are roughly equivalent, if not better.