quad core processors: where are all of the reviews?

P

Pocatello

DC Moderator and [H]ard DCOTM x6
Staff member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
6,639
I'm lusting after a quad core machine. Aren't they gonna be available in about two weeks?

Where are the reviews? I need to build a new machine. My overclocked Pentium III's just don't cut it. And I don't own any dual core machines! [and no duel cores either! :D ]

Anyone know of any pre-NDA reviews out there?

Folding minds need to know!



 
Pocatello said:
I'm lusting after a quad core machine. Aren't they gonna be available in about two weeks?

Where are the reviews? I need to build a new machine. My overclocked Pentium III's just don't cut it. And I don't own any dual core machines! [and no duel cores either! :D ]

Anyone know of any pre-NDA reviews out there?

Folding minds need to know!



Click to expand...


they will come out on [insert date here].

now you know!

:p
 
I found some information. Here is something about a 4-cpu motherboard, each CPU with 4 cores: thus 16 cores total. Tigertown? Here are some links from the Inquirer.

tigertown (with pictures!)

here is a discussion about Kentsfield and Clovertown from the recent IDF Tawain. Is Clovertown simply a dual CPU slot for a 4-core chip (2 x 4 = 8)? Do I have this right?

Intel Kentsfield, Clovertown quite happy on Nvidia


okay, found something useful: (again from the I)

reviews of Intel Core 2 Extreme Quad Core Processor QX6700 will hit the wires on November 2nd

AMD quad core in November of 2006:

another surprise for me. I thought that AMD had no quad cores scheduled until sometime in 2Q or 3Q 2007. The Inquirer calls them QuadFather:

AMD QuadFather matches Kentsfield


After AMD laughed off Intel's dual core and upcoming quad core microprocessors as "not true multicore," with the main reason they physically share two dies, it seems to have done the same thing. Intel's Pentium D "Presler" consisted of two Cedar Mill cores, Core 2 Extreme "Kentsfield" features two Conroe cores and shared the front side bus.
Click to expand...

AMD follows Intel with Quadfather One


okay --- no more links to the Inquirer. Here is something really cool:


A guy named Victor Wang in Shanghai has tested a quad core Kentsfield and the new GPU from nVidia, the GF8800GTX. I don't care about the GPU much (since it can't fold!) but check out the quad core from Intel. This is a link to Xtreme Systems:

some new toys: GF8800GTX+P5B-D+QX66 B3 first result


If the nVidia interests you, then you might like this translated from Chinese:


G80 3DMark 06 scores

quick summary:

3DMark Score : 11795
SM2.0 Score:SM2.0 Score : 4783
HDR/SM3.0 Score:HDR/SM3.0 Score : 4905
CPU Score:CPU Score : 4112


Victor wrote in the other thread that moving from the core dua to the kentsfield: "if change to kentsfield...about 1000score higher" (referring to the GPU score in 3DMark). BTW, he got a score of 18,693 (with the core duo).


In case you are wondering about the quad core:

The Intel Quad 2 Core Q6600 (Kentsfield) is socket 775 LGA at 2.40Ghz.

The Intel Quad 2 Core Q6700 (Kentsfield) is socket 775 LGA at 2.66Ghz.

pictures from this thread show the Quad core overclocked easily to 3.6 Ghz.



.................


 
haha

my last post changed me from a limp dick to a gawd

!!!

about time!

Took me a couple hours to find all of the crap for the posts above. Don't bother reading all 11 pages in Victor's thread at the other place. I did. Not worth reading. Bunch of crap about "please post more soon" and comments about Victor's choice in clothing and scenery in his personal photo. I don't think anyone will really care. Just trying to save you a bunch of time.






 
Tigertown, eh? And how many memory buses are those 16 cores sharing? Yeah. Ouch.

I think the memory bus problem is only going to get bigger for Intel. For average-case workload (not heavily memory-oriented, not heavy on CPU cycles) you probably don't want any more than 2-4 cores on a single set of dual-channel memory. AMD has the framework in place to deal with lots of cpus and memory, Intel doesn't seem to.
 
I should have a clovertown folding review for you at the end of Nov/beginning of Dec. I suspect the quad channel memory and dual front side buses will be enough for all eight cores, but we'll see.
 
seems like the Intel quad cores will overclock quite well.

anyone have any information about AMD's quad father CPUs coming out in the next few weeks?
 
Tigertown_CPUs.jpg


that made me giggle
 
Yea I saw that pic a few days ago.

Am I the only one who counted each core?
 
marty9876 said:
Yea I saw that pic a few days ago.

Am I the only one who counted each core?
Click to expand...


nerp... thats the first thing I did. 16 cores. I'm guessing four quad cores.
 
I am wondering if the overhead for the scheduling for that many cores will completely screw any benefit that having all of them would provide.....
 
mwarps said:
I am wondering if the overhead for the scheduling for that many cores will completely screw any benefit that having all of them would provide.....
Click to expand...
Nope ;) Linux runs on machines with up to 1024 processors that I know of, and Win2k3 datacenter runs on at least 16 (off the top of my head). If you're number crunching, the number of processors even scales well.

 
2k3 Datacenter R2 is at 64 cores.

1024 cores, what the heck is that in?
 
These are shared-memory systems. Foldix would be more appropriate ;)

For the layman, imagine opening Task manager and seeing a thousand usage graphs :eek: This is not a cluster - it's a single system. Yowza.
 
new (to me) article about Kentsfield / quad core:

Anandtech 9/28/2006 article

pricing information:

2.66GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6700 ---- $999
Click to expand...


and cheaper quad cores will be available in 2007:

Closing Thoughts

With only a 266MHz difference in clock speed, the new Core 2 Extreme QX6700 isn't too hard of a choice to make. When Intel introduces a lower cost 2.40GHz Core 2 Quad version, things may get a little more complicated, but at the very high end we would rather have four slightly slower cores than two slightly faster cores. We expect that there will be some improvements in multitasking performance, especially if you have a decently fast I/O setup, and don't forget the performance boost you'll get in well threaded applications.

The first quad-core CPUs will be available in November of this year, with more affordable offerings being introduced early next year. Building on top of the already excellent performance of Intel's Core 2 Duo processors, Intel's quad-core solutions will offer a very attractive upgrade path for those users that have invested in the right motherboards today. We're currently working on putting together a list of all currently shipping motherboards that will support Kentsfield to best help you plan for a more upgrade-friendly machine, and we will have the initial list available later today.
Click to expand...
 
Tom's review is up. Not much to read. Crap. Pretty damn short article.

kentsfield

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/02/kentsfield_released/


Doubling the number of simultaneously-executable threads by doubling the number of cores, however, is just as likely to double power consumption and heat output. This comes at a time when most users cannot yet even take full advantage of current dual-core capabilities; a time when most PC software is written for two cores at most; a time when Intel's reputation is still recovering from the heat nightmare that was the Pentium D; and a time when mass marketing is shifting towards tiny boxes. In other words, Core 2 Quadro is probably the last thing the mass market needs right now. Knowing this, Intel is releasing only enthusiast-level versions.

But Intel's timing is neither poor nor coincidental: AMD's first quad-core release is expected in approximately two weeks. While most technology analysts don't expect anything revolutionary in terms of performance gained, it remains to be seen whether AMD's new product is evolutionary enough to tighten the race. HyperTransport's bidirectional nature might play a key factor in making AMD's solution more competitive, while other planned updates may further enhance scaling and IPC.

Author's Opinion
Intel certainly beat AMD to the quad-core starting line, but this race is far from over. The market needs tight competition to assure reasonable performance at all price levels, so as we congratulate Intel on a job well done, let's also hope that AMD is able to catch up quickly.
Click to expand...

that was about it. Not much else there. Really. See for yourself!
 
ND40oz said:
They take it down? I'm not seeing anything.
Click to expand...


I am unable to see anything. I played with my pop up settings just for good measure. No review for me. Ironic, don't ya think?
:rolleyes:
 
Pocatello said:
I am unable to see anything. I played with my pop up settings just for good measure. No review for me. Ironic, don't ya think?
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


ha!

now I got things to work... actually connected me to digg's site first. Didn't happen before. What a strange way to link a story. I can't be the only one having problems.

??? :rolleyes:
 
I found this interesting, IBM again going for the fastest computer in the world chose AMD in combination with the new Cell processors. 16000 (Yes thousand) Opterons and 16000 Cell Processors.

http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/20210.wss

The article is a pretty good read. Oh, it runs Linux as it’s OS.

1.6 Petaflops....would be a folding fool ;)
 
In case no one saw it yet, there are quad core reviews posted all over the net now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top