AMD demonstrates 4x4

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: avi85
what's the difference between 4x4 and duvie's dual opty system?

Well, dual opties are usually aimed at the server / workstation environment where stability and reliability is a priority. These systems would most likely have more enthusiast features (such as overclocking), an ability to use unbuffered ram (faster and less expensive), and possibly be cheaper overall.

anyway i think its stupid that AMD, intel move into quad-core > why? b/c not many apps today can even take advantage of dual-core, lket along quad-cores ... i think ill be sticking with a higher clock Core 2 Duo (conroe) at least for a while

can anyone tell me what app is optimized for quad-core?? also do we have to worry about this whenever Intel/AMD make a core jump (ie. from 4 cores to 8 cores, from 16-cores to 32 croes ... )[/quote]
Apps don't need to be quad core, you can run 4 apps full speed, or certain apps that can use 2-3 cores and still have power left over for other tasks... and if the OS could get better at distributing power as well as allowing you to (more easily) delegate where the processing power goes... then you'd benefit from it. Then there's the supposed reverse/anti HT technology that would make the extra cores appear all as one to apps that aren't multi threaded (although this technology probably wouldn't be available until quadcore or later, and might not even be so necessary as apps are becoming more multi thread aware - OSes too)

 

[dmens]

don't see why anyone other than the fanboi would bother with this. a quad merom/penryn on a MCM will be cheaper for the same performance, plus the mcm will be directly compatible with older duals. why bother hyping bus throughput when merom performs better with half the bandwidth? as for "torrenza", it'd be worth talking about when 3rd-party vendors start providing interesting modules for the platform. has the coherent HT protocol even been released yet? is it coming out the same time as CSI, or what? besides, there's a good chance CSI can be an open protocol as well.

and for the last time, "reverse HT doesn't exist".

 

[avi85]

Originally posted by: dmens
don't see why anyone other than the fanboi would bother with this. a quad merom/penryn on a MCM will be cheaper for the same performance, plus the mcm will be directly compatible with older duals. why bother hyping bus throughput when merom performs better with half the bandwidth? as for "torrenza", it'd be worth talking about when 3rd-party vendors start providing interesting modules for the platform. has the coherent HT protocol even been released yet? is it coming out the same as CSI, or what? there's a good chance CSI can be an open protocol as well.

and for the last time, "reverse HT doesn't exist".

I love the way people say things like "reverse HT doesn't exist"
technology is so inovative you can't know what will be developed

it kind of reminds me of the whole "the world is flat" thing from the 16th century

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: avi85
I love the way people say things like "reverse HT doesn't exist"
technology is so inovative you can't know what will be developed

it kind of reminds me of the whole "the world is flat" thing from the 16th century

yeah, too bad technological development is bound by reality and return-on-investment. im well aware of what happens when engineers overreach and lose track of all boundaries. it's called P4.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: avi85


I love the way people say things like "reverse HT doesn't exist"
technology is so inovative you can't know what will be developed

it kind of reminds me of the whole "the world is flat" thing from the 16th century

The rumored "reverse hyperthreading" AMD was supposedly going to roll out this year was a hoax.

http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=32885

 

[R3MF]

there was some mention of special HT channels as being necessary for 4x4 in one article.

could these essentially be Opterons with extra HT channels?

 

[PetNorth]

Rahul Sood, founder and CTO of high-end system manufacturer VoodooPC, contends that AMD's multiprocessor platform is particularly well-suited to gamers because each CPU has its own dedicated memory. Serious game players have long avoided multitasking for fear of decreasing game performance, but the new platform will allow gamers to run applications without affecting gameplay. "The hardcore gamers are all about the bare minimum--they don't want garbage running," said Sood.

This is a key feature for a multitasking enviroment. Any other quad desktop system will provide it.

 

[tatteredpotato]

I believe that processors need extra HT channels to work in multi socket system, thats the difference between the 1xx, 2xx, and 8xx opterons, the 1xx are single socket, 2xx are dual socket, and 8xx are quad socket.

That has always been my understanding of it.