AMD's X4 vs Conroe?

[akcorr]

Anyone know if AMD's X4 (Quad Core) processor is suppose to have better performance numbers than the Core 2 Extreme Processor?

 

[RichUK]

I've not heard anything about AMD's x4 processor.

Do you mean the up and coming 4x4 tech that has been talked about?

Anyway the only direct comparison against the Conroe, is the AM2 X2, and from what we already know, the X2 is out performed by quite a margin.

Also don?t forget Conroe is only a dual core not a quad core processor.

 

[cmrmrc]

the X4 could be the K8L...since its quad core, it could be named ATHLON 64 X4...

the X4 will far probably be faster than the Core2 Extreme, but when it will face Kentsfield/Clovertown quad core from Intel, that is a different story that we can't tell yet.

 

[Zim]

The problem is that both cores of a dual core cpu are currently underused in most desktop usage scenarios. Adding 2 more cores to the mix is only going to help a very narrow list of applications. The kewl-factor will be big, but the real-world benefit will be much less... IMHO. It's a different story for servers though.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Zim
The problem is that both cores of a dual core cpu are currently underused in most desktop usage scenarios. Adding 2 more cores to the mix is only going to help a very narrow list of applications. The kewl-factor will be big, but the real-world benefit will be much less... IMHO. It's a different story for servers though.

exactly.

The current user base ATM that would benefit form this tech is very small.

For the main stream user, dual cores are still not fully utilised.

 

[imported_wicka]

Originally posted by: cmrmrc
the X4 could be the K8L...since its quad core, it could be named ATHLON 64 X4...

the X4 will far probably be faster than the Core2 Extreme, but when it will face Kentsfield/Clovertown quad core from Intel, that is a different story that we can't tell yet.

Kentsfield is just two Conroe dies on one chip, whereas Brisbane (K8L) is true quad core (four dies). Brisbane could also have added features that would not be included in a system highly based on the Conroe arch (Wikipedia, for example, lists DDR3 support as a possible feature).

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: wicka

Originally posted by: cmrmrc
the X4 could be the K8L...since its quad core, it could be named ATHLON 64 X4...

the X4 will far probably be faster than the Core2 Extreme, but when it will face Kentsfield/Clovertown quad core from Intel, that is a different story that we can't tell yet.

Kentsfield is just two Conroe dies on one chip, whereas Brisbane (K8L) is true quad core (four dies). Brisbane could also have added features that would not be included in a system highly based on the Conroe arch (Wikipedia, for example, lists DDR3 support as a possible feature).

No that is flat out incorrect, Brisbane is STILL a Dual Core CPU, and is mainly an optical shrink of Windsor with no additional new features for the most part. K8L will be released likely in Servers as a Quad Core in Mid 2007.

"True" Quad Core is BS, Greyhound coming in H1 2008 for desktop is a monolithic Quad Core, but that is a long time to wait for a competitor to Kentsfield.

DDR3 support, would only be a meh, for AMD's K8, neither High IPC architectire are bandwidth Pigs, so giving them additional bandwidth albeilt with higher latencies isn't going to do much more for the moment. Even on the Quad Core side.