Dual-Core Technology Changes Everything ..

[IGBT]

Text

But while dual-core processors can definitely bump performance up by a significant margin, a dual-core processor will not be twice as fast as its single-core counterpart.

This is because dual-core processors must share the same memory controller and bus.

In addition, not all software is SMP-aware or designed to utilize multithreading (where two or more processors run a task simultaneously).

Software developers will have to re-architect their code base to take full advantage of the additional processing power of dual-core chips.

 

[Acanthus]

AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

No such thing as a dual core Xeon so far.

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

No such thing as a dual core Xeon so far.

Correct, that means the above poster has no idea what hes talking about and just spews garbage. No matter if the Intel was 8X the performance he would still find a way for AMD to be "better" because he is a fanboi. Not flaming, just calling em as i see em

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

No such thing as a dual core Xeon so far.

Correct, that means the above poster has no idea what hes talking about and just spews garbage. No matter if the Intel was 8X the performance he would still find a way for AMD to be "better" because he is a fanboi. Not flaming, just calling em as i see em

HAHAHA! check my post history, and my rig in sig, you sped. I *MEANT* to say dual xeons. If anything i should be called an intel fanboi...

Lmao...

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

No such thing as a dual core Xeon so far.

Correct, that means the above poster has no idea what hes talking about and just spews garbage. No matter if the Intel was 8X the performance he would still find a way for AMD to be "better" because he is a fanboi. Not flaming, just calling em as i see em

HAHAHA! check my post history, and my rig in sig, you sped. I *MEANT* to say dual xeons. If anything i should be called an intel fanboi...

Lmao...

I believe someone has just been owned...

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

Not as much as it used to. Some of Intel's latest Xeon chipsets offer dual FSB's which alleviates some of the memory sharing bottleneck that Xeons previously suffered from.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

Not as much as it used to. Some of Intel's latest Xeon chipsets offer dual FSB's which alleviates some of the memory sharing bottleneck that Xeons previously suffered from.

Yeah they have closed the gap quite a bit, but opterons still have a pretty comfortable lead in most real world testing. Im hoping the server merom spinoffs will bring AMD some competition again to bring those Opteron and X-2 prices down.

 

[Venomous]

The heat on the athlon dual cores are a lot less than that of the intels, everyone knows that.However, their stock heatsinks tame the heat until you overclock.


I know that the 4800+'s come with heatpipe HSF combos. Im unaware of the HSF shipping with the intel DC's

I can say that in water cooling my 4400+ oc'd to 2.9 gigs per core on water, brings my BIX2 to its knees with the addition
of 2 6800 GT oc'd to 430/1190 a piece. Its just to much heat. Im upgrading to a BIX3 to control this. The heat is there,esp on a 4400+ when you raise the voltage up. Im sure the Intel is no different.


Im guessing the next wave of trend setting coolers will have heatpipes with refridgerant inside of the pipes.

 

[Goi]

Is this news? I thought we all knew about this like a year ago...

 

[Lonyo]

A lot of the dual core applications are within the server market which is already set up for multiple CPU's, so they're OK already, same with things like rendering, which is often ready for dual CPU's.
The only things that aren't, and that could find dual cores useful in the main, are games.
I don't think we need an SMP aware Office just yet. Video encoding, rendering, webserver stuff, quite a lot of that is already SMP aware.
(I realise I'm being all encompassing, but I'm saying where multiple CPU's are really needed, they are already coded for, just maybe not in the desktop environment, since where they are really needed, people have been using dual or quad CPU setups anyway).

 

[FlyingPenguin]

I attended the AMD Tech Tour in Tampa and this was discussed and demonstated:

50 - 70% performance gain across the board in a variety of benchmarks upgrading from socket 939 single core to dual core with no software or OS changes (BIOS upgrade at most is all that's required).

Additionally NO EXTRA HEAT PRODUCED. The dual core versions of all socket 939 CPUs are 90 watt units, same as the single core versions.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: FlyingPenguin
I attended the AMD Tech Tour in Tampa and this was discussed and demonstated:

50 - 70% performance gain across the board in a variety of benchmarks upgrading from socket 939 single core to dual core with no software or OS changes (BIOS upgrade at most is all that's required).

Additionally NO EXTRA HEAT PRODUCED. The dual core versions of all socket 939 CPUs are 90 watt units, same as the single core versions.

yeah, but the original software was made to take advantage of an extra processor, if present.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: biostud

Originally posted by: FlyingPenguin
I attended the AMD Tech Tour in Tampa and this was discussed and demonstated:

50 - 70% performance gain across the board in a variety of benchmarks upgrading from socket 939 single core to dual core with no software or OS changes (BIOS upgrade at most is all that's required).

Additionally NO EXTRA HEAT PRODUCED. The dual core versions of all socket 939 CPUs are 90 watt units, same as the single core versions.

yeah, but the original software was made to take advantage of an extra processor, if present.

There is actually quite a lot of software that is already SMP aware, so people bitching about games or office programs are stupid.

 

[svi]

Additionally NO EXTRA HEAT PRODUCED. The dual core versions of all socket 939 CPUs are 90 watt units, same as the single core versions.

This is not true, and also does not make any sense. Explanation: They have the same TDP, but they don't actually put out what the TDP says in the real world. It is fairly well-known that typical 90nm A64s put out a LOT less than 89W. Remember, the TDP is designed to ensure that systems based on A64s can handle the worst-case scenario, not to ensure that we all know exactly how much heat our processors make.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: biostud

Originally posted by: FlyingPenguin
I attended the AMD Tech Tour in Tampa and this was discussed and demonstated:

50 - 70% performance gain across the board in a variety of benchmarks upgrading from socket 939 single core to dual core with no software or OS changes (BIOS upgrade at most is all that's required).

Additionally NO EXTRA HEAT PRODUCED. The dual core versions of all socket 939 CPUs are 90 watt units, same as the single core versions.

yeah, but the original software was made to take advantage of an extra processor, if present.

There is actually quite a lot of software that is already SMP aware, so people bitching about games or office programs are stupid.

How is that stupid?
Games is where 90% of home users will actually need all that power.

I think AMD made a very wise move in making DC Opterons before the X2's, there's little need for CMP in the home, but in the server world it makes a lot of difference.

 

[SVT Cobra]

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: Acanthus
AMD64 CPUs already have independant memory controllers... Its the reason mutli CPU opterons stomp the crap out of Dual core Xeons.

No such thing as a dual core Xeon so far.

Correct, that means the above poster has no idea what hes talking about and just spews garbage. No matter if the Intel was 8X the performance he would still find a way for AMD to be "better" because he is a fanboi. Not flaming, just calling em as i see em

HAHAHA! check my post history, and my rig in sig, you sped. I *MEANT* to say dual xeons. If anything i should be called an intel fanboi...

Lmao...

I believe someone has just been owned...

yes pwned....