First Intel Smithfield Dual Core Prices

[Bozo Galora]

(allegedly)

http://theinquirer.net/?article=20826

 

[voodoo1694]

that's not too bad... for some reason i expected much higher. All the issues with heat and power consumption still bother me though....

 

[jabronidan89]

Not a bad price indeed. I will wait about a year or a year in a half after Dual comes out before I consider getting one. Let them work out the bugs and come out with new revisions and such.

 

[amol]

WOW, i was thinking $800-1200!

 

[Bozo Galora]

be interesting to see how a $528 Dual P4 does against a $850 FX55

supposedly only needs a bios update, if I rememb correctly

 

[Malak]

When it says 2.8ghz, does it mean per core?

 

[thegimp03]

well...i wouldn't expect those prices in the beginning. people will be charging like 50% more than that to make a good profit...this is similar to what a lot of companies did and still are trying to do with the latest generation videocards. x800xt's for 600-800 bucks? give me a break.

 

[walkure]

This sounds pretty damn good for those interested in building a new server or something. For Joe Home User, make sure that you really are running tons of multithreaded apps before your splurge

 

[Bozo Galora]

Originally posted by: malak
When it says 2.8ghz, does it mean per core?

yeah, not 1.4 1.4

 

[stevty2889]

Now they just need to make games and more software that can take advantage of SMP.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: stevty2889
Now they just need to make games and more software that can take advantage of SMP.

Exactly!!

 

[Dahak]

the only down side to all the dual core p4 chips is that they are not support on the 915/925 chipsets. although i did read that thay *may* add support for them, but currently you will need the new board that will be out later this year for them

 

[Acanthus]

These will be slower for everything but multitasking and multithreaded apps...

I am suprised the prices are so low though, that means performance is likely to not be on Dual-CPU levels.

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
These will be slower for everything but multitasking and multithreaded apps...

I am suprised the prices are so low though, that means performance is likely to not be on Dual-CPU levels.

That's what I'm thinking. There is always a catch.

 

[stevty2889]

I think the reason they won't cost more is because it's not costing any more to make them. The die size is probably very close to that of a single core prescott with 2mb L2 cache. All the hyperthreading circuits can be removed, and each core gets 1mb L2 cache, so it should cost just about the same to make them.

 

[mdaniel73]

Dumb question: Doesn't XP Home only support single processor systems? Will this be seen as a single or dual processor by the OS?

 

[Bozo Galora]

Originally posted by: mdaniel73
Dumb question: Doesn't XP Home only support single processor systems? Will this be seen as a single or dual processor by the OS?

thats a good question. Home does not support "multiprocessors" as in SEPARATE, but does support INTEL HT as in VIRTUAL. Combined in one cpu would depend on how they connect to ea other and the socket traces.


http://www.notebookreview.com/...opic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3423

 

[JonnyBlaze]

this is great. i miss my dual p3's and vp6.

JB

 

[phreaqe]

that is cheap. i thought i read somewhere that amd is planning to have theres cost 700. i do not remeber where i read that but this actually makes me think i was wrong about that. can anybody confirm that. i may have read it in one of the CES articles but i am not really sure.

 

[Bozo Galora]

more dual info: (long)

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...display/dual-core.html

 

[stevty2889]

I am assuming XP home will support it, since dual cores are still a single CPU.

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

Originally posted by: stevty2889
I am assuming XP home will support it, since dual cores are still a single CPU.

 

[jvarszegi]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
These will be slower for everything but multitasking and multithreaded apps...

Not really, compared to chips at the same clock speed. Overall system efficiency should be higher, even playing a single-threaded game. The other core can run the OS and other processes (AV, etc.) while the first plays the game.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: jvarszegi

Originally posted by: Acanthus
These will be slower for everything but multitasking and multithreaded apps...

Not really, compared to chips at the same clock speed. Overall system efficiency should be higher, even playing a single-threaded game. The other core can run the OS and other processes (AV, etc.) while the first plays the game.

Precisely. The benefit of SMP is more than "1+1=2" - it's that "1+1=Can run multiple CPU-intensive tasks without dragging your system responsiveness down the tubes"

- M4H