• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

**Secret Intel Processor Plans Uncovered**

THG Had the same article, albiet much more in depth the other day. In it they showed a pic of the future 4 core CPU, and guess what Intels crack job Engineers did? Well they finally combined 2 cores into one die.... and then slapped two of those dual core dies on a single chip! LOL Pentium D Rehash anyone? Hopefully these quad cores will NOT use Netburst, which could redeem them.
 
you all realize that none of these chips are based on the Netburst architecture, right? So no one can make anything better than a marginally educated guess about performance or power dissipation.

edit: BTW, this info is taken off a story from Tom's Hardware. Who isn't saying where they got the info from; sounds like TheInquirer-level rumours, I wouldn't put much stock in any of it.
 
Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
you all realize that none of these chips are based on the Netburst architecture, right? So no one can make anything better than a marginally educated guess about performance or power dissipation.

Absolutely correct!
However since CSI was delayed for a few years, they will also be using a FSB...so we can have a glimmer that there will be a fairly substantial bottleneck there...
 
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
you all realize that none of these chips are based on the Netburst architecture, right? So no one can make anything better than a marginally educated guess about performance or power dissipation.

Absolutely correct!
However since CSI was delayed for a few years, they will also be using a FSB...so we can have a glimmer that there will be a fairly substantial bottleneck there...

CSI is slated to start appearing in products for 2007 AFAIK, so it may very well be in some or all of the products past Merom.
 
Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
you all realize that none of these chips are based on the Netburst architecture, right? So no one can make anything better than a marginally educated guess about performance or power dissipation.

Absolutely correct!
However since CSI was delayed for a few years, they will also be using a FSB...so we can have a glimmer that there will be a fairly substantial bottleneck there...

CSI is slated to start appearing in products for 2007 AFAIK, so it may very well be in some or all of the products past Merom.

They put the 2007 release on hold when they cancelled Whitefield a month ago...
 
You do realize that these will probably be server CPU and cost an arm and a leg, right? Considering that the merom-based server chip is going to have a tdp of around 70W (if my memory serves me well) I'd expect this to hit around 100-110W, which is not too bad, I guess. AMD claims that it will launch quad-core (on a single die) by 2007 (meaning during 2006) so I'd guess both will end up launching pretty close together. I think 8-core is overkill considering that it will probably be bottlenecked horrendously by the FSB/HT (unless HT3.0 is vastly superior to HT2.0/Intel routes a FSB to each pair of cores).
 
Easy bake oven?

No. You're thinking too clod here. Fully fledged sunday roast with extras!

It'll be like an aga that can run games, assuming it sees general release without costing a small family of arms, legs and livers.
 
You guys, I'm sure intel would have learned their lesson about overheating by then. I think we will at least see quad core for home pcs but I cant see octa core coming to home pcs. I don't think there would be a use for them. quad core would be plenty.
 
Back
Top