So, where are the Dual Core EEs?

[mamisano]

Checked out Dell -> Expected ship date of an XPS Gen 5 w/ Pentium D 840 is 5/3!
Checked out Alienware -> Expected ship date of Area51 5500 w/Pentium D 840 is 5/16!

Nothing like a paper launch, just in time for their earnings report tomorrow.

 

[EndGame]

Yeah, the sad part is they both do it everytime now.......

A few choice people have the dual cores and a select few final may have Venice/San Deigo this week.......

 

[Duvie]

LOL!!!!!

That is the EE version right???

 

[mamisano]

Originally posted by: Duvie
LOL!!!!!

That is the EE version right???

Yeah, Dual core with HT. Funny thing is that you can configure the Alienware with the EE and it's default OS is XP-Home! Does XP-Home support Dual processors or even Dual with HT?

 

[PetNorth]

And if you ask me, funny thing is expected availability too: may-16...

What the hell of launch it is?

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: mamisano

Originally posted by: Duvie
LOL!!!!!

That is the EE version right???

Yeah, Dual core with HT. Funny thing is that you can configure the Alienware with the EE and it's default OS is XP-Home! Does XP-Home support Dual processors or even Dual with HT?

I didn't think so cause it should be seen as 2 physical cpus and 2 more logical cpus....I though home would not recognize 2 physical cpus like say a dual opteron or xeon setup...

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I'd thought the same of XP Pro, but it can support up to four threads. I think Home can support two threads, and thus the two physical cores of the EE, just not the HT. Although I'm not sure.

So XP Pro supports 2 chips and 4 threads and Home 1 chip and 2 threads...I'll have to go find that chart I saw I might be remembering something other than Home.

 

[Bateluer]

XP home supports HT, which is why it can use the HT on current P4s. Unless I am mistaken though, it does not support SMP. Granted, Dual core and Dual CPU are a little different, but I think that in the short term, an OS needs to be SMP supported to use Dual Core CPUs. You'll have to upgrade that to XP Pro to use any Dual Core chip, methinks.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I dunno, by treating a P4 with HT as a chip with two threads, how is this much different from treating a dual core CPU with two threads? Before dual core, the only way to have a 2CPU system (or more) was to have 2 physical chips and a motherboard with two sockets. Two completely separate CPUs. I'm not saying I'm right, but from what I understand it seems as though Home will support dual core CPUs, however people with Pro would still have the ability to have a 4 core/thread system via a 2x2 setup or a single PDEE chip.

I'm going to stop implying such things now, and I'm going to go see if I can look up any information to confirm or dissprove what I'm thinking, as I'm now pretty interested in it.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I did a quick search on XP home (I've never used it for more than a few minutes) but didn't find anything to indicate 2 processor or dual core support or not. MS clearly states that a dual core processors will be treated as one license however.

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/highlights/multicore.mspx

edit: I did find this:

Supporting Dual Processors

Another reason to choose Windows XP Professional is if yours is a dual?processor system. Some high?end computers, graphics workstations, and supercharged machines built by gaming or computing enthusiasts have two processors on the motherboard. How can you tell if your computer has two processors? You can be fairly certain that if you aren't sure, then your computer is a single?processor machine. For dual?processor computers, you'll need to purchase Windows XP Professional instead of Home Edition to enable the second processor to work

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/expert/crawford_november26.mspx

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
XP home supports HT, which is why it can use the HT on current P4s. Unless I am mistaken though, it does not support SMP. Granted, Dual core and Dual CPU are a little different, but I think that in the short term, an OS needs to be SMP supported to use Dual Core CPUs. You'll have to upgrade that to XP Pro to use any Dual Core chip, methinks.

I thought it has already been proven that a dual core P4 (non HT one) ran fine with Windows XP home.....

The whole point of the move to dual core with both cpu makers would be ease....If it required an upgrade to the more expensive Xp pro it would be well documented by now.....

 

[Cooler]

I am just wondering if Intel is going to bump the Processor speed and FSB some later this year on this product cause it would be at least 6 months before pressler would come out . Since the multipliers are unlocked and form the current oc, I have seen from the reviews I think this maybe in the future.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Duvie are you saying that XP home will see and use a dual core chip but will not utilize a 2 processor setup? That seems strange to me if true.

 

[Duvie]

Lets get straight what I am 100% sure of....

1) a dual core (2 socket) Xeon or opteron requires me to use Win XP Pro

2) a p4 with HT is seen as 1 physical cpu and 1 logical cpu and works in winxp home

3) the reviews I read are all PISS POOR becuase many fail to say what OS they used only furthering our confusion....

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050405/pentium_d-10.html


If this means anything they ran Home on both the PD 840 EE and the PD 840 (non HT)...I will continue to look at the other dual core reviewers....

 

[AnandThenMan]

Duvie I'm not questioning your information or the validity of what you are saying. What I am saying is that is seems very strange to me to have an OS fully support a dual core processor but ignore a dual processor kit. Especially in Intel's case, the 2-core Pentium D is almost a dual processor rig shrunk down. But MS has made it very clear that a dual core CPU will be seen as one physical unit, so from that perspective it makes sense. I guess my real question becomes, is XP Home exactly the same as Pro with features disabled vs. not even being present in the code at all.

 

[Duvie]

I always thought the pro had multi processor support as well as some additionl network settings like remote access.....So I am as lost as anyone else....I would think support for dual cpus (not current HT technology) has something to do with the thread scheduler...

maybe all of this is a workaround by INtel and AMD to use the existing thread scheduler and in a sense tricking the home to hand;e more as if many logical cores and not physical cores....I dont know...Seems like contradictories and inconsisiteniceies all over the place....

IF anandetchs reviews would have listed the OS like they should in the tested platform we would have a better idea....

 

[Targon]

In theory, the Windows XP license applies to sockets only and not to the number of cores. As a result, XP Home should in theory show the EE version as 4 "processors" under Windows XP Home(2 cores with HT enabled per core). Under a dual processor system, that means that you could have 8 "processors" showing up under Windows XP Pro.

I am still waiting for the dual core Opterons to be released so we can see some head to head comparisons when it comes to performance.

 

[irwincur]

Haha, Intel sucks. Middle of may if we are lucky.

AMD has had dual cores in the hands of OEMs for almost a month, ready to sell them on launch day. I wonder why Intel, a company with 100x the R&D and 100x the resources can't even get a release on time.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: mamisano
Checked out Dell -> Expected ship date of an XPS Gen 5 w/ Pentium D 840 is 5/3!
Checked out Alienware -> Expected ship date of Area51 5500 w/Pentium D 840 is 5/16!

Nothing like a paper launch, just in time for their earnings report tomorrow.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Pentium D a different model than the Pentium EE?

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: mamisano
Checked out Dell -> Expected ship date of an XPS Gen 5 w/ Pentium D 840 is 5/3!
Checked out Alienware -> Expected ship date of Area51 5500 w/Pentium D 840 is 5/16!

Nothing like a paper launch, just in time for their earnings report tomorrow.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Pentium D a different model than the Pentium EE?

You are right...i think the OP wrote it down wrong cause the other articles on the topic say the EE version spelled out for the Dell and Alienware cpus and about a 3000 dollar system price tag...

its the Pentium EE 840 (HT) and the Pentium D 840 (non HT)


Edit: you know KEY that is a good point....Is the OP looking the the D version which in May a few weeks makes more sense....

 

[mamisano]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: mamisano
Checked out Dell -> Expected ship date of an XPS Gen 5 w/ Pentium D 840 is 5/3!
Checked out Alienware -> Expected ship date of Area51 5500 w/Pentium D 840 is 5/16!

Nothing like a paper launch, just in time for their earnings report tomorrow.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Pentium D a different model than the Pentium EE?

Direct from the Dell website:
Pentium® D 840 Extreme Edition Dual Core w/ HT Tech (3.20GHz, 800FSB)

From Alienware:
Intel® Pentium® Processor 840 w/ HT Technology Extreme Edition 800MHz FSB 2MB Cache - May delay your order

Here is the 3rd and last "lucky" vendor to "ship" machines based on the new EE:
Velocity Micro Velocity Raptor DCX: Estimated Ship Date 5/5/2005.

Looks like Dell messed up the naming convention, should not be Pentium D like you guys had stated.

 

[Aenslead]

I beleive this article from The Inquirer pretty much sums up all of our feelings.

What a fiasco...

 

[kini62]

"Operating System: Comes standard with Microsoft® Windows® XP Media Center. Customers can also upgrade to Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional."

From the Dell website.

XP Media Center is based on XP Pro so it must support dual processors. XP Home is not even offered.

 

[Duvie]

"The funniest part of this all is that not only did AMD beat Intel in shipping chips to end users, but so did IBM and HP. By any objective measure, PA-RISC and Power have had dual core out for over a year, so even without AMD, you are at best number three. AMD has had product for a quarter, and Intel is standing up, waving its hands and shouting 'look at me'. It's going to be a wonderful Monday but we do hope it's not full of fawning moronic reviews followed by months of wait. Please don't let this trend continue. µ"

The prolblem is in the end the average user doesn't know this and thinks Intel did win...the power of marketing when done to its advantage.....AMD may take the high moral role but in the end ppl still think Intel drives the innovation. They will still most certainly have hit the desktop market first and get the average Joe sitting at home glued to the TV......

I dont doubt one tof the reason Intel targeted the less lucrative desktop market (unlike AMD) was they know they get more exposure there and they could assure they could be there first. The xeon dual core would be a disastor based on results of s dual core desktop versus a 2x Xeon 533fsb. The memory bandwidth requires a who knew chipset for this in that market and that obviously was giopng to take time....a DDR2 chipset like 955 was not much of a leap, neither was the 2 prescott cores slapped together....

 

[Aenslead]

THING IS... I am certain AMD's aproach is far more INTELligent: see, very, VERY few people actually encode, while playing Doom3 and having a virus scanner runing at the same time. I'd dare to say only 5% of desktop users have this sort of use, and while it is UNDENIABLE the performance bennefits that dual core processors have, it only matters to that very same 5% of users.

On the other hand, workstations and servers NEED multi core solutions, and that's where AMD is going to be first: where it DOES matter... besides of being more lucrative.

Its gonna be funny watching Episode III thinking throughout the movie that it was all rendered on AMD64 machines...