http://www.osnews.com/story/16486/Intel_Officially_Launches_Quad-Core_Processors Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:00:08 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread?182247 http://osnews.com/thread?182247 I hope the motherboards that support these new chips are a heck of a lot better than the sorry excuses that were the Core 2 Duo boards.

I went with an AMD64 X2 chip over a C2D because the motherboards were so much better (and cheaper). Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Clinton) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182256 http://osnews.com/thread?182256 I don't really understand the need for quad-core CPUs. A dual-core one is still pretty reasonable, but a quad-core one would pretty much benefit only servers or people who seriously lots of stuff simultaneously, like compressing mp3s, video, rendering images and watching movies all at the same time..On an average desktop even a dual-core one is doing hardly any good. Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (WereCatf) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182270 http://osnews.com/thread?182270 Oh, c'mon.. imagine: a Beowulf cluster of these things.

:-3 Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (zsitvaij) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182275 http://osnews.com/thread?182275 Many pro-apps support multicore, for instance: Photoshop, Maya, POV-Ray, Cinema 4D, 3DSmax.

And currently quad-core CPUs are not intended for average pc, but rather for HPC, pro and enthusiast markets.Edited 2006-11-14 20:18 Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (stare) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182278 http://osnews.com/thread?182278 You obviously don't run Gentoo.. the more core's you can get during an emerge -uDN world the better. I believe the optimum number, for both shaver blades and processor cores, is 8; at which time, there will be world peace and the return of all forecasted religious icons to earth.
We are three-blades and four core from Utopia. Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (CowMan) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182280 http://osnews.com/thread?182280 Some will quote the relatively few apps that benefit from multiple cores. Others will argue that your wordprocessor might not benefit right now, but after it's rewritten to take advantage... blah... blah... blah... X can run on its own processor... blah... blah... blah...

;-) (Better put a winky in, there!)

But the real need for multiple cores comes from marketting. Megahertz were petering out and a replacement was desperately needed.

That said, if you do a lot of compiling, these things really *are* a Godsend.

For the average desktop user... get real! ;-)Edited 2006-11-14 20:36 Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182281 http://osnews.com/thread?182281 Getting the highest seti@home score (-; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (aaronb) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182284 http://osnews.com/thread?182284 This is perfect timing on Intel's part for me. I've been looking into buying myself a Core 2 Duo-based system and this will hopefully cause the prices of these to drop a bit, as the quad-core systems become the HPC processors of choice. Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (codergeek42) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182285 http://osnews.com/thread?182285 like nobody needed more than 640KB of RAM...Edited 2006-11-14 20:41 Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (yanik) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182295 http://osnews.com/thread?182295 Bill Gates also said something along the lines of never needing more than 640K of RAM. Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (flanque) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182311 http://osnews.com/thread?182311 well yeah, for normal home users its pretty pointless. I mean, do you really need a BMW, lexus etc when a yugo will do?

ok, bad comparison. But for 'power users', the more the merrier. Even if you are just running 4 apps at once ,that means you can split those 4 apps onto the 4 cores.

It'll also get developers to start supporting multiple CPUs better/more. Hopefully. Tue, 14 Nov 2006 21:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182328 http://osnews.com/thread?182328 You've forgotten the ultimative main reason for multicore CPUs in PCs:

It's urgently needed for playing games! :-)

BTW: SGI and Sun had multicore and even multiprocessor systems years ago, I remember the 64x tezro rack... so Intel, where's your 128 core PC processor? :-) (The x86 architecture for children: Imagine a steam engine running at 500 mph where an airplane should be used.) Tue, 14 Nov 2006 21:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Doc Pain) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182357 http://osnews.com/thread?182357 >Doc Pain
>(The x86 architecture for children: Imagine a steam >engine running at 500 mph where an airplane should be >used.)

Tell that to the Japanese: Bullet Trains hit upto 350-400mph.

Folding@home anyone? ;-) Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Accident) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182374 http://osnews.com/thread?182374 Now the Core 2 chips are going to be nice and cheap now that there will be people that waste their money on quad core chips. Time to upgrade the AthlonXP 1700.

Besides, pretty soon you're going to need a 1KW PS just to power one of these bastards. It's all really just PC decadence. Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Phloptical) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182390 http://osnews.com/thread?182390 I agree. The motherboard line up is a bit disapointing. That and I'm a little more interested in AMD quad core architecture. And while Intel is the first to the market with their quad core cpu, I'll wait on a head to head compairison with AMD to make a decision. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (vimh) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182394 http://osnews.com/thread?182394 Not sure why you replied to me, but I am a developer and do quite a bit of compiling.

I also write my code to use both cores, so there is an extra bonus.

The Core 2 Duo motherboards were pretty underwhelming (and still are). I hope Intel's quad core motherboards show a little bit more promise. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Clinton) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182397 http://osnews.com/thread?182397 That is the best point I've seen made.

As a developer, I think the problem with most desktop application developers is that they don't understand multi-threading very well because most of them don't have the hardware to make it worth doing anyway. They use it in things like Java GUIs, but I don't think they really understand it.

I am sincerely hoping that an influx of multi-core systems will eventually bring developers to write better desktop application code because they will now have access to the kind of hardware that makes doing so quite meaningful. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Clinton) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182419 http://osnews.com/thread?182419 """Not sure why you replied to me"""

Mainly, I guess I had something that I felt like blurting out and your post was a good excuse. ;-)

Compilers are the apps that keep occurring to me as the killer apps for multicore.

That's what multicore is about, I guess:

Developers! Developers! Developers!

Oh, dear...Edited 2006-11-15 02:33 Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182420 http://osnews.com/thread?182420 "like nobody needed more than 640KB of RAM... "

At the time this was true. The problem was not with the statement or it's validity but with the design that was chosen. Most people dont need quadcore today and won't for quite some time. The important thing is to not unnecessary limit future needs. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182422 http://osnews.com/thread?182422 Quad-core will be useful for servers and datacenters.

remember when AMD first came out with 64bit duo-core Opteron, Intel kept saying 'what for? it's too early, nobody needs it' and the next thing you know their market shares came tumbling down. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (MaxxTotal) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182428 http://osnews.com/thread?182428 Yea, it's true. But average users have always wanted high end hardware because they perceive that they can use it longer before replacing it (probably true, but there are diminishing returns).

Graphics people should enjoy it too. And anyone who does video editing. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 03:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ma_d) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182434 http://osnews.com/thread?182434 the review was appealing, but the cost of one of a quad core is a little to much for my budget. the low-end cpus like the pentium 4,d and the athlons 64 is all i need to run OpenBSD.Edited 2006-11-15 03:28 Wed, 15 Nov 2006 03:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (happycamper) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182438 http://osnews.com/thread?182438 I'll wait for AMD's Quad-Core CPU thank you very much.

AMD's HyperTransport bus will make the return on additional cores much greater (as well as the bandwidth between each core, and memory subsystem), unlike Intel's 'stick 4 independent chips on the same die', and they all communicate over what would be the networking equivalent of a HUB (Hyper Transport would be the equivalent of a Switch). Wed, 15 Nov 2006 03:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anon) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182466 http://osnews.com/thread?182466 @Folding@home anyone? ;-)
Already accelerated by ATI R580 GPU and Cat 6.10. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 06:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (encia) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182469 http://osnews.com/thread?182469 Quad core will be in the OEM computers soon I bet so thats not right what your saying. Does average joe need duel core?, only because the economy say so and want your money. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 06:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (SlackerJack) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182476 http://osnews.com/thread?182476 Urban myth:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.folklore.computers/msg/99ce4b055... Wed, 15 Nov 2006 07:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182478 http://osnews.com/thread?182478 "which resulted in a slurry of reviews ". At last, an appropriate collective noun for most reviews! Wed, 15 Nov 2006 08:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sphexx) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182525 http://osnews.com/thread?182525 Intel is going to have their own interconnect technology next year and AMD isn't going to release their quad-core technology until middle of 2007, which probably means the beginning of the third quarter. I don't think that the K8L is going to compete clock for clock against the current Intel architecture either. So it doesn't look to rosy for AMD at the moment. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BFGoodrich) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?182550 http://osnews.com/thread?182550 So true, Intel just keeps rolling out innovation and imitation one after the other, things do not look good for AMD. Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (capsized) Comments