Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Jan 2006 15:26 UTC
AMD AMD has released its first dual-core Athlon 64 FX processor, the FX-60. The Reg puts it through its paces, and concludes: "AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 is the best consumer processor AMD has ever produced. With effectively a pair of FX-55s sat in the same socket, sharing an efficient memory controller, it's close enough to FX-57 in single-threaded apps that the multi-threaded advantage makes that slender gap moot. Targetted at the well-heeled enthusiast, the new dual-core processor should be a shoo-in for those with FX-57s already, and those with the required readies to drop on the latest and greatest."
Thread beginning with comment 84061
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Prices
by klynch on Tue 10th Jan 2006 18:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Prices"
Member since:

How can you "require" dual cores? It's not like it's impossible to run multiple threads on the same CPU. Sure it won't be true concurrency, but it'll still operate.

Also, let's assume the game needs two threads to run in true concurrency. These threads will be able to run well on dual processor systems too.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Prices
by Tom K on Tue 10th Jan 2006 20:43 in reply to "RE[2]: Prices"
Tom K Member since:

You can "require" dual cores because a single-core processor will not be able to provide sufficient performance at some point in the future. Even if you have a 3.0 GHz Athlon 64, and the game requires ~5.0 GHz of processing power (it will happen, not soon, but it will), no single-core CPU will be capable of it, thus in essence saying "you need dual cores".

Single-core performance has more or less peaked for the forseeable future. That's why there's such a push for dual cores and multithreading now.

As for dual-processor systems ... yeah, but dual-processor is a lot more expensive than dual-core. Consumers will all be on dual-core sooner or later.

Reply Parent Score: 1