Intel’s planning its own version of ‘Quadrophenia‘ for this week’s Intel Developer Forum. It has already revealed the code names for the server and desktop versions of those chips: Clovertown and Kentsfield. Those models will be constructed by combining Intel’s two newest dual-core processors in those categories in a multichip package. Intel also announced low-end Xeons.
Since the server quad cores will be Socket 771 based, I am wondering if one could replace a dual core 51XX processor with an upcoming quad core one (possibly after a BIOS update on a Intel 5000X chipset mobo). Anyone have an idea?
You may not even need to update the BIOS. I believe it was Tom’s (or Anand maybe) who did an article where they popped a pair of Quad-core samples into a Mac Pro. OS X recognized and used all 8 cores.
They didn’t do anything special with the BIOS (or EFF in this case) so they’re either a drop-in solution or Apple had already included support in their firmware.
At any rate, it seems that 4 (and more) core CPUs are central to Intel’s plans, so it wouldn’t supprise me that the chips are at least pin-compatible, making platform support a matter of a simple BIOS extension at most.
>> You may not even need to update the BIOS. I believe it was Tom’s (or Anand maybe) who did an article where they popped a pair of Quad-core samples into a Mac Pro. OS X recognized and used all 8 cores.
When does Apple plan to start shipping this as a standard configuration?
“When does Apple plan to start shipping this as a standard configuration?”
hang on… I have a crystal ball here somewhere….
The folks over at tomshardware have more info on the quad core chips and benchmarks as well.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/
Quad-Core running a beta 3DMark 07 ?
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34612
Intel IDF keynote with Quad-Core info :
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34641
Edited 2006-09-26 18:27
It always seemed strange to me that Apple never put out real pressure to get a dual/quad processor chip developed years ago for thier machines.
Many of the jobs Macs tend to be used for like Graphics and Signal Processing could have benifited from a quad-CPU machine ten years ago.
Considering Be got a dual PowerPC setup running and shipped almost fifteen years ago, Apple threw away a good chance to increase thier market share/sales years earlier than they did.
Daystar shipped a quad 604 Mac years ago. Apple could have built quad G4 Macs, but the FSB probably would have limited performance. As for quad-core, it has only just now become economically feasible.
http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6119618.html?part=rss&tag=6119618&s…
Until Intel comes up with a better system than the front-side bus for accessing memory, their dual and quad-core offering will not be worth looking at, especially in the server market.
Their dual-core offering aren’t too bad, and are currently the best laptop and desktop chips (Core2). But put more than 4 cores or 4 CPUs into a system, and they starve. Intel needs to come up with a HyperTransport-like system (or just license HT like they should have 5 years ago).
Until CSI (Common Systems Interconnect, I believe) hits the x86 server market, there’s no point in looking at Intel solutions. AMD is where it is at in the server market, especially when you get more than 4 cores or 2 sockets on a motherboard.