AMD to demo a dual-core desktop chip
Posted by malebolgia on 23 February 2005 - 16:17 · 61 comments & 5554 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name:
malebolgia
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name:
malebolgiaContact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#1 Posted by LeMerovingien on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:20
- its gonna kick sooo much ass!!!
i cant wait!!!! woot!!
-
(1 reply)
#2 Posted by Rickie on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:29
- Nice, things like this make me wan't to hold back on my upgrade. Can't wait till this comes on though
-
#2.1 Posted by sphbecker on 23 Feb 2005 - 20:35
- That is the problem with keeping up with what is to come. It makes the stuff today seem obsolete even as you take it off the self. There have been so many times where I think "I'll just wait for this cool thing and then buy," well, but the time that cool things comes out there is something even better in the works that I have to wait for. At some point you just have to break down about buy what is currently available.
-
(8 replies)
#3 Posted by stezo2k on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:31
- hope its as good as it sounds
should be much better than hyperthreading too -
#3.1 Posted by EnIgMa-PenGuIn on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:42
- If they really wanted to they could do that as well, they filed a patent for hyperthreading years ago, but this is still better
-
#3.2 Posted by Coolme on 23 Feb 2005 - 17:00
- They patented it?? Then why is Intel using it?
lol.. of course it's better then hyperthreading.. because hyper-threading is simulating a dual-core processor. Whereas this IS the real thing. -
#3.3 Posted by EnIgMa-PenGuIn on 23 Feb 2005 - 17:06
- You do realise that AMD, IBM and Intel all have separate patents on hyperthreading technology dont you. (mind you IBM and AMD generally work together) and they can do both.
have a nice day now
-
#3.4 Posted by sphbecker on 23 Feb 2005 - 20:34
- Dual Cored processors are really very similar to hyperthreading, just taking the technology to the next level. Intel is working on dual core as well, but if they don't get their butt in gear they are going to loose even more market share to AMD. I am a long time Intel fan, but my next desktop computer will have a 64-bit dual core processor, and if I have to go with AMD, so bet it
-
#3.5 Posted by Jstphish on 23 Feb 2005 - 20:59
- From what I understant of Hyper-Threading, applications have to be written to take advantage of it. With Dual Core every application will take advantage of it because it is the CPU. At least that's what I understand.
-
#3.6 Posted by sphbecker on 23 Feb 2005 - 23:17
- That is actually not correct. Both Hyper-Threading and Dual Core present a 2nd virtual processor to the OS. Dual Core has actually has two sets of registers, so all instructions can be done in parallel (with HT only instructions using different registers could be done at the same time). With HT, Dual Core and even two real processors you still have the issue that software needs to be multi-threaded to benefit from the extra processor. The OS is multi-threaded, so background tasks and running two different apps at the same time will always take advantage of the 2nd processor.
Intel’s “Designed for Hyper-Threading” logo program really just certifies that the application is able to take advantage of 2 processors (single or dual core, virtual or real). -
#3.7 Posted by ev0| on 24 Feb 2005 - 00:45
- There is a big difference between 2 real cores and virtual cores.
-
#3.8 Posted by sphbecker on 24 Feb 2005 - 15:46
- I agree, there is a difference, 2 cores vs 1 core is a defendant advantage, perhaps less then you realize*, but still an advantage. That does not change my point that software still needs to be multi-treaded to take full advantage.
*I say that because there are a number of things to keep in mind. One, you still share cache and bandwidth so it is not like 2 real processors. Two, the 2 pipelines can’t feed 12 registers any faster then they can feed 6 with HT; the only advantage (and it’s a pretty big one) is that two instructions trying to use the same register can be executed at the same time.
-
(5 replies)
#4 Posted by SVT on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:33
- OHIO!
-
#4.2 Posted by tiagosilva29 on 23 Feb 2005 - 19:20
-
?
-
#5 Posted by Colonel_Angus on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:39
- Holy Toledo, Batman!
-
(3 replies)
#6 Posted by BeyondGodlike on 23 Feb 2005 - 16:54
- i dont think these are practical for gamers..but still cool
what socket are they? -
#6.1 Posted by Zkal on 23 Feb 2005 - 18:12
- Socket 939 so they will work on current AMD Athlon 64 motherboards (but will need a bios update)
-
#6.2 Posted by BeyondGodlike on 23 Feb 2005 - 22:31
- SUHWEET, i might go DC then!!!
-
(4 replies)
#7 Posted by Mr. Black on 23 Feb 2005 - 17:31
- This definitely shows AMD is WAY ahead of Intel in getting things to market, not to mention innovation. I really like what I am seeing from them. This is definitely my next processor!
-
#7.1 Posted by Radium on 23 Feb 2005 - 20:19
- Intel rather wait longer than needed for some strange reasons. Even if they have a fully function product ready for mass production.
AMD has to be ahead of Intel, to show who they really are.
They get more publicity if they are ahead of Intel, and AMD need publicity.
We've seen silent releases before, we've also seen that just because someone demo a product first doesn't mean that they will release it first. -
#7.2 Posted by ~*McoreD*~ on 23 Feb 2005 - 23:06
- LOL. Intel have been talking about MULTI core processors.
-
#7.3 Posted by jasondefaoite on 24 Feb 2005 - 09:55
- LOL exactly, talking!! I guess Intels dual/multicore processors will need to be Pentium M derived? The power needed and heat generated from the Prescotts is bad enough with a single core, can't imagine two.
-
#7.4 Posted by shao on 24 Feb 2005 - 11:58
- this is generally how it works.
- intel release new chip.. they claim it to be the best thing since sliced bread
- amd release new chip.. everyone but intel claims it to be the best thing since sliced bread
- intel look sheepish
- intel say they're going to release a new chip which is very much like amd's.. everyone still claims amd's is the best thing since sliced bread
- intel still look sheepish
- intel lose another large portion of their market share
- repeat
-
#8 Posted by santidog on 23 Feb 2005 - 18:07
- Anyone else see this article? Kinda makes you wonder how strong the first dual cores are really going to be.
"For all of the fanfare surrounding dual-core processors, AMD executives said its new chips won't be the crème de la crème of its desktop product line."
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558...2129TX1K0000532
-
(5 replies)
#9 Posted by SkaterAustin on 23 Feb 2005 - 19:38
- I wonder if this will have the ddr2 support w/ sse3 ? and what pin its going to be.. so many details i need answered
-
#9.1 Posted by Radium on 23 Feb 2005 - 20:22
- SSE3, yes.
DDR2, most probably not. DDR2 needs a new socket, and the new socket is not here yet.
Next socket will probably be 1207. -
#9.2 Posted by insurektion on 23 Feb 2005 - 21:54
- they should just skip ddr2 and move right up to ddr3, ddr2 ~ as good as rdram
-
#9.4 Posted by Coolme on 24 Feb 2005 - 12:35
- I wasn't really into computers during the Rdram era... but how fast was Rdram? What is compariable to rdram?
-
#9.5 Posted by Radium on 24 Feb 2005 - 14:52
- RDRAM was fast, but too expensive.
High frequency and narrow bus.
DDR2 is slower and more expensive than DDR, but so is DDR3. If DDR3 was cheaper and faster than DDR2 then we would be using DDR3 now, but that's obviously not the case.
Rambus' next thing is called XDR DRAM.
-
#10 Posted by Bliksem on 23 Feb 2005 - 20:34
- Cant wait, excellent news (Y)
-
#11 Posted by atomicski on 23 Feb 2005 - 21:34
- so sweet! but are they going to make them geared for home users or servers?
-
#12 Posted by King Rilian on 23 Feb 2005 - 22:07
- Rock on, AMD.
-
#13 Posted by SkaterAustin on 23 Feb 2005 - 22:26
- love how dell tho, denies amd once again.. tho im sure amds dual core and there 64 bit is way better than intels.. and amd also has a really good server processor..
-
#14 Posted by tiwaris on 23 Feb 2005 - 23:06
- I am happy for AMD.
I wish AMD gets 50% market share, then it would really drive cut throat competition with intel.
-
#15 Posted by Samoa on 23 Feb 2005 - 23:15
- Hope Intel delivers nice dual core as well. We consumers need the competition to take place. Drives down prices for us. and gives us better products. GO AMD64
-
(2 replies)
#16 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 24 Feb 2005 - 00:03
- *Insert forced emotions of positive consumerism here*
AMD isn't all too "ahead" here, seeing how Intel announced dual-core processors for Q2 2005. They're pretty even right now, and one can only speculate which one will crank out a faster dual-core when the time comes. -
#16.1 Posted by ishtar on 24 Feb 2005 - 10:21
- Oh yes they are , where AMD is true dual core , intels is just another gimmick their cores are just two chips slapped together.
-
#16.2 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 24 Feb 2005 - 11:25
- Who cares if the cores are on the same die or not? You're such a fanboy.
-
#17 Posted by Hankyone on 24 Feb 2005 - 01:13
- AMD FOR LIFE! WOOT
i am now officialioy an 100% AMD fanboy
*hugs my winchester*
intel
-
(1 reply)
#18 Posted by Dirtie on 24 Feb 2005 - 01:27
- This news is orgasmic. Just one question though, would the the chip be more liable to overheat?
-
(3 replies)
#19 Posted by amdme3200 on 24 Feb 2005 - 02:17
- The better Amd dose the better Intel dose and so forth. I just hope Amd/Intel dont pull a Microsoft/Nvidia and buy eachother then we are F.
-
#19.1 Posted by KCKitsune on 24 Feb 2005 - 17:41
- amdme3200, don't worry about it because the Cell processor from Sony/IBM/Toshiba will hopefully keep AMD/Intel honest.
-
#19.3 Posted by rafter109 on 25 Feb 2005 - 04:31
- u guys realize Cell is not x86 compatable thus will not run Windows natively so all your precious games wont matter. Many processors exist on the premise of Cell and many have lost out to the more popular x86 architecture. So unless Cell really really kicks ass, no one is going to change platforms for the cpu, simple as that.
-
#20 Posted by Verbose. on 24 Feb 2005 - 03:54
- Surely big things are in store for AMD. Their present course is already extremely good. This is a really good chart which illustrates the specifications for each respective codename. Last updated Feb, 20.
The chart: http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/
Last edited by 20498 on 24 Feb 2005 - 15:21
-
#21 Posted by Chanser on 24 Feb 2005 - 06:24
- I can't wait for Dual Core to come out! If only most software and games support dual core, heck I could run many personal game servers with this .
-
(1 reply)
#22 Posted by Coolme on 24 Feb 2005 - 08:02
- It's thursday... where are the details??
-
#22.1 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 24 Feb 2005 - 09:16
- I don't think they'll post the details at 1-4AM, USA time.
-
(1 reply)
#23 Posted by Matrix XII on 24 Feb 2005 - 09:36
- lets just hope its 939
-
#24 Posted by bobzy on 24 Feb 2005 - 13:13
- even if these dual core chips from AMD run hotter, i wont mind. it will have 3 uses, 2 processing cores and a place to fry my egg
-
#25 Posted by jon86 on 24 Feb 2005 - 14:36
- From looking at the chart posted earlier, Toledo will be an FX chip and work on S939.
-
#26 Posted by Verbose. on 24 Feb 2005 - 15:21
- Someone looked at it, thanks. I made the link more pronounced.
Toledo will be 90nm, 2MB L2 cache, memory support will be the same.
In response to the people who were talking about future DDR2/3 support: supposedly socket M2 (1207) will support DDR2-667.
Last edited by 20498 on 24 Feb 2005 - 21:07
-
#27 Posted by .:Neo.X.WinFreak:. on 25 Feb 2005 - 17:50
- being developed and built in germany... MUHAHAHAW
lalala...
mmh i guess im gonna buy one
-fm
The chip, code-named Toledo, will feature two separate Athlon 64 processing cores on the same piece of silicon. It will start appearing in PCs in the second half of 2005, said Theresa DeOnis, desktop brand manager for AMD. Putting two cores on a chip will allow a computer to perform two tasks at once, she said, or run specially tweaked applications faster. Windows XP Professional will be the operating system of choice for many dual-core desktops, as it is already threaded to run two processors.
What's new