Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Who Knew!!!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 5, 2006 3:27:21 AM

I didn't know about this. And it kinda sucks what AMD and Intel is doing. Those money hungry fools.
Here's the Link:

http://www.behardware.com/articles/571-2/dual-core-athl...
:twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

More about : knew

January 5, 2006 3:33:26 AM

LOL. Do you live under a rock?

This has been going on for years now. Nothing new... Only major news was last year when Intel joined AMD's ranks and started using models instead of clock speeds.

It was inevitable in some respects. Clock speed just doesn't mean what it used to. This is a big reason why intel has changed logos, brand names, etc.

-mpjesse
January 5, 2006 4:33:23 AM

I dont understand you point. It says the same thing as most articles did around that time.
The only things that have changed are the addition of the X2 3800, and the surfacing of the problems that the 820D have.
Related resources
January 5, 2006 4:40:38 AM

Quote:
LOL. Do you live under a rock?

This has been going on for years now. Nothing new... Only major news was last year when Intel joined AMD's ranks and started using models instead of clock speeds.

It was inevitable in some respects. Clock speed just doesn't mean what it used to. This is a big reason why intel has changed logos, brand names, etc.

-mpjesse


I dont know crap about comps, except for a little here and there. And I never been on any of these types of forums before. So pretty much I was under a rock lol. Plus lately i've been reading a lot of forums becasue I have been deciding on what type of cpu to get. I want to get a new comp. Can't decide on Operton 175, x2 4400, or even intel. I want to use my PC for gaming, editng video's, encoding, all that type of other multi-threaded, multi-tasking stuff. So, some of these news maybe old for you guys, but for me it's new. :oops:  My budget is around $1500 to 2 g's. CPU, PSU, sound card, vid card, 2 gb of memory, mobo, hd (sata2, raptor, raid, whatever that means lol), nice uv reactive stuff to make my case all purty and stuff lol. Any good advise will help a poo man that has been under a rock for a while. :D  :)  :(  :? :oops:  :roll: :twisted:
January 5, 2006 4:49:17 AM

Quote:
I dont understand you point. It says the same thing as most articles did around that time.
The only things that have changed are the addition of the X2 3800, and the surfacing of the problems that the 820D have.

I was just talking about the pricing. How they are saying that x2 4800 is same as a 64 4000+ but double the mula. :twisted:
January 5, 2006 5:12:11 AM

That makes sense to me. After all the X2 is basicly two of the 4000s on a single chip. Of course the prices have gone down since that time. Two of the 4000s will now cost you $668 @ newegg, while the X2 4800 cost $787.
Since I have 5 computers on my intranet, getting a dual core doesn't make much sense to me.
January 5, 2006 6:03:55 AM

Quote:
That makes sense to me. After all the X2 is basicly two of the 4000s on a single chip. Of course the prices have gone down since that time. Two of the 4000s will now cost you $668 @ newegg, while the X2 4800 cost $787.
Since I have 5 computers on my intranet, getting a dual core doesn't make much sense to me.


Damn 5? What do you do with all those computers? 8O
January 5, 2006 11:25:07 AM

What's with the bold? You can make your point / question just as well without it.
January 5, 2006 9:05:39 PM

Quote:
What's with the bold? You can make your point / question just as well without it.

LOL why does people take offense to the bold lettering. I'm not doing it because i'm mad or anything. I'm just doing just to do it. And I can stick out like a sore thumb :twisted: :p 
January 5, 2006 9:15:41 PM

The reason is simple. It costs nearly twice as much to manufacture a dual core processor than it does a single core processor. Since all wafers have a certain yield percentage, AMD and Intel have to waste more silicon than ever making dual core CPU's.

Those nice, round, and shiny silicon wafers cost serious $$$. And when AMD and Intel are trashing cores at the rate they are now for a single CPU package, it hurts the bottom line. This is the primary reason the move to 65nm is soooooooo important for Intel and AMD; they have to squeeze as many dies on a piece of silicon as they possibly can. Why? To avoid shortages in the CPU supply. (common sense will tell you that with twice as many cores, you need to double your output to keep up)

And don't forget that everyone is betting on dual core here. Everyone is betting that software developers will write software to take advantage of dual cores. The performance increase may not be that great right now... but it will be in the future.

This is why I don't think it's wise to upgrade to a single core processor at this time. Sure... they're pretty much useless right now, but wait another year. Things will change dramatically.

-mpjesse
January 6, 2006 9:13:30 PM

I think it is inversly proportional with self esteem!! Some feel the need to talk louder to make their point.. Just like when one say that dogs that bark don't bite.. Well.. some may ...
January 7, 2006 5:41:10 AM

Quote:
The reason is simple. It costs nearly twice as much to manufacture a dual core processor than it does a single core processor. Since all wafers have a certain yield percentage, AMD and Intel have to waste more silicon than ever making dual core CPU's.

Those nice, round, and shiny silicon wafers cost serious $$$. And when AMD and Intel are trashing cores at the rate they are now for a single CPU package, it hurts the bottom line. This is the primary reason the move to 65nm is soooooooo important for Intel and AMD; they have to squeeze as many dies on a piece of silicon as they possibly can. Why? To avoid shortages in the CPU supply. (common sense will tell you that with twice as many cores, you need to double your output to keep up)

And don't forget that everyone is betting on dual core here. Everyone is betting that software developers will write software to take advantage of dual cores. The performance increase may not be that great right now... but it will be in the future.

This is why I don't think it's wise to upgrade to a single core processor at this time. Sure... they're pretty much useless right now, but wait another year. Things will change dramatically.

-mpjesse

Thanks for the info. Makes more sense. Hey I have a question. I was reading another forum about OCing. Wheather it's x2 or Operton, that it was not a good idea to OC because there could be some serious problems and what not. How often can this happen when OCing. I do plan OCing my new pc when I decide to get either x2 4400 or Operton 170 or 175. I just won't OC right away. Just later down the line.
!