Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dual CPUs

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 1:52:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/23/news_6119095.ht...

"....New "Toledo" processor to be shown off Wednesday, start appearing in
PCs in the second half of 2005.

Advanced Micro Devices is expected to show off a dual-core processor for
desktops at its headquarters Wednesday but is keeping tight-lipped about the
details.

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....
"

---------------------

Maybe with a 2nd cpu, the developers could dedicate it to a reasonable A/I
to go up against. ;) 

More about : dual cpus

February 25, 2005 1:58:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:52:56 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com>
wrote:

>Maybe with a 2nd cpu, the developers could dedicate it to a reasonable A/I
>to go up against. ;) 

Not until every potential machine has that feature. There would be no
way they will write a game that plays completely differently on a
machine with one or two CPU's/cores.

I think the main hope for parallel computing will be when PC's (not
necessarily in the IBM sense) start using Cell processors, assuming
they live up to the hype IBM and Sony are spouting.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:48:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

sayNO2steam wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, "OldDog" wrote:
>
> powerfull hardware is great but only with great software!
> if you want to use that great and powerfull hardware please support
> developers in creating good pc games optimized and done from the
> start for the pc!
>
> you know what amd should do? them and intel and nvidia and ati...
> in every piece of hardware you bought it came with vouchers for at
> least 10 full version pc games from different publishers, so when
> you bough that powerfull cpu you bought the same time 10 pc games
> you could choose in the period of one year and one from each pc
> game publisher
>
> pc hardware manufacturers have to invest in pc game developers,
> cause only this way its worthy to have that dual core state of the
> art 64bit super processor

10 games is a lot. That's £300-£400 of software. Even if the CPU
seller/developer/whatever gets them at half price, they will still have
to add £150-£200 to the price of the CPU to get their money back.

Also, powerful chips aren't just bought by gamers. Video editing, CAD,
photo editing etc will all benefit from more powerful chips - these
users aren't going to like paying an extra £150 for software they
don't want.

Even graphics cards, which are aimed at the gaming market, only contain
2 or 3 full version games. This is probably an affordable level. Much
better to include demos, which cost nothing to distribute (they're
generally free anyway) but will tempt the purchaser into buying the
full game at full price - which puts more money into the game
developers' pockets.
Related resources
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 5:17:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> once tried to test me with:

> http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/23/news_6119095.ht...
>
> "....New "Toledo" processor to be shown off Wednesday, start appearing
> in PCs in the second half of 2005.
>
> Advanced Micro Devices is expected to show off a dual-core processor
> for desktops at its headquarters Wednesday but is keeping tight-lipped
> about the details.
>
> 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.... "

I have to be the first to say it...

"Holy Toledo!"

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 12:24:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, "OldDog" wrote:

powerfull hardware is great but only with great software!
if you want to use that great and powerfull hardware please support
developers in creating good pc games optimized and done from the
start for the pc!

you know what amd should do? them and intel and nvidia and ati...
in every piece of hardware you bought it came with vouchers for at
least 10 full version pc games from different publishers, so when
you bough that powerfull cpu you bought the same time 10 pc games
you could choose in the period of one year and one from each pc
game publisher

pc hardware manufacturers have to invest in pc game developers,
cause only this way its worthy to have that dual core state of the
art 64bit super processor

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 12:38:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:52:56 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com>
wrote:

>http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/23/news_6119095.ht...
>
>"....New "Toledo" processor to be shown off Wednesday, start appearing in
>PCs in the second half of 2005.
>
>Advanced Micro Devices is expected to show off a dual-core processor for
>desktops at its headquarters Wednesday but is keeping tight-lipped about the
>details.
>
>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....
>"

This is great news, but I find I cannot get excited about it because:

1. Windows XP 64bit is still immature, especially with reopect to
drivers and applications. Thus, much of the benefit of the 64bit chip
is not taken advantage of. Remember, to truly take advantage of 64bit,
you need 64bit hardware, a pure 64bit OS, 64bit drivers, and a 64bit
application. Sure, AMD and Intel can emulate 32bits (and quite well
with AMD, btw), but to truly benefit from 64bit, you need the
application (game, whatever) to be compiled as a 64bit application.

2. Even worse than #1 is that applications have to be written to
support multiple processors. Just like applications have to be
compiled as 64bit, code needs to be written to take advantage of
mutliple CPUs. So, for todays crop of games that is not written to be
SMP aware, you get virtually NOTHING. Sure, your OS _might_ be SMP
aware, and therefore have a slightly lower load on the system, and
therefore allow your application to hog the power of one CPU, giving
slightly better performance, but that will be marginal.

Developers need to jump on the bandwagon for 64bit and SMP. I remember
the switch from 16bit to 32bit, and it was very slow, then virtually
overnight gained huge momentum and took over. OS/2 was partly
responsible. I am waiting for the damn to break on 64bit and SMP
support.


Please replace the "NoSpam" with "MCI" in my email address in order to
reply.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Granto Joe.Granto@NoSpam.Com
Senior Engineer Intel Engineering,MCI
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 1:11:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:goms11l8k72v47gia25vg4ef2ali2vt78q@4ax.com...

> >Maybe with a 2nd cpu, the developers could dedicate it to a reasonable
A/I
> >to go up against. ;) 
> Not until every potential machine has that feature. There would be no
> way they will write a game that plays completely differently on a
> machine with one or two CPU's/cores.

The P4s have had virtual dual cores for quite awhile now, there's no reason
why today's games can't take advantage of that.

There lies another advantage to coop games, you can have a dedicated CPU
doing all of the AI processing.
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 2:26:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> wrote in message
news:cVsTd.44599$cW2.43350@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> Maybe with a 2nd cpu, the developers could dedicate it to a reasonable A/I
> to go up against. ;) 
>
>

If only.

*prepares for ultrasuperhyper lighting*
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 11:58:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:58:07 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:

>Not until every potential machine has that feature. There would be no
>way they will write a game that plays completely differently on a
>machine with one or two CPU's/cores.

You might get support from nextgen console -> PC ports, as the
consoles are all going multicore.

If that's any consolation to ya. ;-)
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 1:04:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Joe Granto wrote:

> the switch from 16bit to 32bit, and it was very slow, then virtually
> overnight gained huge momentum and took over. OS/2 was partly
> responsible. I am waiting for the damn to break on 64bit and SMP

i hope the "switch" to 64bit computing will also be very slow!
me like millions of other pc gamers have a 32bit computer and want it
to last at least 5 more years
pc games don't need 64bit computing, we already have high processing
speed and power that beats any console available
64bit yes... but only for the next decade

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 1:05:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 25 Feb 2005, "Chadwick" wrote:

my point is, if intel, amd, ati and nvidia are gaining so much with
high demand for more processing power its cause of pc games, so their
gain is cause of the developers work
but we know pc game developers are not gaining alot and pc games sells
are down, so its in the interest of intel and nvidia and others too
finance pc game developers
sells in the pc game market has been down year after years and mighty
intel and mighty ati should look at it and put money so those pc games
like farcry and doom3 will be released

i'm not telling is would be made a law, not at all!
what i'm telling is the more farcry and doom3 are released the more
amd and nvidia will sell

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
Anonymous
February 27, 2005 9:18:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Joe Granto" <Joe.Granto@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:2kdu11d15cg1m3bth6odh7895qdn5ve0ih@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:52:56 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com>
> wrote:
>
> >http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/23/news_6119095.ht...
> >
> >"....New "Toledo" processor to be shown off Wednesday, start appearing in
> >PCs in the second half of 2005.
> >
> >Advanced Micro Devices is expected to show off a dual-core processor for
> >desktops at its headquarters Wednesday but is keeping tight-lipped about
the
> >details.
> >
> >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....
> >"
>
> This is great news, but I find I cannot get excited about it because:
>
> 1. Windows XP 64bit is still immature, especially with reopect to
> drivers and applications. Thus, much of the benefit of the 64bit chip
> is not taken advantage of. Remember, to truly take advantage of 64bit,
> you need 64bit hardware, a pure 64bit OS, 64bit drivers, and a 64bit
> application. Sure, AMD and Intel can emulate 32bits (and quite well
> with AMD, btw), but to truly benefit from 64bit, you need the
> application (game, whatever) to be compiled as a 64bit application.
>
> 2. Even worse than #1 is that applications have to be written to
> support multiple processors. Just like applications have to be
> compiled as 64bit, code needs to be written to take advantage of
> mutliple CPUs. So, for todays crop of games that is not written to be
> SMP aware, you get virtually NOTHING. Sure, your OS _might_ be SMP
> aware, and therefore have a slightly lower load on the system, and
> therefore allow your application to hog the power of one CPU, giving
> slightly better performance, but that will be marginal.
>
> Developers need to jump on the bandwagon for 64bit and SMP. I remember
> the switch from 16bit to 32bit, and it was very slow, then virtually
> overnight gained huge momentum and took over. OS/2 was partly
> responsible. I am waiting for the damn to break on 64bit and SMP
> support.
>

I think we have several years before we see the developers jump on 64bit or
even dual cpus. From what I've read, it takes the software community at
least two years before they can catch up to the latest hardware release.

Oh well, we'll just have to wait for the year 2015 before we can battle a
decent A/I. One that doesn't have to cheat, respawn behind us, ....
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 2:14:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

5 years?No way.Not if you play new games.
"sayNO2steam" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:u8h0219j3mj8g55qkb9teavup37b8smm4g@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Joe Granto wrote:
>
> > the switch from 16bit to 32bit, and it was very slow, then virtually
> > overnight gained huge momentum and took over. OS/2 was partly
> > responsible. I am waiting for the damn to break on 64bit and SMP
>
> i hope the "switch" to 64bit computing will also be very slow!
> me like millions of other pc gamers have a 32bit computer and want it
> to last at least 5 more years
> pc games don't need 64bit computing, we already have high processing
> speed and power that beats any console available
> 64bit yes... but only for the next decade
>
> --
> post made in a steam-free computer
> i said "NO" to valve and steam
>
> against steam campaign
> http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/
>
> steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
> http://www.steamwatch.org/
>
> please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
> http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 5:32:37 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>I think we have several years before we see the developers jump on
64bit or
>even dual cpus

Intel is talking about 100 core processors in "a few years". Vertical
scalability is taking strain, they're going horizontal now.

Do you think future action games will get away with only using 1% of
processing power?
February 28, 2005 2:15:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 27 Feb 2005 23:24:21 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:

>He actually said 5 MORE years. As if he thinks his gaming rig can last MORE
>THAN FIVE years.

He is still playing Doom - he has made his 486 last 10 years, I don't
see why he shouldn't scrape another 5 years out of it. He is still
saving his pocket money for Doom 2.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 5:05:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Andrew wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2005 23:24:21 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:
>
>
>>He actually said 5 MORE years. As if he thinks his gaming rig can last MORE
>>THAN FIVE years.
>
>
> He is still playing Doom - he has made his 486 last 10 years, I don't
> see why he shouldn't scrape another 5 years out of it. He is still
> saving his pocket money for Doom 2.

Pocket money? More like the cash from the Warder for stitching Mail
Bags. Thats if they let him handle sharp objects of course.
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 6:05:26 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> once tried to test me with:

> Andrew wrote:
>> On 27 Feb 2005 23:24:21 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>He actually said 5 MORE years. As if he thinks his gaming rig can
>>>last MORE THAN FIVE years.
>>
>>
>> He is still playing Doom - he has made his 486 last 10 years, I don't
>> see why he shouldn't scrape another 5 years out of it. He is still
>> saving his pocket money for Doom 2.
>
> Pocket money? More like the cash from the Warder for stitching Mail
> Bags. Thats if they let him handle sharp objects of course.

I was going to say I'd think he'd have a hard time working with that
straitjacket on all the time.

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.
!