Dual Core Processing: Explained

I love the pictures!!!

Click <font color=blue><A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">HERE</A></font color=blue> if you realy are an <font color=red>idiot</font color=red>.

i like how they compare a processor to a carpenter

GIMMIE!

_______________
STFU

Dual core AMD (or Intel, for that matter - smithfield in particular) processors will not be nearly as revolutionary as some might think. Firstly, it will carry the FX price tag, which is, after all, some $800-850. Secondly, it'll probably run at slightly lower frequencies than the single-core varieties. Thirdly, Toledo (AMD's dual-core) will have one shared memory controller, like Intel's solution. Lastly, compare the two rigs:

Hypothetical dual-core Toledo @ 2Ghz-2.2Ghz (?)
Socket 939-mobo to go with it

Two Opteron 244s: 305x2=$610
Dual socket 940 mobo to go with it: $~200?

In what do these configurations differ? Would the CPU integration on a die be so much better to interprocessor arbitration and communication as to even out the negative side effects of having a shared memory controller?

Add to that that only very few applications will truly benefit as of now, and dual-core is more interesting to servers and workstations.

It's also interesting in the mobile field - the thought of enabling/disabling the second core gives a lot of flexibility.

But it's not that much of an "overkill" like some people think it is for the desktop. <i>Not at launch</i>, anyway... Of course, enter 2006/2007, multithreaded apps should be able to reap more benefits, even for the desktop.

I think Microsoft should build somekind of SMP support into DirectX, so games can benefit from Dual cores...

<font color=blue>The day <font color=green>Microsoft</font color=green> will make something that doesn't suck is the day they'll start making vacuum cleaners.</font color=blue>

But doesn't directX refer much more to graphics processors (GPU/VPUs) that are already widely parallel in nature? (think 16 pipelines, and so on)...

I'm saying that if the OS handles SMP for games/etc, even old ones not optimised for that type of thing, there would be a real benefit from dual core CPUs for regular people like me.

<font color=blue>The day <font color=green>Microsoft</font color=green> will make something that doesn't suck is the day they'll start making vacuum cleaners.</font color=blue>

SMP will eventually become incorporated into all software, and a number of processors instead of gigahertz number will be the measurement... very generalizing, but it seems the way it is going.. more GIMME!   think quad-quad-core cluster setup  

Abit IS7 - P4E3.0@3.45- i865PE - 1024mb dual ddr400 - Leadtek 6800 128mb@380/800 - 600W dualfan(front/rear) PowerTek Psu - maxtor 4K080H4 & 6Y120P0 - samsung sm-352b

You're right, but that's still a very, very long way off! That won't happen overnight and that most certainly won't be the case in a year from now. It will be the case some 2-3 years from now, maybe. Within the next 5 years, to be sure...

Programmers are lazy. Multithreading requires a lot of effort. You do the math. Benefits will appear only very, very gradually...

I agree with you, but wouldn't that also leave a us with a "performance vacuum" since the actual software support lacks? I love the idea of multi cpu-dies.. I am sure the "GIMME" pictures would make remarkable marketing material  

Abit IS7 - P4E3.0@3.45- i865PE - 1024mb dual ddr400 - Leadtek 6800 128mb@380/800 - 600W dualfan(front/rear) PowerTek Psu - maxtor 4K080H4 & 6Y120P0 - samsung sm-352b

Absolutely. After all, hey, the single-threaded market hasn't seen that big performance increases overall at all, if you compare to previous times? Will single-threaded performance actually stall? I don't think so, but if you think dual-core too hard, it might...

...as an example, I've got a dual P3 933Mhz, but I sometimes wish I had a single, faster processor with better overall features, i.e. better memory system, and so on.... It wasn't worth the added cash. Less than, say, one in ten of all programs (and that's being optimistic) I ever used were actually aware that 2 CPUs were in play... If I had executed the other 9 of 10 faster, I wouldn't mind going a little slower through the multi-cpu-aware programs.....

And that brings another very important issue: an US$800-850 CPU that is dual core will probably not change anything by a big amount. But the moment there is a dual-core CPU for like US$200-300, and each core <i>isn't</i> at 1Ghz, <i>then</i> you can count me in!

Hey now, programmers aren't lazy  , usually it's the project managers who make you aim for the lowest common denominator/buzzword compliance. When dual core becomes the latest buzzword to be compliant with, then the project managers will direct development accordingly. Half of them won't have any idea what dualcore is, but they'll demand support for it nonetheless.  

<i>Dual Opteron 248s, 5900nu, 4gig ram, dual 36gb raptor, 80gb hd, 550w Enermax, Suse64 9.1, and a bunch of other crap.</i>

WOw, i finally understand duel core proc's,I may get one, but i cnat waint till H2 2005, i been wanting a new comp for 14 months, and i still have 3 months before i actually buy anything..

ASUS 440BX P3B-F, Intel P3 @ 553Mhz, 128Mb Pc133 Ram, nVidia Gefore 256, IBM 20gig HD, Creative Sound Blaster Live,Lg Cd-Burner, Creative 52x Cd Drive, Microsoft Windows XP Pro/2000 Pro Duel Boot

- Would be fine with the single-core CPUs. Will have components available to assemble a powerful system at a good price.

- AMD targeting FX at least partially to overclockers - fully unlocked. Adding dual-core to FX appears to be making a statement about heat dissipation.

I remember reading an article about multi-core future and it mentioned something about the ability to simultaneously run multiple operating systems on a single computer. Edit: <A HREF="http://www.crmbuyer.com/story/Intel-Chief-Outlines-Mult..." target="_new">Here it is</A> if it would be an attractive feature to someone.

I like the directx idea, but lets take it another step. Amd, or intel could set up some form of simd extensions, that could be coded for, and divide the workload between say AI and physics , or something like that. Then, directx could make use of it, and even in games that were not optimized, directx could still do some setup, much like directx 6 and 3Dnow.