View Full Version : Intel Unleashes Pentium D

29-05-2005, 08:09 AM
Read about it on Tech News World (http://www.technewsworld.com/story/43435.html)

Another article you may find interesting: Next Generation DVDs (http://www.technewsworld.com/story/43436.html)

Murray P
29-05-2005, 01:29 PM
Still gets spanked by AMD single core chips in most benchmarks.

30-05-2005, 12:48 AM
Yes but you just can't compare a single-core cpu to a multi-core one with benchmarks. A slower dual core cpu will still have a massive advantage when running multiple applications at once, whereas a faster single core cpu will have the advantage running a single task.

Whether dual core is right for you depends on how you use your computer. Personally I reckon dual core is the most significant event in CPU development for a long time, and can't wait to get my hands on one. But I won't be buying a Pentium D, they run too hot and I like my computer Cool 'n Quiet. Plus AMDs implementation is technically superior.

Murray P
30-05-2005, 08:46 AM
But they have compared them, and by and large the single cores come out on top.

Whether it's a useful comparisom for everyday use may be doubtful, the app's that take advantage of the dual cores aren't that useful in a single user, non-server environment. The multi-cores have not being built specifically for desktop use at this point in time.

30-05-2005, 08:54 AM
But they have compared them, and by and large the single cores come out on top.

FWIW ~ From the PC Pro web site:
Beyond Hyper-Threading
Despite Intel's enthusiasm, Hyper-Threading - where a single-core processor allows two threads to share execution resources simultaneously - has been only a qualified success. The problem for developers has been the relatively opaque low-level mechanisms by which the CPU handles threaded code. It's difficult to determine, ahead of time, if the performance boost will be worth the effort or if resource contention will hamstring the process. Dual core changes the landscape. Developers can look at their code at the algorithmic level, determine which operations can usefully be executed in parallel and get a very good idea of the benefits before they start coding. Since dual-core processors are basically two completely separate CPUs in one physical package, you can be practically guaranteed that two independent operations taking ten seconds each will take ten seconds on a dual-core design but 20 seconds on a single core. True dual core is a performance no-brainer, so long as the application in question is algorithmically suited to multithreading (see The pitfalls of multithreading). Read more here (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/73255/analysis-dual-core-technology.html)

30-05-2005, 09:07 AM
Still gets spanked by AMD single core chips in most benchmarks.

From TechWhack News:
What the market would be looking for is a rebound by the AMD. They would have to take drastic steps to stay alive in the market. Now with Intel taking the price advantage, there are few options available for them. They however have normally excelled at providing excellent speeds at economical packages. If they can price their Dual Core processors cheaper than Pentium D, it would be a win-win situation for the end consumer! The company is expected to launch their desktop range of Dual Core processors quite soon. more here (http://news.techwhack.com/)

Murray P
30-05-2005, 10:08 AM
I still stand by what I say. How many app's and drivers for everyday desktop use are optimised for dual core at this point in time?

The benchmarks I have seen show the dual core Pentium D running behind both AMD and Intel single core prosessors, in some instances by significant margins. The no brainer at the moment is, if you have a 1200mHZ/core dual core processor that is, say, running a single threaded game, it's going to run it slower than a single core 3200mHZ processor. 2x2400 or 2800 does not make 4800 or 5600 in real terms.

You might start seeing some adavantages if you can type your CV and play the game at the same time or maybe processing two AV files at once, if you have the RAM.

They are not price competitive, yet, for everyday use, especially when you considerer the the cost of a motherboard on top of the CPU.

01-06-2005, 08:26 AM
AMD launches dual-core Athlon 64 X2

Excerpt from Computer World below. Read full story here (http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/hardware/story/0,10801,102135,00.html)

So now that they're here, are dual-core chips for everyone?

That depends, said Rob Enderle, an analyst at San Jose-based Enderle Group, who attended the AMD event. Users who recently bought a machine don't need rush into replacing it with a dual-core model. However, he said, users just now replacing their hardware might consider the dual-code chip, especially given the typical three-year life span for a desktop PC.

The reason: The new chips will deliver even greater performance gains when used with a 64-bit operating system. Microsoft just launched such a version of Windows, but it isn't easy to obtain for the average user, and there are still many issues associated with drivers for peripherals.

"If you want a machine that's ready for Longhorn, that's when it comes into play," Enderle said.