Log in

View Full Version : Quad-cores demo this year???


NeoGen
02-03-2006, 04:09 AM
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20060126111118.html

I'm stunned... :shock:
Brucifer
02-03-2006, 05:00 AM
You can bet that they will be pricey devils...
gamer007
02-03-2006, 06:03 AM
Wow.... Imagine running different DC projects at once. *drool* Those cpus will cost not only an arm and a leg, maybe both arms/legs.

I could be playing a game and crunching on 3 projects at once.
Majestic-12
02-03-2006, 12:43 PM
They'd better hurry up before we crawl the whole of the Web :)

I don't think they will be that expensive, certainly not after 6 months after release - the thing about CPUs is that they hit limit in terms of frequency so the only way to improve performance is to have more cores - its simpler to do as well. Given that manufacturing processes improve and that AMD manages to sell dual core x2 3800 at 90nm for cheap price (211 GBP here in the UK now), it follows that the price for quad cores should not be more than 100% higher.

Most likely dual cores will be relegated to current single cores cheap prices and quad cores will be charged premium similarly like dual cores now :)
AMD-USR_JL
02-03-2006, 09:27 PM
I thought they already had quad-core servers etleast.
Isn't </u>this (http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=478307)</u> one?
mitro
02-03-2006, 09:31 PM
I thought they already had quad-core servers etleast.
Isn't </u>this (http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=478307)</u> one?
No that is a computer with two seperate dual-core cpus. The quad cores will have 4 cores (duh!) on one physical CPU.
NeoGen
02-03-2006, 09:43 PM
So that's a dual-dual machine... :lol:

Would be about the same performance as a quad though... :roll:
NeoGen
02-04-2006, 12:49 PM
Say... isn't there a hard limit on the number of cpu's that Windows XP will support? Given that multiple cores are identified as multiple cpu's, I wonder if quad-cores will force us to go over to server OS'es... :?
Majestic-12
02-04-2006, 03:02 PM
Say... isn't there a hard limit on the number of cpu's that Windows XP will support?

Microsoft has got good stance on multi-cores - they consider them as one CPU for licensing purposes, not sure its implemented in XP, but it will certainly be in Vista :)
Brucifer
02-04-2006, 04:22 PM
Microsoft has got good stance on multi-cores - they consider them as one CPU for licensing purposes, not sure its implemented in XP, but it will certainly be in Vista :)

Yeah..... anything to try and force the people to move to the next O/S
NeoGen
02-04-2006, 06:51 PM
This page isn't exactly about it, but does point out what I was looking for.

Scroll a little down to the "Physical memory and CPU limits" table
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/889654

It says that Windows XP supports 1-2 CPUs. So to take full advantage of a quad-core I would have to change to Windows Server 2003?
Majestic-12
02-05-2006, 03:14 PM
It says that Windows XP supports 1-2 CPUs. So to take full advantage of a quad-core I would have to change to Windows Server 2003?

Most likely Microsoft would want people to upgrade to Vista - I doubt we will see affordable desktop quad cores before 2007 and this will give just enough time for Microsoft to release Vista.

Have to say that using a dual core PC rocks :)
Brucifer
02-05-2006, 04:05 PM
This page isn't exactly about it, but does point out what I was looking for.

Scroll a little down to the "Physical memory and CPU limits" table
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/889654

It says that Windows XP supports 1-2 CPUs. So to take full advantage of a quad-core I would have to change to Windows Server 2003?


That would make one pricey box, as win server isn't cheap. Then add the cost of the 4-core to it and voila!!! Instant poor house!!! :) So I'll be running Linux on them. :)