An exclusive gaming industry community targeted
to, and designed for Professionals, Businesses
and Students in the sectors and industries
of Gaming, New Media and the Web, all closely
related with it's Business and Industry.
A Rich content driven service including articles,
contributed discussion, news, reviews, networking, downloads,
and debate.
We strive to cater for cultural influencers,
technology decision makers, early adopters and business leaders in the gaming industry.
A medium to share your or contribute your ideas,
experiences, questions and point of view or network
with other colleagues here at iVirtua Community.
I know there isn't much info on these chips, but if anybody can add a factual link about this Dual Core CPU's, then that would be of great help to learn more.
I do know for a Fact that AMD's Athlon 64's were designed for Dual Core Technology in mind back in 1999. This is why they integrated the Memory Controller. But the best thing AMD is did with there CPU's is have 3 high speed HTT links. This is how the two CPU's are going to communicate. The Cool thing here is that the these HTT links are not going to be 1GHz in speed, but rather the same speed as the CPU core clock speed which can be anywhere from 2.40GHz to 3.0GHz. That is amazingly fast Point to Point links I'll say.
The 2 High Speed 2MB L2 cache & 256MB L1 Cache is also an addition to a phenomenal Dual Core 64-Bit design.
Dual Core Technology will increase performance 70% to 300% with slower clock CPU's, but in order for this to happen, games, programs & software have to be designed for multithreading.
If not then Dual Core will be slow. Just like Intel's Hyper Threading, when turned on, it decreases performance.
AMD's Dual Core CPU's will have 3 Hyper Transport Links connecting the two CPU's running at CPU core frequency.
Right now AMD's single 64-Bit CPU's use 1 HTT link @ 800MHz(1600MHz) to 1000MHz(2000MHz) DDR @ 16-Bit for a total of 14.4 GB/s total delivered processor-to-system bandwidth.
What we don't realize is that this technology is amazing, because AMD probably has already enhanced there HTT Link Width to 32-Bit for a Data Throughput of Up to 22.4 Gigabytes/sec. for there near future 64-Bit CPU's.
If one link can give us 14.4GB/s to 22.4GB/s, total delivered processor-to-system bandwidth, then can you imagine how much 3 or 4 links can give us?
Intel CPU's still suffer due to the limited bandwidth of there age old Net Burst Architecture. By the time Intel releases a completely new architecture in maybe 2007/8, AMD CPU's will always be hungry for Competition.
Last edited by Super XP on Thu Jan 20, 2005 6:35 am; edited 1 time in total
Have you ever noticed that people switch over to AMD more often then Intel?
Think about it. When is the last time you heard some one say \"my AMD 64 sucks I?m switching over to Intel\"? Never.
But how often do we hear \"my Intel sucks I?m switching over to AMD 64\"?
At least 3 or 4 times a month right?
In fact I have at this time in the last 2 weeks heard 9 people say there Intel sucks & that they are switching to AMD.
Don?t say much about how Intel is keeping there people happy.
I now hear people in the work place saying there servers have switched over to AMD. I have a friend that is a systems administrator for NACVA. The place that makes high end business software and applications. He was having problems with system stability with his 6 Intel Based Servers. He talked them into moving to a full AMD Based System and there happier than ever now.
Once again it doesn?t say much more about Intel.
Personally I have never once heard an individual say he hates his AMD based system, but not a day goes by I hear some one complaining about Intel. Lol
I find this interesting that a guy like Sean B can?t see this.
Lets face it people Intel is not the top dog any more.
I dont want to post in it i was just making a point. These forums are turning into tool for spreading AMD propaganda. Most threads are turning into totaly one sided affairs and as soon as someone mentions Intel you all pounce like a pack of dogs repeating the same bollocks you hear everywhere else.
Everyone knows AMD have the upper hand for this generation of processors, i dont want to hear it in every single f**kin thread. Some of you are already putting down intels dual cores even before it released, how the f**k can you make judgement before any benches have been run? and a decent comparison has been made?
Im not liking this fanboy culture at all.
Dave.
David has a VERY good point. Though I favor AMD and so do about 99% of people on these forums, there is no need to make the point evident over and over. I opened the AMD Dual Core thread so go in and flame AMD if you like. I have no problem with flaming companies, just don't flame each other. You like AMD, good! You like Intel, good! Please get along.
Contributed by Predator, Guest 510 iVirtua Loyalty Points • • • Back to Top
I am not blaming you. I am not blaming anyone. I am just saying. Go ahead Flame AMD, flame Intel. But DO NOT flame each other. That includes David also. Also, all AMD \"fans\", I know it's hard, but try not to gang up on people who support Intel. That is all I'm asking.
2 Things You Can Do in a Situation Like this:
Quote:
Treat each other with respect. DO NOT engage in flame wars. If you see a fight coming up, use the *Report* option to let a moderator or administrator know.
This wasn't really a flame war, but I am trying to stop it before it becomes one.
Contributed by Predator, Guest 510 iVirtua Loyalty Points • • • Back to Top
Digg Topic
Tag topic on On del.icio.us
Technorati Search
Post to Slashdot
