Intel Launches Dual-Core Chips for PCs

[js33]

Yea!. The dual-core revolution has begun. Now on to quad-core. :thumbsup:

Cheers,
JS

[mummey]

Its all hype until there's software that actually takes advantage of this.

[retinajoy]

Its all hype until there's software that actually takes advantage of this.

Lightwave and Cinema4D do, of what I know of. :)

[harmonic01]

Its all hype until there's software that actually takes advantage of this.

Even if software doesn't support it yet, you'll still be able to run 2 applications at once more efficiently. Like say a 3D application and a compositing one. According to what they say, anyways.

[<Pino>]

http://www.intel.com/personal/desktop/pentium_d/index.htm?iid=HPAGE+low_news_050526a&

[mummey]

Lightwave and Cinema4D do, of what I know of. :)

Both probably are specific to the CPU's. I doubt the support is native. It will have to be added once the processors are released.

Even if software doesn't support it yet, you'll still be able to run 2 applications at once more efficiently. Like say a 3D application and a compositing one. According to what they say, anyways.

I choose not to believe the hype. I'll believe it once there are benchmarks out or when Thalaxis can prove me otherwise. ;)

[KayosIII]

How exactly does Dual Core rigg Differ from a Dual processor rigg in realworld performance terms.

[hypercube]

Really anything that threads properly should be taking advantage of it..they've already been steering people this way with XP and the HT stuff on the last gen of Pentiums..it should just behave similarly, but there'll be two real processors per chip instead of the 'virtual' ones there are now..my dual has 4 'processors' as it is and nothing seems to mind, just have to set affinity on some things that don't thread properly. Either way, can't wait. Though I don't know if I want first gen motherboards on any of this, duals are finicky enough already.

[opus13]

Its all hype until there's software that actually takes advantage of this.

you mean like...

photoshop
xsi
maya
3ds max
cinema 4d
houdini
mental ray
renderman
avid
pinnacle
soundforge
TMPSenc
Quake III+derivitives
matlab
digital fusion
premiere
ansys
flask MPEG
visual c++
acrobat
nuendo
realfow
lightwave
sonar
windows media encoder
neat image pro
autocad
after effects
...

yeah, youre right. that multithreaded crap just doesnt exists these days. in fact, it'll probably never catch on.:rolleyes:

Both probably are specific to the CPU's. I doubt the support is native. It will have to be added once the processors are released.
I choose not to believe the hype. I'll believe it once there are benchmarks out or when Thalaxis can prove me otherwise. ;)

you really, really need to do at least the most insiginificant bit of research before you post... you might actually appear to be informed.

[rayk]

Great news indeed!

Now we just need AMD 939 socket dual core's to come out!

[dmonk]

I actually think this is a good thing! I know my software will take advantage and by the time I need to upgrade my rig i'm sure there will be vast improvements with multi-core processors.

[BRUTICUS]

so should we start using Pentiums again?

I was going to go AMD.

[Goon]

Here's some heresay I don't feel like double checking: I've heard the Intel had to lower the clock speed on their dual cores because of heat issues, so if you a get a 3.2 dual core, each core might not be a full 3.2. Or, was it simply that they aren't able to push the dual cores into the higher ranges, like dual core 3.8s?

Personally, I haven't really seen intel do much innovation in a bit. Am I wrong here? Their 64bit technology is licensed from AMD, and they've taken two years to get from 3.0 to 3.8ghz and can't even get to 4.0ghz. I'm sure its a nightmare getting dual cores to work, but they better have something up their sleeves cause the p4 line seems to have run its course.

[NUKE-CG]

Hardware sites and industry experts seem to be giving AMD the thumbs up, and heavily recommending people go with AMD workstations over Intel.

Benchmark results seem to agree.

[Thalaxis]

Both probably are specific to the CPU's. I doubt the support is native. It will have to be added once the processors are released.


Anything multithreaded will be able to use multiple cores.


How exactly does Dual Core rigg Differ from a Dual processor rigg in realworld performance terms.

With Intel's architecture, one dual core costs less than a pair of single cores will. For the P4,
that's really about the only difference.

AMD's approach has a dedicated crossbar for the two processors to use to exchange
data with each other, so it scales better as you add processors up to four sockets.

Goon,
You're right about heat... AMD's dual-core processors are also clocked lower than their
single-core parts for the same reason.

Nuke-cg,
See my response to kayos above :)

[ngrava]

Hardware sites and industry experts seem to be giving AMD the thumbs up, and heavily recommending people go with AMD workstations over Intel.

Benchmark results seem to agree.

AMD has there dual core chips right around the corner. Intel is just the first to market at this point. Like it's already been said, if your app is multithreaded, it's the OS's job to send them out to the CPU's in the most efficient manner. Most software now a days is multithreaded. Proper thread handling was an issue back when NT first came out but most apps have ironed this out by now.

Personally, I'm waiting for dual core Opteron's so I can stick them in a quad slot motherboard and have the power of eight chips. He he. ;)

-=GB=-

[PixelVampire]

Personally, I'm waiting for dual core Opteron's so I can stick them in a quad slot motherboard and have the power of eight chips. He he. ;)

-=GB=-

Can I please come and visit you in heaven? I will have to aim for hell and get 2 x dual core opteron's instead :-)

[Thalaxis]

AMD has there dual core chips right around the corner. Intel is just the first to market at this point.

The dual-core Opterons are actually shipping, I think -- http://www.boxxtech.com/products/7400.asp

Intel has the dual-core desktop product, AMD has the dual-cover server/workstation
product, at present. By the end of the year, they'll both have both, but most likely AMD
won't have any low-cost dual-core models for another year or so -- basically, not until they
get more production capacity.

[mummey]

To all those who decided to troll on my post (not counting Thalaxis because he actually gave INFO to back his opinion up.):

Specifically I was considering the difference between dual-processors and dual-core processors. Depending on how Intel decides to implement their dual-core technology, I might be MUCH better off using dual-processors rather than dual-core processors. Things like the number of caches that will be on these dual-core processors make me wonder if I would be better off just using two normal processors rather than one dual-core.

The information in the article doean't explain one way or another and I suspect I won't get any true answers until there's benchmarks comparing the P "D" and the P4.

I know many of you salivate and the opportunity to flame one of my posts but c'mon, GROW UP! ;)

[Dimos]

Does anyone knows if it will be possible to assign i.e. a rendering task to one core and play a game using the other? I would like to know also if that is possible with dual processor setups. Thanks

[mummey]

In both cases, that's the idea.

[Dimos]

Thanks for replying. To the example I wrote above, are there any perfomance differences when the game runs on a single core cpu compared to run on one core of a dual core cpu (all cores of the same frequency)? What about single/dual cpu setups? In general, are there any memory management or other conflicts that affect the real-time perfomance of the game?

[mummey]

Thanks for replying. To the example I wrote above, are there any perfomance differences if the game runs on a single core cpu or if it runs on the one core of a dual core cpu? What about single/dual cpu setups? In general, are there any memory management or other conflicts tha affect the real-time perfomance of the game?

That is what is not clear about dual-core cpu's. They could be two entire cpu's on one wafer OR they could be two partial cpu's that share components such as L2 cache. I'm not sure what the "Pentium D" will contain.

[richcz3]

Has anyone read that owners of 939 pin motherboards that use FX or Opteron CPU's will be able to upgrade to Dual Core FX/Opteron. I've read something similar to that a few months back but can't find any links now.

--
EDIT

For starters, the Athlon 64 X2 is already supported by nearly every 939-pin motherboard already on the market. We are told that most 939-pin motherboards will only need a simple BIOS flash to make the AMD Athlon 64 X2 compatible. We are currently running our Athlon 64 X2 on a production ASUS A8N-SLI motherboard with nothing more than a BETA bios. So many of us will see an upgrade to dual core with little more than the purchase of a processor.
"Combine the overall AMD Athlon 64 X2 mega-multitasking-performance with its subtly increased power needs and its compatibility with current 939-pin Athlon 64 motherboards and AMD has what amounts to a silicon homerun with the bases loaded."

--

If you already own an Athlon 64, AMD made the upgrade path to the Athlon X2 very easy. Most existing socket 939 motherboards that support the Athlon 64 should support the Athlon X2. AMD claims that the vast majority of motherboards will be able to run Athlon X2s with nothing more than a BIOS update. Be sure to check your power supply though, as AMD recommends the use of a 550W power supply for use with the Athlon X2.

See Links
LINK1 (http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzY2LDU=) LINK2 (http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-ST-17478-1945-x-x-x)

[tAstyBITs]

Yes you can upgrade a opteron single core to a dual core, np. just check out amd's web sight if you need more varification.


This is a good sight to find more info about general dual core set ups.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/

[Thalaxis]

That is what is not clear about dual-core cpu's. They could be two entire cpu's on one wafer OR they could be two partial cpu's that share components such as L2 cache. I'm not sure what the "Pentium D" will contain.

Intel and AMD have released tech data to answer that one, in both cases it's the former,
two entire CPU's. The P4's share the external memory bus just like dual processors in SMP,
the Opterons (and soon the Athlon64 duals) share only the on-die memory controller.

Dimos,
What you're talking about is processor affinity... but if you restrict your renderer to use only
one thread, it won't use the second core anyway, and the same holds for the game.

Richcz3,
The answer is yes for AMD, though it's likely to need a bios update... though you and
tAsty already beat me to that one :)

Since AMD used an on-die memory controller and crossbar for the external interface, they
didn't have to change the signaling and therefore the socket to support a second core.

[novadude]

Most of the newer AMD boards are dual core capable, but some of the older Opteron boards and s939 boards won't be.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.