Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD's Dual-core Athlon 64 X2 reviewed

Hemos posted more than 9 years ago | from the lots-of-reviews dept.

AMD 309

ChocolateJesus writes "Weeks after formally announcing its dual-core Athlon X2 desktop processor, reviews are finally trickling out. The Tech Report's coverage tests two flavors of the Athlon 64 X2 against a whopping 17 competitors, including AMD and Intel's fastest single- and dual-core offerings. They've even thrown in a handful of dual-processor systems (and dual-core, dual-processor systems) for good measure. Testing focuses on multi-threaded applications, and the X2s deliver remarkable performance. Perhaps even more impressive is the fact that unlike Intel's dual-core Pentiums, AMD's X2s consume no more power than single-core chips." Looks like this story has come out of embargo - if you've find more reviews, post them in comments.

cancel ×

309 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Frist psot (-1, Offtopic)

jsrlepage (696948) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477135)

Dual-core? I want two of that on my SK8N Biprocessor motherboard please!

FP for Annette (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477140)

:-)

I fail it. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477176)

I'm sorry, Annette. :-(

Re:I fail it. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477391)

So am I...

Re:FP for Annette (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477489)

Jus ask the girl out! How hard is that?

Cooling (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477148)

I don't get how this can run on the same power level as the single core chips. Can someone explain on how this is possible?

Re:Cooling (5, Informative)

masklinn (823351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477242)

Specific design and use of a modified version of the most recent AMD core (Venice). Venice's consumption is much lower than it's parent (Winchester core), check the graphs, Dual Cores' power consumption is a bit higher than the 3800+ Venice processor.

On top of that, A64 platforms are known for their low power consumption compared to Netburst based processors.

Re:Cooling (4, Funny)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477250)

Easy. Multi-threaded electricity.

Re:Cooling (5, Informative)

Kobun (668169) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477254)

Over at Anandtech, they have a similar article up.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx? i=2410&p=2 [anandtech.com]

On that page they compare a 130nm single core Athlon to a 90nm dual core. Even under a full load, the 90nm dual core uses less power than the single core 130nm chip.

Cooler than the old AMD 130nm designs and Intel (4, Informative)

Brian Stretch (5304) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477283)

Sayeth Anandtech [anandtech.com] : ...the Athlon 64 X2 will consume less power than a 130nm Athlon 64, and less than 20% more power than a 90nm Athlon 64. Note that the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ compared here also consumes less power than all single core 90nm Intel Pentium 4 CPUs, even the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ consumes less power than all single core 90nm Pentium 4 CPUs.

Re:Cooling (1)

moz25 (262020) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477290)

Well, if you design them to use less power overall and make use of the fact that they're on the same chip then it'll roughly be about the same power level. Also keep in mind that a slower-running (or idle) CPU will consume less too. In actual use, both processors probably won't be running at their full speed anyway. Such techniques are already common for mobile chips so they can improve battery life.

Re:Cooling (2, Informative)

Xoro (201854) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477318)

I don't get how this can run on the same power level as the single core chips. Can someone explain on how this is possible?

It isn't.

Under load, the dual core system consumes about 25 watts more power than the single (178 watts vs. 154) -- and 25 watts is just less than what a single-core A64 consumes under load.

I think the poster was looking at the numbers for idling.

Re:Cooling (1)

Zemplar (764598) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477347)

Nanotechnology and further advances in chip design resulting in more efficient transistors and better interconnects.

Re:Cooling (0, Redundant)

Three Headed Man (765841) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477375)

I don't get how Transmeta chips use so much less electricity than single core chips.

gee (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477151)

They've even thrown in a handful of dual-processor systems


Bet those systems are pretty fucked now!

-SJ53

Me too (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477153)

Me too

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477154)

big deal!

Mmm.... dual core. (-1, Offtopic)

millennial (830897) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477157)

Sounds like a new and improved type of pr0n to me. Core-on-core action! Faster and better than a single core at handling multiple "THREADS" at one time! unf.

Re:Mmm.... dual core. (4, Funny)

maharg (182366) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477206)

forget longer pipelines, it's girth that really counts

Re:Mmm.... dual core. (1)

fbody98 (881072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477400)

Is that why I keep getting SPAM trying to sell me and Ultra-Fast Wide pipeline?

Re:Mmm.... dual core. (1)

millennial (830897) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477452)

Your spam is selling you ultra-fast pipelines? Wow. Mine tries to sell me "pipelines that are slower so they last longer."

Anand's Take (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477164)

Here's Anandtech's review of the X2 [anandtech.com] .

Re:Anand's Take (1)

Zocalo (252965) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477300)

Trusted Reviews has its review [theregister.co.uk] up to, also being mirrored by The Register [theregister.co.uk] .

Re:Anand's Take (1)

Zocalo (252965) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477502)

Oops. Pasted the wrong link for Trusted Reviews; the correct direct link is here [trustedreviews.com] , and here's a link to Bit tech's review [bit-tech.net] with a photo of the chip in question with its cover off, for those who get excited by such things... :)

What's that burnt intel smell? (2, Interesting)

MaceyHW (832021) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477169)

will they be able to outmarket AMD again?

whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477180)

whitebox linux on a dual core opteron box would rock, heck, any 64 bit linux distro should. AMD is now a market leader. Where does this leave Intel? Could this ever happen to Bill Gates and Microsoft?

MOD up please.

I am not a troll, perhaps a bit off topic, but this is good news.


Seems the owner of the whiteboxlinux.net [whiteboxlinux.net] and whiteboxlinux.com [whiteboxlinux.com] domains has decided to offer them on ebay [ebay.com] as a peace offering between wbel and himself.

This is really great news so lets hope someone with WBEL enthusiasm steps up to build a respectable community site.

Re:whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477236)

how in the world is this off topic? parts of it may be off topic, but this is slashdot is it not?

Re:whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (1, Troll)

masklinn (823351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477292)

Crappy ad for a crappy distro by a crappy AC in a thread about processors sounds as off topic as one can get, even for /. standards

Re:whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477349)

the poster had a valid point about AMD market leadership though?

Re:whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (1)

masklinn (823351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477379)

Yes, a point that's been valid ever since last year.
Doesn't make his post less offtopic

Re:whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477316)

Hmm.. maybe because you're a spamming piece of shit?

Re:whitebox linux on dual core Opterons (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477280)

This is the guy who's selling the domain trying to get more money for it. He's even put an anti-Intel/MS comment in there in a vain attempt to get his post modded up.

Keep this spamming fuck at -1, and certainly don't bid for his domain.

Redsigning your applications. (0, Redundant)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477186)

What a lot of people dont realize (Including a lot of programmers). That a lot of applications are not multithreaded. Thus wont get the speed advantage of the Duel-Core processor. You will probably get some boost because the OS wont get in the way of your program but it wont be twice as fast untill you modify your program to run for a duel-core. As well many of these changes are more then just a recompile with a newer compiler. It take a redign of your thinking to make duel-core processing to work. But maybe on the plus side more colleges will teach parallel processing.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (5, Funny)

mattmentecky (799199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477238)

That a lot of applications are not multithreaded. Thus wont get the speed advantage of the Duel-Core processor.

Thats because the two cores are too busy fighting.

PvP in core design (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477531)

ROFL. Nice one, and well moderated.

The sad thing though that there is a whole generation of gaming kids growing up thinking that dual is spelled duel.

I bet there's even a few who think that dual cores are specifically made to speed up dueling ... not many, I hope.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (5, Funny)

UrgleHoth (50415) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477548)

Let me guess, if one gets hurt, is it only a flash wound?

Re:Redsigning your applications. (1)

Enigma_Man (756516) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477240)

My spelling and grammer combined with the fact that I have college degree, proves a problem with the educaion system.

duel-core

Wow, couldn't have reinforced that point any better. These cores don't fight eachother, there are just two of them (duel/dual).

-Jesse

Re:Redsigning your applications. (2, Insightful)

BigGerman (541312) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477247)

it does not have to be the same application. I have seen the environments where the business users are crippled because they have over-agressive anti-virus running in the background. Their apps would fly with a dual-core (or even hyperthreading).

Re:Redsigning your applications. (2, Informative)

mellon (7048) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477333)

A lot of the CPU burn with AV software involves doing I/O or scanning memory, neither of which are speeded by a dual-core processor. So you might get some speedup from this, but it won't be the difference between sluggish and speedy - it'll be sluggish versus less sluggish.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (4, Funny)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477255)

What a lot of people dont realize (Including a lot of programmers). That a lot of applications are not multithreaded. Thus wont get the speed advantage of the Duel-Core processor.

Correct. Instead of executing the code in parallel, both cores will fight to the death for the privilege. Since only one core survives, you don't really get much benefit from duel-core processors.

Highlander! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477420)

There can only be one core!

Parent is a troll. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477267)

Don't moderate that crap up, please? For dual-core to not matter, you'd have to run a "OS" which only ran one task at a time (basically "DOS"). The OP is making a poor strawman argument in his spelling-troll.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (0, Redundant)

Xarius (691264) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477297)

Duel-core? Am I to expect my processes to start fighting amongst themselves?!

It's about the interactivity (5, Informative)

tinrobot (314936) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477313)

A dual CPU machine provides such a smooth operating environemnt. Never hiccups or pauses. I'm hooked on them. I hope dual core provides the same interactivity.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (5, Informative)

masklinn (823351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477345)

What a lot of people dont realize (Including a lot of programmers). That a lot of applications are not multithreaded. Thus wont get the speed advantage of the Duel-Core processor.
And what YOU don't realize (including... duh... yourself?) is that running two or more applications at the same time will make use of dual core system, even if the apps themselves are single threaded (which is mostly true for games, quite a lot of desktop apps are at least a bit multithreaded).
And a singlethreaded badly written application will be less prone to lock your computer, too, since the other apps will still be able to run from the second core.

The main issue is not the multithreading abilities of the applications, but the multithreading abilities of the OS itself. If the OS handles multithreading well, multicore (physical or virtual) will always give a slight to impressive improvement over single core.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477346)

It's not always about speed. X for example used to feel very slow compared to windows on my pc, even though obviously it was much faster, just because of sluggish mouse response and such. It 'felt' slow. Dual-core can help a lot in responsiveness. I prefer everything going 25% slower but never having to stop, to just sitting there staring at a screen (I hate the way programs are installed under windows, if the install is going to be long, make it a background task!).

Re:Redsigning your applications. (1)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477348)

Any programmer that doesn't understand what multithreading is isn't a very good programmer.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (1)

smackjer (697558) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477516)

And any programmer that doesn't understand what multithreading is, but tries to do it anyway, is a very very BAD programmer -- and generally much worse than a programmer who avoid MT altogether.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477539)

That's true, but your average business programmer will be using a "container" application like J2EE or IIS/COM+ where the threading is handled for them like magic.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (1)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477555)

Oh I agree, I avoid multithreading because its a bit beyond me, but the concept of multithreading isn't difficult to grasp. Any programmer that doesn't understand it and its relevance to dual core/CPU computers shouldn't really call himself a programmer.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (0)

segmond (34052) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477392)

Any one who doesn't understand that non threaded programs will have the same performance under multi cpu system is not worthy to be called a programmer.

Your post tho is written as if all applications need to be multi-threaded for a dual core to be useful. Not exactly so. A system executing two different programs on each CPU instead of on one CPU will definitely bring performance increase.

Dual CPU systems tho are useless to the home users, it's for businesses and scientists with more computing need. Real enterprise applications are multithreated.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (5, Interesting)

Xoro (201854) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477550)

Dual CPU systems tho are useless to the home users, it's for businesses and scientists with more computing need. Real enterprise applications are multithreated.

Not so!

I was one of the lucky people buy a cheap dual Celeron setup right after that hack was first discovered and I can tell you that multiprocessors on the desktop rock. My old system was a dual Celeron 400, and while it couldn't compete with a modern system in terms of benchmark speed, it had my current 1400 MHz Celeron system beat bloody when it comes to interactivity and responsiveness -- that elusive "feel".

The price is steep now, but don't let arguments about application benchmarks dissuade you from trying out multicore when prices go down. The Anandtech review cited about has some really telling benchmarks about how well a dual system performs when loaded down with multiple tasks.

Unlike the unnoticeable 200 or 400 MHz incremental bumps you usually see with processors, dual core really brings something of value to the desktop user. Try it and you'll see.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477416)

Also on the plus side maybe with a 'duel-core' you will have enough spare CPU cycles to run your posts through a fucking spellchecker.

P.S. Going to college does not automatically make you educated. You actually have to put effort in for that, but I guess it is alot more comforting to shove the responsibility on to someone else.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (1)

robnauta (716284) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477438)

If you use Windows, open the task manager and go to the 'processes' tab. Choose View - select columns and tick the 'threads' column.
You'll see that almost all running processes use threads. Only the tiniest systray apps may be singlethreaded. Apps like Internet Explorer use dozens of threads, and will render a page with many jpg's or flash applets faster than a comparable single CPU/single core system.

The 'not many apps use threads' myth keeps on being spread, but anyone can see for himself just how many apps use threads.

Re:Redsigning your applications. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477558)

Yeah, but MS has been pushing threaded programming since OS/2 back in the 80s. Whereas the Unix world seems to have just discovered it a couple years ago, so a Linux desktop will have a lot more monolithic processes ("Threads are for people who can't program state machines." harhar.)

Re:Redsigning your applications. (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477455)

What you don't understand is that hyperthreading, dual core & dual processing is good for multi tasking. Some people actually run more than one app or service at a time, and the computer will be more responsive. It looks like AMD has no wattage penalty for this, which is good.

If readers didn't get the above replies, duel and dual are two very different words. Dual is a word used for "two", duel is a word for a fight.

I think it is a chicken and egg thing, developers of performance intensive software will try to optimize for multicore if there is demand for it.

Check out Linux (2, Informative)

Nailer (69468) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477535)

ps -eLFwww

A lot more common apps are multithreaded than people think. Nautilus, Firefox, OpenOffice, Gnome Terminal, and, um Gnome Weather Applet are all mutithreaded.

Even if no apps on your system are multithreaded, if you're like the 99% of users who run multiple processes simultaneously, you'll still get an advantage. Your updating app runs on one core while your desktop runs on another, for example.

I'll wait for the next version... (5, Funny)

Eagle5596 (575899) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477196)

While the AMD 64 X2 Dualcore is impressive, I am still waiting for the AMD 69 XXX Hardcore myself.

Sorry, it just had to be said.

Re:I'll wait for the next version... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477307)

Im waiting for Castlemaine XXXX myself :D

XXXX

Re:I'll wait for the next version... (1)

RealProgrammer (723725) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477417)

>AMD 69 XXX Hardcore

They only come in pairs.

Also, after you've had it a while one of the pair refuses to go into "69" mode, even though it's still fine in standard mode. Something about being incompatible with a daughtercard.

market for this? (0)

slizz (822222) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477208)

who is going to buy computers with these new ultra powerful dual core processors? gamers don't need dual core, and everyday users have had plenty of power for the last 5 years. its like intel and amd are creating products purely for graphic artists and rich people, i dont see how they're going to make any money in the future.

Re:market for this? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477237)

More power means less needed optimisations! Programmer's dream :-)

Re:market for this? (1, Insightful)

59Bassman (749855) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477277)

Who will EVER use more than 640K?

The fact of the matter is if you build it, they will come. I'd bet that it won't be more than a couple of years before you see a recommendation for 2 processors on games.

Re:market for this? (2, Insightful)

Stibidor (874526) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477308)

If the general public can be convinced that these new dual-core chips are "better" than the old single-core stuff (not hard to do in a culture always seeking the so-called "latest and greatest"), then there is certainly a market for this. People don't always buy things for practical purposes.

Besides, in an industry where if you don't come out with something new frequently you die, it seems likely that it won't be too many years down the road before dual-core may be the only option for consumers in the market for a brand new machine.

Just my two cents...

Re:market for this? (0, Redundant)

CDLewis (775622) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477319)

gamers don't need dual core, and everyday users have had plenty of power for the last 5 years.

Careful, you're dangerously close to Bill Gates/640KB territory.


its like intel and amd are creating products purely for graphic artists and rich people, i dont see how they're going to make any money in the future

By selling to graphic artists and rich people, perhaps?

Re:market for this? (0)

fbody98 (881072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477336)

"If you build it, someone will buy it."

Hmm.... I think I messed that quote up somehow...

Re:market for this? (2, Funny)

Blue-Footed Boobie (799209) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477343)

SERVERS!

Nothing sexier than a 16slot Blade server running Dual-Core Opterons. Equivelent of 32 cpus in 5u of space.

MMMmmm...mmm...mmm...mmm...SEXY!

Re:market for this? (2, Funny)

masklinn (823351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477410)

Even 16 slot blade servers running octo dualcore Opterons systems?

Adware&Virus: hardware makers win!! (5, Interesting)

amcdiarmid (856796) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477366)

The market for this is everyone who uses an agressive anti-virus program. The AV will run on one prcessor, what you are doing on the other.

It's a sad case that as malware becomes more previlent, hardware vendors win. Really, you can be productive with (for example) Win2K on a 1GHz machine and 256MB, in an office. Now add the wait as every file is scanned on access for viruses (per corporate policy), and the machine somehow becomes "too slow."

OH well. I guess it's time to put all productivity applications on a Server & run them remotely. Again;-(

Re:market for this? (5, Insightful)

jtpalinmajere (627101) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477407)

For Intel, your argument definitely holds water. Their whole business plan has been based off of their vast number of production plants and relatively cheap process of putting hordes of chips on the market... hopefully making the chips pervasive enough to strike a profit level in the end (more like early mid-life with their price schemes though). It is only after a processor has been found tried and true that Intel migrates it to server land.

AMD on the other hand has always started out chips on the enthusiast / enterprise market because they simply don't have the fabrication capacity that Intel does. Thus they market first for the high end users and over time the processors find their way into the desktop market when they've been dated by yet another new, improved processor being marketed at the first group. Their whole revenue plan is based off of the 'rich' people niche (which includes many medium to large businesses). Based on their success, I'd say that they've done really well with this business model and continuing to do so would likely continue to work for them.

The common misnomer that is latched onto with many processor reviews nowadays is that both AMD and Intel are prodcing processors for the desktop platform, when in reality their business goals for their processors are on opposite spectrums. Intel starts desktop side, AMD starts server side. It is only after both have matured to some degree (and software caught up to both of them) that the processors can be meaningfully compared for the average joe user that just bought a new computer (or had one built for him).

Most people who go crazy over these new technologies are either wanting it for pure bragging rights, or simply aren't aware of how little it will actually do for them... or both in all liklihood.

Re:market for this? (2, Interesting)

Malc (1751) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477422)

If they ever make it to a significant size of the market, you will see more of the CPU intensive tasks that people do today becoming multi-threaded. Some of the of long running processes that are common on home computers lend themselves nicely to divide and conquer, such as ripping music or video. By going dual core or SMP, one can halve the processing time without having to wait a few years for the processing power of CPUs to double.

Re:market for this? (4, Insightful)

segmond (34052) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477441)

You are right that the market for dual core processors for home users is really not there, but it could be. Think of the BeBox/BeOS, It was a system that was designed for dual core processors and all applications compiled for BeOS automatically benefited from it. What is missing in the x86 world for home users is such an OS. I believe that Intel/AMD are well aware of this, and this belief leads me to the conclusion that they are not really pumping out such systems for the average home users, it is more for businesses. Internet/Enterprise servers will definitely benefit more from it.

Longhorn (4, Funny)

yabos (719499) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477447)

Have you seen the specs required for Longhorn!

Re:market for this? (3, Interesting)

be-fan (61476) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477490)

Programmers? Multimedia people? Scientific computing folks? There are quite a few markets that can use dual-core right now. Basically, anybody who buys a PowerMac :) Moreover, in the future, everyone will have to move to dual core (including gamers), because AMD and Intel cannot ramp up the clockspeed of single core chips. So AMD's strategy makes quite a bit of sense. Sell dual-core chips to the high-end now (notice how all of these CPUs are high-end chips that carry quite a price premium), and start getting the ball rolling on multithreaded software.

Re:market for this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477499)

Aren't many games multi-threaded now? It seems to me games like Morrowind or World of Warcraft spawn separate threads to continually load the parts of the world that you are exploring so that the gamer rarely or never has to stop and wait for a level to load.

Seems like dual-core would help these games, and it also seems a lot of games will (or at least should be) implementing this technique more and more in the future.

Re:market for this? (2, Informative)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477530)

Gamers need dual core processors. Many games are still single threaded but that's probably the past. There is plenty to be gained from a single game running multiple threads. The only concern is that RIGHT NOW I don't think Windows will do The Right Things. I could be wrong.

The question is, other than gamers and graphic artists, who needs them? You have a point in that almost every other application that the average guy uses has been saturated in terms of (quite prolific) features for years. I really don't think that will change much, hence MS is having a hard time maintaining the "Buy a New Office Suite every 3 Years" business model.

More and better multimedia applications MAY be the next killer app that requires this power, but a significant amount of work needs to be done to make tools for this accessible to the masses.

Row, row row your boat, gently down... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477213)

No actually, they're going to be launched in June. The fact that this would be lost on the submitter was so obvious, I was able to prepare this message in advance and just paste it in.

These look to be amazing CPUs. After the initial linpack-with-large-matrices benchmark, you have to go thirteen pages into the benchmarks at TechReport [techreport.com] to find some of note where the Intel solutions are able to score off a win!

Don't Forget the [H] (5, Informative)

Unholy_Kingfish (614606) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477223)

The cold dark [H]OCP [hardocp.com] also has their preview [hardocp.com] up.

Or you can jump right to their conclusions [hardocp.com] .

first SENSIBLE posts (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477225)

I don't mean to be a troll, but is it just me, or is the first sensible post always modded up to infinity? Perhaps it's to (somehow) counter the flood of "OMG FRIST PSOT!!!!1" posts?

Rollout process (5, Interesting)

fbody98 (881072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477229)

I'm relieve to see at least one thing out of this launch, and I would hope that other companies would do as much. AMD has clearly defined their rollout process so there will be no confusions and hopefully no false expectations.

1. Announcement
2. Technical Preview (benchmarks Appear)
3. Launch (OEM Availability)
4. Ramp-up and Reseller Availability

They even give dates, if they can keep to those dates then we might actually have a product launch that doesn't antagonize the community with accusations of a 'paper launch'.

I'd like to see more companies be more upfront about this.

vs (2, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477251)

This is all getting very complex in the "Pentium compatible" world. Where's a chart of direct CPU performance comparisons across manufacturers (Intel, AMD, etc), so I can look up a potential purchase? Eg, I see that PriceWatch has an "Athlon XP 3000" at $102, and a P4/2.26GHz at $111. How much faster/slower will my LAME encoder server run for the $9 difference? At the very least, where's a chart showing which makes/models are direct competitors?

Re:vs (5, Informative)

fbody98 (881072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477367)

The best example of what you're looking at that i've found is at http://www23.tomshardware.com/index.html [tomshardware.com]

It's an interactive chart of all major processors available now and plenty that aren't available, it's a good idea to compare what you might have not and what an upgrade could do for you.

Re:vs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477374)

Try here

http://www23.tomshardware.com/index.html [tomshardware.com]

Not everything you want, but a good start.

The new Anandtech article (1)

Kobun (668169) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477424)

Myself, I enjoyed reading the new Anandtech article that went up today. The new AMD CPU's are put through their paces, and are compared against the best Intel has to offer. For some good top end (or dual core, as it has become the same thing) comparisons, this is a good place to start.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx? i=2410 [anandtech.com]

Re:vs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477427)

If you're in such a hurry, I suggest you try oggenc Archer [nifty.com] . Then you'd get higher quality encodes faster; I get more than 20 times real-time on my Athlon XP 2400+

I don't know how much encoding you do, but at this speed I can encode ~7200 tracks per day.

Wow... those are fast (1)

tinrobot (314936) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477270)

I do a lot of reviews of dual processor machines for publications that cover 3D animation and graphics. Usually the dual processor machines kick the single proc machines to the curb in every test. Dual CPU machines also give better interactivity, and the machines we use at the studio always are dual cpu for that reason.

This really is going to make me think twice about the need for separate CPUs. I really want to get my hands on one of these to test.

Funny from TFA: (-1, Offtopic)

Enigma_Man (756516) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477314)

Does a bear pope in the woods?

Hehe, I think we need a bear-pope. Or is that equating the pope to poop? (Eww, I just stepped in some pope).

-Jesse

Re:Funny from TFA: (0, Offtopic)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477408)

Winnie the Pooh for Bear Pope! he'll Poo Bear-Pope Pooh Poop in the Woods!

Re:Funny from TFA: (1)

Enigma_Man (756516) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477553)

Hahaha, maybe it's just the dayquil talking, but damn that's funny.

-Jesse

Re:Funny from TFA: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477473)

You are the epitome of not funny.

is AMD a market leader now? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477315)

whitebox linux on a dual core opteron box would rock, heck, any 64 bit linux distro should. AMD is now a market leader. Where does this leave Intel? Could this ever happen to Bill Gates and Microsoft?

Seems the owner of the whiteboxlinux.net [whiteboxlinux.net] and whiteboxlinux.com [whiteboxlinux.com] domains has decided to offer them on ebay [ebay.com] as a peace offering between wbel and himself.

This is really great news so lets hope someone with WBEL enthusiasm steps up to build a respectable community site.

Re:is AMD a market leader now? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477381)

Mods, put this down to -1 please. This is the 2nd time this dipshit has posted this spam.

$537 is considered "Entry Level"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477368)

In what neck of the woods?

Does dual core == 2xProcessor or hybrid? (2, Interesting)

amichalo (132545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477376)

Does dual core have to mean 2 of the SAME processor?

I recall reading a /. comment on a previous news day that suggested using dual core to allow the OS and anti-virus software run on one proc, while applications share another, thus improving stability/security/performance.

But does a vendor HAVE to make a dual core chip with two of the same processor? Perhaps gains could be made using a less powerful, commodity chip core and pairing it to a top of the line core.

Costs would be lower and they could sell more of this hybrid dual core because they would only need 1 top of the line cores.

Oh, you get what I am saying.

YeS! (2, Funny)

fredan (54788) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477411)

An 32-bit comparison of an 64-bit processor. This is exactly what I look for when I need to know which cpu to buy...

Fast and INEXPENSIVE to run! (3, Informative)

Senor_Programmer (876714) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477435)

"... AMD's X2s consume no more power than single-core chips."

This is significant if you live in say Honolulu where electricity is 14cents/KWh or on Kauai where it's close to 22cents/KWh.

Great! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477464)

Now I can heat up two rooms!

Windows Licenses (2, Insightful)

Timberwolf0122 (872207) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477519)

As I understand it M$ only allow upto 2 cpus on a standard licence. I hope they will release an update to allow for 2 dual core chips.

Tomshardware (0, Offtopic)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 9 years ago | (#12477529)

I still don't see this chip, or any other AMD dual core chip mentioned at TomShardware. Are they under some sort of Intel Only agreement?

Supported by Linux - Yes/No? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12477577)

If yes any benchmarks, especially scientific-oriented benchmarks?

Thanks in advance!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>