Technology Dual core CPU

[Ryo-Ohki]

"Now dual core Opterons must take a hefty upgrade of your system? Surely a new socket and higher power consumption is headed our way. Well in fact the beauty of AMD's dual core solution is that neither is the case. As you can see from the current Opteron on the left, and the dual core model on the right both are Socket 940 compatible CPUs. Yes, you will be able to drop a dual core Opteron into your current Opteron motherboard. You will simply require a bios update to the board for the dual core Opteron function correctly."

http://www.amdzone.net/modules.php?...ns&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=56&page=1

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[g3pro]

I've been an intel guy for a while, but I think I'm finally going to make the switch. I was hoping that intel would have had the first dual-core 64-bit CPU out first, but they didn't.


I can't wait till I can pick it up!

 

[evines]

Could some geeky person please explain to me what this means? How is a dual core advantageous compared to a single core? Layman's terms if possible . . . I'm kinda dense.

 

[g3pro]

Could some geeky person please explain to me what this means? How is a dual core advantageous compared to a single core? Layman's terms if possible . . . I'm kinda dense.

A dual core chip is like a dual-processor system, except that the die size is considerably smaller, and the production costs are significantly cheaper (one fabrication vs. two). So you have a LOT of power as if from two chips with the convenience and cost of one chip. Not only that, but there are some latent speed advantages in the location on the motherboard, where the distance of communication is larger with two chips separated on a board than the two "chips" on the same die.

 

[evines]

So that's all it is? That's simple enough. I tried googling it to find out on my own, but didn't understand most of the language used on the sites.

Thanks.

 

[16846]

The next round of Intel Vs. AMD ought to be interesting. AMD is clearly ahead of the game regarding 64-Bit and Dual Core fabrication, but Intel is clearly ahead of the game regarding 65nm fabrication and dynamic semiconductor rearrangement.

My predictions: AMD will gain significant market share in the near future, with Intel fighting back strong by the time Longhorn is released. In the end, AMD will have gained some market share, but Intel will still remain dominant.

Any other opinions/predictions on this?

 

[g3pro]

I think moving to the .065 micron process is ridiculous. There is very little gained from it in terms of being able to fit more transistors, yet there are many, many problems with leakage. I don't even quite trust the 90nm process let alone the 65. Intel needs to get over it's gigahertz "is what matters" mentality. Their chips are now becoming more expensive, hotter, and less dynamic.


AMD definitely has teh right philosophy, and their current designs show it.

 

[Neuron]

A dual core chip is like a dual-processor system, except that the die size is considerably smaller, and the production costs are significantly cheaper (one fabrication vs. two). So you have a LOT of power as if from two chips with the convenience and cost of one chip. Not only that, but there are some latent speed advantages in the location on the motherboard, where the distance of communication is larger with two chips separated on a board than the two "chips" on the same die.

heh. Thanks for the translation.

 

[vinoyp]

This chip does actually sound pretty good.

However, maybe someone can enlighten me on this since I've been out of the loop for a year or so now. Can Windows XP take advantage of the dual processors? And, what programs do you see a significant performance advantage using them? I know they are paticularly useful for certain database servers, like MySQL and Oracle, and for Photoshop as well. I'm not a gamer so I don't know the advantages here.

--Vinoy

 

[rgporter]

This chip does actually sound pretty good.

However, maybe someone can enlighten me on this since I've been out of the loop for a year or so now. Can Windows XP take advantage of the dual processors? And, what programs do you see a significant performance advantage using them? I know they are paticularly useful for certain database servers, like MySQL and Oracle, and for Photoshop as well. I'm not a gamer so I don't know the advantages here.

--Vinoy

Almost no advantage for you. I guess if you're editing a lot of video or sound files you will see an advantage. But for the most part a regular processor is all the average user will need for quite some time.

 

[16846]

Actually, according to the article, the new type of strained silicon that is being used in the 65nm process drastically reduces leakage.

I think moving to the .065 micron process is ridiculous. There is very little gained from it in terms of being able to fit more transistors, yet there are many, many problems with leakage. I don't even quite trust the 90nm process let alone the 65. Intel needs to get over it's gigahertz "is what matters" mentality. Their chips are now becoming more expensive, hotter, and less dynamic.


AMD definitely has teh right philosophy, and their current designs show it.

 

[DrMom]

moving to the tech forum

 

[16846]

Agreed. Your OS & Programs need to be written to take advantage of a dual core processor, just like 64-bit processing. No current programs can take advantage of dual core processors. I think we won't see much support for dual core processing until Longhorn is released when you consider the very limited amount of support 64-bit processing still has.

Almost no advantage for you. I guess if you're editing a lot of video or sound files you will see an advantage. But for the most part a regular processor is all the average user will need for quite some time.

 

[mebhs15]

So are these things out right now, or not? Im planning on buying a computer sometime early next year, will I have the option of having a dual core CPU?

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Not true. Look at the benchmarks for the old Dual CPU Athlon MP system. It is higher at 1280X1024 than the faster Mhz Single CPU systems.

Look at the Divx encoding benchmarks comparing the AMD systems.

Unlike the 64-bit issue, there is already inherent support for dual-cpus.

----------------
mebhs15, they plan to have it out early next year. However, they will have these out as server/workstation chips (in other words, more $$$$$). I don't expect a consumer version until 2H 2005.