Intel Quadcore vs AMD 4x4

**ChaosMinionX** · Nov 29, 2006, 10:11 PM

http://tinyurl.com/yfe5y4

article is translated from japanese to english via google so bear with the grammatical errors, but its not looking good at all for AMD they better hope that the K8L beats Intels Yorkfield oct when it comes out.

EDIT: Sorry if its already been posted, i just scanned the DH forusm real quick.

PangingJr · Nov 30, 2006, 01:48 AM

oh boy. however, that motherboard is just packed with technology and features, it seems to have full platform support for many things.
imagine how much money that people needs to put in the budget in order to build a system under that platform and to fill the available supports (in its full extended) offered by it.

**ChaosMinionX** · Nov 30, 2006, 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PangingJr

oh boy. however, that motherboard is just packed with technology and features, it seems to have full platform support for many things.
imagine how much money that people needs to put in the budget in order to build a system under that platform and to fill the available supports (in its full extended) offered by it.

Yeah but based on preliminary results of it, 4x4 is in its infancy and is also a power hungry infant at that.... Im hoping we see good things from AMD on this

~~hackerx~~ · Nov 30, 2006, 05:40 AM

well serves AMD right.They were complacent with socket 939 and K8.
But seriously this "4x4" just semms like a desperate attempt to respond to kentsfield.
And as it turns out,putting server on desktop doesn't get them what they want.Although this could change once they bring out the 65nm chips.

Erroneus · Nov 30, 2006, 06:30 AM

If those benchies are holding up, it doesnt look to good for AMD and look at the watt usage :O

Judas · Nov 30, 2006, 10:56 AM

er.... not many people are going to even purchase a 4x4 system, it's pointless for the many, seeing as amd's quad core will be completely different.

Matth · Nov 30, 2006, 04:51 PM

Just read the Anandtech one (posted here - AMD's Quad FX: Technically Quad Core @ AnandTech )

AMD have been caught napping big time - too busy assimilating ATI when they should have been concentrating on CPUs!

H3X4D3C1M4L · Nov 30, 2006, 05:07 PM

The empire rises further and further.

Intel just keeps looking better and better

Wait to go AMD

josh2thad · Nov 30, 2006, 05:12 PM

Wow, all i can say is wow.. i seen this on tom'shardware this morning. I cant belive this, AMD should know that dual processors are a thing of the past. Muticore - thread is the future and i thought they were holding out for something great. I seen the benchmarks and intel destroys them with a single processor

I thought armageddon would come before i said this, but i think my next system is going to be an Intel ( Yikes)

Judas · Nov 30, 2006, 05:56 PM

remember, this still opens up ethusiast dual cpu market a bit.

i'd like to see a 4x4 in real 4x4 mode (4 cores on one cpu, times 2)

imo, i beleive amd was just opening up the segment and getting it out with just 2 core cpu's first... oventually leading to a dual quad core setup.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Dec 4, 2006, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

remember, this still opens up ethusiast dual cpu market a bit.

i'd like to see a 4x4 in real 4x4 mode (4 cores on one cpu, times 2)

imo, i beleive amd was just opening up the segment and getting it out with just 2 core cpu's first... oventually leading to a dual quad core setup.

Yeah but it's a bit of a sucker deal, I mean you have to contend with the crappy version now then wait for the 8 core (2x 4 core monolithic CPU)? By then it may not even work with that one mobo that you're forced to buy to get 4x4