Wow nice price... so where can i buy one like that? :D 2200 € orQuote:
Originally Posted by goldenfrag
$ ora 4400 is not a problem... :) :) :banana:
Wow nice price... so where can i buy one like that? :D 2200 € orQuote:
Originally Posted by goldenfrag
$ ora 4400 is not a problem... :) :) :banana:
I think the appropriate price is $800-$1,200 (US).
Shows more about what you know then the prise :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
Me wants!!!! Goldenfraq where can we get one it is a crazy price but nice!!!
Be 'in the know' and spend a lot of money. Generally if you don't know how to get one then you won't be getting one as its all about trust, people won't want you to spill the beans who sold you it this early as it could cost them there jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
The DFI will almost certainly support Kentsfield. All revised Conroe compatible motherboards should.
If its an Extreme Edition it'll cost $1000 on launch, expect to pay a lot more for a 6-month before launch CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
Yeah but it's a 2.4GHz Kentsfield! the X6800 will use 2.9GHz! so same price! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
OK let's do like that! if any of you guys can sell me a kentsfield please contact me by PM, just tell me how much $$$ (it will be our little secret).
If the price is right for me i'll buy it soon. :)
The X6800 is Conroe, not Kentsfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
Same price, yes, same chip, no.
That is one impressive computer chip, no doubt about that. :) But don't count AMD out yet. They have been owning
Intel on game performance (which is the only reason most PC owners go out and buy these expensive chips to begin
with) for a long time and now Intel is on a major counter attack, bringing the full weight of their engineering excellence
to bear. But AMD is supposed to have their quad core chips out in the first quarter next year, so we'll see how they
stack up then. It's going to be very interesting. :) AMD was dumb to go to DDR2, their low latency advantage was
enhanced by DDR, they should have gone to JEDEC and gotten a new DDR 433 or 466 spec. That would have given
better performance.
Of course, these multiple cores are pretty useless for games. We're just now starting to hear about games coming
out later on that might make some use of two cores. Personally, I'd rather have a FX-57, but 600MHz faster (FX-63?),
running on DDR at 250MHz at 2,2,2 (you can get memory now that will do that). That would *own* in games! :)
A Conroe @ 2.4 Ghz, owns a FX-60 even man.. What are you talking about...
Id rather have a E6300 than an FX-60....
I said a FX-57, but 600Mhz faster than a 57 clock speed. So that would be like a FX-63. Then,
of course, you can OC beyond that some. Then combine that with OC'ed 250MHz DDR (DDR 500 equivalent)
at 2,2,2, timings. That would rock in games. :)
A 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo can already see off an FX-62 in most if not all benchmarks, which is the same speed as an FX-57.
Now add your proposed 600MHz to the FX-57 for your proposed FX-63 and 533MHz to the Core 2 Duo to make the X6800 and remember that even in a single threaded games that dual core offers a performance increase thanks to threading in graphics drivers and the fact Windows can offload background processes and the Core 2 Extreme would offer a clear benefit.
I've made the mistake of going from dual to single processors in the past (Prestonia-1M 3.2GHz Xeons to Athlon 64 3500+) and HATED the A64, I certainly wouldn't make the same mistake again.
The one showed by coolaler is a quad core Conroe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
Its a KENTSFIELD, exactly the same as I'm sitting at right now.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
Its not the X6800 being released next month, did you not read the Coolalers thread?
It may well be two Conroes on one substraite, but its not the Conroe out next month.
Shouting about how much you want one and how you'll pay a fraction of what people would want for them is not going to get you one either.
Yes, there is a bit of benefit from the background processes and such, but the single core will OC better.
So you take that FX-63 and then OC it maybe 300MHz on air, or 600MHz - 800MHz or whatever on AC,
and then match it up with proper DDR (500 or faster effective) at 2,2,2 and you have a gaming monster.
Low latency rules in gaming, forget that DDR2 junk. :)
I dont want to start an argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
Its not an arguement, its fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
Kentsfield is not X6800.
You got that right!Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
Actually it's E6600. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
Anyway I meant that a 2.4GHz Kentsfield should cost like a 2.9GHz Conroe! (about $800) but! the Kentsfield release date is few months from now and not few days! so I said:
Want to kill me for saying what I think?Quote:
I think the appropriate price is $800-$1,200 (US).
Thorburn looks like your in the "know" yourself. :D
For what your running and your Kentsfield do they match up with Coolaler is getting as well. This looks fantastic.
Cheers!!
:toast:
Doesn't matter if it were a FX-66 besides it costing more, it'd still be slower=PQuote:
Originally Posted by Dunedain1
Like Intel had to do in the past, AMD will have to out MHz Intel.
Faulse. DDR2-800 will prove to be 1 to 9% faster than DDR1 when the smoke clears. The problem still will be AMD adding something to the architecture to speed up K8. AMD will have to do a Yonah to Conroe update for K8 to K8L.
Results match yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerdude
Mr Popo, you really don't make much sense at all. I certainly don't want to kill you, just that you express your opinions and they are wrong a lot of the time.
1001 people speculating doesn't help matters and at a time of transistion to have a bunch of people who don't know whats happening, what is truth and what is rumors, etc all spouting opinions isn't helpful, its down right obstructive to those who seek genuine information especially when fiction because commonly acknowledge as fact.
Well teach me master!Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
ok, now we got kentsfields, anyone have a hookup at nvidia to get an 8800gtx?
i need to see the 06 score of a kentsfield an g80 lol...then ill know what to expect in 7 months.
The latest NVIDIA design has apparently only just taped out, it'll be a few months until we see any solid results methinksQuote:
Originally Posted by grimREEFER
This is a friendly forum, we never want to kill anyone. Sometimes one may want to do this: :slap: but that's all.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Popo
Sorry for the OT but couldn't resist.
ok i love all those pics
but where are benchmarks ?
i cant see no 3d marks or superpi-s on aquastuff
I want one
i'd like to know more about virtualization technology :)
Wow, I want one also...
Everything you need ( pdfs ) here :Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
http://www.intel.com/technology/computing/vptech/
I want two so what?..Quote:
Originally Posted by BulldogPO
:slobber:
get conroe or wait and get kentsfield :brick:
Going to get Allendale then wait and get Kentsfield.
ha... I'll wait till kentsfield and AMD's revision and quad core come out AND all the bugs are ironed out. Waddya think..? Q4 2007?
Ryan
i thought the g80 would be in stores before kentsfield though lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Thorburn
I think you'll need a Quad SLI System for this CPU. Or the graphiccards will limit in 3d-benches - a little bit :D
Actually, the Kentsfield is two Conroes (Core 2 Duo) in the same LGA775 package (Core 2 Quad). For this reason, it is utterly pin *and* socket-compatible with Core 2 Duo. If the board can take Core 2 Duo, it can take Core 2 Quad, and without modification. It is for *precisely* this reason that I am hoping that more encoding apps (especially video) become multicore-ready. It also puts a sizable spanner in the AM3 works because it requires literally no other upgrades from Core 2 Duo platforms (remember, AM3 is *not* pin or socket-compatible with AM2), whereas Kentsfield can be a drop-in upgrade from Core 2 Duo.Quote:
Originally Posted by dogsx2
"Steal not a single link of chain more than you can swim with." - Chinese proverb
Because Core 2 Quad will (barring problems) launch less than six months after Core 2 Duo, AMD appears to be well into the drowning phase of chain-theft.
I just read an article saying AM3 CPUs can be dropped into AM2 sockets
here it is
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3169
Who is Coolaler. Is he a computer distributer or something? I am interested to know why he has access to Kentsfield+MSI and the rest of us do not. Is it because he overpaid for the CPU? Is it through piracy in his country?
^^what?
I think he's a top tier in the distro business.
Jackass post of the day. Winner. :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by ExcelsiusXS
I'd be really happy if one could pirate hardware... just download it off the net :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mako88
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by ewitte
I remember a few years back a few scientists waxing on about how within the next 50 years we'll have refridgerator-sized appliances in our homes that actually manufacture items that we purchase online on the fly similarly to how an inkjet printer "manufactures" an image... ;)
Ok, I need to ask a potentially very dumb question..... strickly for the use of games, will this Kentsfield be much better than these E6700's?
If the game is multithreaded to such an extent that it can utilise 3 or 4 cores effectively then the performance gains could THEORETICALLY be double, although in all probability more like 3-3.5x on a clock for clock basis. If a game doesn't then it'll perform the same, maybe marginally better if the OS is busy in the background.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalia
Yeah, he did get out his James Bond silicon copy toolkit and made a copy of the die :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ewitte
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalia
At the resolutions most of us play at (1280x1024x4AAx16AF+), the video card will always be the limiting factor no matter if the CPU is multi-threaded or not.
At the resolution I play at (1920x1200x2AAx16AF), it wouldn't matter if you dropped a 32-core CPU in the system...the video card is maxed out and that's that.
This board is (when it comes out) my first choice for Conroe so far.
Edit: It's my 100th post, just realized. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mako88
you obviously have not seen what happens when you game with a Conroe or Kentsfield have you ?
you wouldnt be saying that if you had.
Stick to bashing ASUS Lestat. You're more effective in that role. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
If you are going to give dumb responses, it would be better if you just stayed quiet. This applies to you, mako. I think that the age should be a required to be displayed in this forum. The problem is that guys like this person will certainly lie about it.
I really do not know who's Coolaler. That's why I asked. I visited his website and he just looks like another game player. Nothing professional. I doubt that a professional is going to sit down and play pointless computer games. So if you know for sure, I'd like to know.
And for all the apparent smartasses in here, you can pirate hardware. In some countries people are innately corrupt and even though it might not be legal, they will sell you "under the table" before the release date if they have links with the distributor. I am not talking about CPUs, but hardware technology in general.
It also angers me that I couldn't buy Conroe about a month ago (when it was out for to the distributors) and yet some "gamers" were able to get their hands on it. I was forced to buy AMD and yet I needed the CPU for research, not some PC game. So that's the reason I asked the question in my posting.
If you're not a distributer, you don't have anything to be angry about. The CPU isn't available to the public. If you couldn't find Conroe a month ago, then you weren't trying hard enough. (It was very easy).Quote:
Originally Posted by ExcelsiusXS
You must be joking. Not only did I search all over google, but I also asked in forums if anyone could help (not in XS though). I even called those lazy reps at Intel, but to no avail. Could you give some info about as to how could I get it? If you can't write here, just PM me. As far as I knew, getting a conroe was not possible.
Needless to say, I am not satisfied with my AMD AM2 and am looking forward to getting the K8L ASAP (I read that it should work on AM2 socket). If AMD doesn't kick some intel ass in the next round I will be forced to get a new motherboard as well. That's not financially sound.
Lol you are a crazy guy, why does Intel owe you anything? If you are selling thousands of CPUs then you get samples, people in the companies that get samples give or sell them to their contacts in the industry, friends, gamers etc but they shouldn't really.Quote:
Originally Posted by ExcelsiusXS
If you dont have the contacts in the industry then you live like everyone else and wait until launch day to buy one. Plus at launch you will get the latest stepping not some ES sample with more errata, usually worse overclocking, and no warranty.
BTW if quad core opteron benches are anything to go by AMD wont be coming back anytime soon, so I suggest you buy a new mobo.
i want you to run 3dmark 06 so i can see how quad core handles the 06 cpu tests
Coolaler is a well respected OC guy in Taiwan. he runs his own review website and being based in Taiwan is naturallly well connected.Quote:
Originally Posted by ExcelsiusXS
Hope that helps you feel better since he probably had to give the Kentsfield back after his testing. But who knows :toast:
A professional can't play a computer game?
Ok back to serious
how do you guys get the 'hook-ups'?
i didnt know it was 'easy' to buy a conroe a month ago...
do you just google "i wanna buy a kentsfield"?
surely they make you pay out the ass for unreleased tech though, right?
Sorry off-topic post, but nice Ching Ming Wang bobblehead avatar Coolaler:hehe: :toast:
Wow the Kentsfield is looking good. I've heard and read that the Conroe compatible boards should support Kentsfield too so here's hoping to that.
What are the expected retail prices?
No idea on pricing, but I heard a rumour that Intel is pulling Kentsfield foreward into Q4 2006. Yeah it was in the Inq, but the were dead on about the ATi-AMD thing.
Last I checked my copy of XP pro has the ability to set core affinity by adjusting it via the task manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by PGHammer
http://www.informit.com/articles/art...&seqNum=2&rl=1
Both Windows and Linux have the ability to bind processes to CPUs (which means cores in this context).Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardnyl
Problem is, this is almost always a bad idea on any computer that runs a mix of programs (desktop, webserver, fileserver etc.).
People overestimate how expensive the core switch is (if you do it rarely enough it is not) and people misunderstand how many things are actually running on their computer and demand CPU. In particular they forget that the kernel itself needs to get cracking every now and then, and it might need CPU but it almost always needs bandwidth and you don't want to run it through a floor of TLB misses just because you forced it onto the wrong CPU thanks to stupid affinity.
For the average user, who at most is going to run maybe 2 games windowed and set the affinity of just those 2 games and leave the rest up to the OS as far as background processes are concerned (kernel activity, etc) how much of an impact are we talking about here?Quote:
Originally Posted by uOpt
You play two games at the same time? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardnyl
The overall answer is that unless you benchmark something like SuperPi, or unless you want to identify a faulty core in testing such as by binding Mprime instances to them, or have hard real-time requirementsyou never want to set affinity for processes.
On a Windows system that is used interactively you always have the GUI screw with things just for starters.
The scheduler in the OS is not stupid. Even with no affinity set by the user it will try to keep processes and thread on the same CPU and only move a process when there is a good enough reason. The OS scheduler might make an occasional bad guess but overall it has much better information to make the decision what to run where than you.
The situation is different from e.g. VM systems where you often have situations where paging policies are identifyably braindead and you lock down some mapped files hard.
the msi 975x power up edition, also support Kensfield core?
Thanks...
Jaim3x
here is what Intel says about the 965 chipset:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaim3x
NOW...compare it with what is said for the 975 chipset:Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel
it doesn't mean the 975X won't work with the Kentsfield since coolaler has proven it...it just says it was not designed in concept to accommodate the Kentsfield core.Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel
Interesting... so (just to clarify)
the 965 chipset is designed to work with future processors - the Kentsfield - while the 975 is not (even though some might).
Bummer... from what I've read, the 975 works better with the e6600+ while the 965 chipset is better with e6400 (and lower). Not only that but (here I'm guessing kind of) the 975 is MORE expensive.
But in real life... BOTH chipsets are likely to support Kentsfield and so if anyone is planning to get a Conroe now and upgrade to a Kentsfield later it shouldn't matter whether he/she gets a 965 or a 975, right?
Sigh - not really sure if I want to go Allendale and Kentsfield or just 6800...
I know it seems easy, but I don't have easy insight into just at what point a dual core is likely to be saturated.
Factors that need sorting:
Even "when" games get more vigorously into SMP, it seems that the 2nd core is still likely to be used less than the main core thread, translating to full use of 1 core, and partial use of a 2nd, before OS and background ops.
Video drivers could add to the overhead mix, but really, by how much?
For most of what is out now, if you aren't 3D modeling, Wouldn't a Conroe > 3.5 really be just as good "in use" as Kentsfield at 3.0 or so? Just kind of hard to think what would saturate Conroe for more than a second or two, lol.
I did also notice that Kentsfield gets pretty toasty on the Tuniq at 3+ghz. That's certainly not a factor on extreme cooling, but it's definitely something that is back to liking at least water for everyday.
People are welcome to toss the ideas here - it's what we do. Just leave the AMD stuff out as that just clouds things and they are an ignoreable factor for the time being.
:)
MSI 975X Platinum V.2Quote:
Originally Posted by lopri
this is it
I agree kentsfield isn't neccessary if you are mostly into gaming, but i want one anyway LOL. Does the DS3 support kentsfield? If so i will probably sell my Allendale and get one in 6 months or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anemone
Funily enough its aimed squarely at the gaming community.
Man, 2 months ago the X2 was the CPU to have, now it's not? The new Intel chips are looking mighty fine I must say. But not fine enough for me to sell what I got to get one.
For your standard FPS game your right. Some games do benefit though they are in minority. Any game that heavily relys on AI, strategy games should improve nicelyQuote:
Originally Posted by Mako88
Fear I think has its minimum frame rate improved which should make things smoother.
In future, games may use the dual core far more, for physics and so on.
Championship manager has been reprogrammed to use the second core for preparing the next round of the game in advance so preventing any boring waiting for the player.
By the time we can buy 32 core I think even gamers will appreciate it, for now it may be mostly unneeded but manufacturing processes make core technology cheaper to produce then high speeds so the future is certain in this respect and software will eventually reflect this properly
Let me reiterate what we often forget. When you have enough dual cores on the market that games start to be written to "take full advantage" of dual core cpu's, you can, and sometimes will tie up a dual core processor fully, putting you back, effectively, to running a game and tying up a single cpu. This will be true of more than games, and Intel is going full bore into getting folks to code for that full advantage. That literally means they expect one dual core cpu to get fully tied up. So yes, I do believe they are aiming Kentsfield at enthusiast gamers who will still want a functioning machine while playing that super Halo 5. :)
Also bear in mind that game programmers drop a lot of stuff to get things to "run in the designed envelope" of target machines. I would not doubt there is a long list of things they'd like to bring back to the table if machines bumped up a notch in power.
Kind of scary to think of a not so distant day when we can grind a 3.5ghz Conroe to a screeching halt...
It's really not that simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anemone
There are generally two ways to make a program use multiple CPUs:
- Find something to do "one the side" while you main program is running on CPU0, that means CPU1is doing something different than CPU0, so there is few opportunity to screw up and have both CPUs globber each other's work
- Split up computationally expensive tasks into schedulable entities, that means CPU0 and CPU1 (and all other CPUs) do the same thing, just on different chunks of data. Identifying these different chunks of data and properly locking them is very non-trivial
As far as I can tell, most games do the former these days. However, there are strict limits about what you can do. You can often come up with things to do for a second CPU, but for 4 CPUs that is less likely to be low-hanging fruit.
Doing it right, the second way, usually gives you good scaling to many CPUs, but it is much harder to do.
I expect that current games are not making use of more than 2 CPUs, and that the step from 2 to 4+ CPUs will take them exactly as long as doing 2-CPU code in first place. Since there will be low pressure from the customers (too few with more than 2 CPUs) that can take quite a while.
I agree, dual core should finaly catch on soon for games I think 07 shall be the dual core revolution.
I was very hardcore into single core when I got my 146 and 148 I knew I didnt need a dual core, now history repeats with quad core.
I would think maybe one or two big hit titles will be used to get 4 core technology out to the masses but for the majority of games it wont be a issue till probably late 08'
But that doesnt mean quad core wont have a purpose for sombody who uses professional programs that can use all 4 cores, or heck running 2 programs at once that use dual core and being able to manually assign cpu use.
For a gamer tho, I look at quad core as a way to get cheaper dual cores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stealthbomber
Only for the Jedi Coolaler :) .
The CPU introduced in this Thread doesn't seem to be a Kentsfield -living in Taiwan doesn't proove that you have some connection the automatically way. The Kentsfield is being developed in Germany if I can trust this site here=
http://hardware.thgweb.de/2006/09/11...re/page28.html
"Entwicklungszentrum für Multi-Core Braunschweig". Translated= "Dev. Laboratories for Multicore in Brunswick (Germany)"
I didn't see any proof of a Kentsfield in here (except the 4-Core entry being shown in CPUz, but where is the 2x4MB shared L2 Cache huh?).
This should be the final design of the Kentsfield (English and not the complete Report)
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/...on_the_rampage
This is the complete Report from THG Germany (this includes the pics from the laboratory in Germany, so this explains why the UK Report isn't complete in comparison with this=
http://hardware.thgweb.de/2006/09/11...ore/index.html
You obvsiously have no idea who coolaler is and what he does (for a living?).
Ok junior :slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelbsucht
rofl, kentsfield is everywhere :D
who care about THG
You should reaaly take a look at the other post fro mthe person you're talking about before opening your mouth and sticking your foot in it. :slapass:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelbsucht
This just hit me.
Is this the so-called Q6600 that's suppoed to come out in January?
The grass is always greener :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Torin
One word.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelbsucht
IDIOT
one smilie
:D
That was rich :)
crikes...
:D
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Gelbsucht
I would like to know this also ?Quote:
Originally Posted by S&M
FFS... Very nice :cool:
Kentsfield will be my next step..K8L seems far away atm (Q2 2K7 and I cant wait that long). Have my 4400 for 14 months now and I believe it will serve me well till this baby will be available.. :)
I'd like to see some gaming benches with a Kentsfield though..That would be interesting..
Seems like this chip will be very quick, when released, it should really stamp the of Conroe and Allendale, which is good for poor people! I will probably go Conroe when Kent comes out, will be a big performance increase for me :p. Seems like the chip will be stupidly quick! Lets hope games start supporting more than 2 cores!
Ruan
Apart from 'Alan Wake' I cant imagine any game needing 4 cores, I can barely think of any that need 2. That'll be another year at least I reckon
It prolly was developped in Germany, but I gotta tell you that there are a lot...I really mean "A LOT" ES version of kentsfield floating around on the market, you obviously don't know who da hell is Coolaler -_-"Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelbsucht
You guys should drop it already. So he made a mistake.
Count me in. I'd like to know also. Although I've seen it benched on a badaxe 304, there have been some problems it appears in getting it to overclock as well as on other 975 boards and on the badaxe 2. Even though it appears to work, will the regular badaxe fully and officially support kentsfield?Quote:
Originally Posted by lowrider007
yeah, i doubt that since Intel is projected to release 8 core Yorkfield (45nm) and wolfdale (45nm) Q3 of 2k7... while AMD is projected to release a 4 core and 2 core mainstream coming out at 2.0-2.9Ghz, while the wolfdale comes out projected at 3.5-4.0 Ghz............ no way does it seem like AMD is going to catch up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosfer@tu
yeah, but he sounded a little pissy and acted like he knew everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slycer
well if it isn't, I can't wait to see what is...
was looking all over the place for a quad core thread,now i found it