Re: Intel introduces "Core 2 Duo"
- From: Del Cecchi <cecchinospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 13:47:35 -0500
NoNoBadDog! wrote:
Chris;But the amd ht is 2 bytes in each direction. how many bytes is the 533?
See my responses in line to yours...
"chrisv" <chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:470962pvichilu5pl1fkgom3t6vpdrvtu1@xxxxxxxxxx
NoNoBadDog! wrote:
"chrisv" <chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Some people think Conroe *might* compete-with, and
*might* even out-perform, AMD's best. I for one will not be surprised
if it does - it's an all-new design and it will initially have the
advantage of being on a .065 process.
Doesn't matter how fast the core will be...it will still be tied to a measly
533MHz FSB,
533MHz DDR is "measly"? Whatever...
When AMD runs at 2GHz, then *YES* 533 MHz is very measly.
has no on-die memory controller,
Okay, one true disadvantage.
small handicap
the two cores cannot
communicate directly, but consume clock cycles communicating through the L2
cache, taking the L2 cache away from doing its real job, has no
hypertransport bus....I could go on, but you get the picture.
Not that any of that impacts performance all that much...
It results in at least a 50% drop in availability of the L2 to do its primary job..caching data. That is why they plan to double it from 2 to 4 MB. But it is still relatively inefficient and adding more cache does not compensate for the loss of clock cycles from haveing to communicate through the L2 as opposed to direct communications.
What direct communication? What is architected in X86 for "direct communication"? It all takes place via memory near as I can tell. So if you don't share L2 you have to go to dram?
If Intel really has re-prioritized x86, then there is no reason it won't be competitive in power and performance within a few years of the redirection. It is not as if they don't have good processes or know how to do chip design.
Intel may be updating its chips, but they are still being deployed on 10
year old motherboard designs.
Not a single new motherboard (other than chipset and connectors) has been introduced. You need to do your homework before correcting someone else, particularly when you are wrong and the one you are correcting is right.
Not true. Your hyperbole does not further your cause.
(snip)
Can I watch you eat crow this fall if/when Intel takes-back the
performance lead?
I have always posted that I will acknowledge it is Intel gains the lead. I used to be dedicated to Intel. But you and I both know that Intel is not known for changing it's ways. I fully anticipate Conroe and Merom to be on par with AMD, but it should have happened two years ago. AMD will continue to innovate, and Intel will continue to obfuscate (a new sticker...a new numbering system...yada yada yada...)
Bobby
Newsgroups trimmed
--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions, strategies or opinions.”
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Intel introduces "Core 2 Duo"
- From: krw
- Re: Intel introduces "Core 2 Duo"
- Prev by Date: Re: Need for speed.
- Next by Date: Re: Intel introduces "Core 2 Duo"
- Previous by thread: Re: Need for speed.
- Next by thread: Re: Intel introduces "Core 2 Duo"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
