I think multi-tasking on conroe is acceptable. The problem with compression/encryption, etc. (and the inverse) is that it is beneficial to have lots of cache. From what I can gather not only is the L2 cache shared, the amount of cache changes dynamically depending on the loads on the cores. Not only that, communication between the cores are through this L2 cache.
I think what's happening here is that both cores are using the L2 cache constantly with different loads between them so the cache size changes, (plus inter-core communication) which might make it a tad slower.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddtox
I must say I agree with rotosequence: This is far from over. Quite the opposite actually, it's just beggining! After all AMD have only launched a new socket, it remains to be seen what their plans are for the microarchitecture to go with it.
-ed out
AMD are going to make a platform for the high-end gamer/enthusiast called 4x4. Basically, 2 sockets, 2 dual core processors. Unbuffered memory. (gettit? 4x4?) Tasty? WELL, AMD are also going to licence out their coherent hyper-transport technology. Which means, in a nutshell, that any processor that is made to take advantage of coherent HT, means that it will be able to be put into an AM2 socket (or an expansion socket) and use system resources like your AMD cpu. Like a co-processor. Now think back to the 4x4 platform above.
IMAGINE, you have 1 dual core processor, 1 physics co-processor. OR, 1 dual core processor, 1 GPU co-processor. If AMD puts more sockets in, like 3 sockets, 1 for CPU, 1 for GPU, 1 for PPU...I can only think of the madness that it will do to games.
Originally Posted by webchimp So will Conroe fit in existing LGA775 boards like the ASUS P5WDG2-WS or P5WD2-E Premium?
It should work in any 975X motherboard made after April 2006 with nothing more than a BIOS update. There are some minor hardware modifications required to existing designs - I *think* the P5WD2-E Premium will work. There is nForce 590 SLI to come for Conroe, too.
Originally Posted by dainbrain I like the gaming performance, but the Multi-Threading results are extremely dissapointing. I'm a game developer and I use 3dsmax, Maya, and Photoshop all day long and I like to have them all running at once. That, along with other proprietary tools, and switching into full-screen tests, I need as much Multi-Tasking as I can get. I've been awaiting these Conroe tests hoping that they would IMPROVE multi-threading, not slap it in the face with a large, wet, trout. :'(
What good are games if you don't have a decent system to develop them on? Does anyone have any news on the pricing? Hopefully this will be the basic "home-user" CPU with a much lower price-point, and Intel will develop a new CPU that developers can actually use.
On the other hand, with these numbers, I'm definately going to drop on of these babies into a gaming-only rig as soon as it hits the shelves.
Lets not forget Woodcrest - quad core, and shipping this month. It's the replacement to Intel's Xeon and is based on the Core architecture - I would expect the multi-threading to be a little better.
Originally Posted by MrABC I think multi-tasking on conroe is acceptable. The problem with compression/encryption, etc. (and the inverse) is that it is beneficial to have lots of cache. From what I can gather not only is the L2 cache shared, the amount of cache changes dynamically depending on the loads on the cores. Not only that, communication between the cores are through this L2 cache.
I think what's happening here is that both cores are using the L2 cache constantly with different loads between them so the cache size changes, (plus inter-core communication) which might make it a tad slower.
AMD are going to make a platform for the high-end gamer/enthusiast called 4x4. Basically, 2 sockets, 2 dual core processors. Unbuffered memory. (gettit? 4x4?) Tasty? WELL, AMD are also going to licence out their coherent hyper-transport technology. Which means, in a nutshell, that any processor that is made to take advantage of coherent HT, means that it will be able to be put into an AM2 socket (or an expansion socket) and use system resources like your AMD cpu. Like a co-processor. Now think back to the 4x4 platform above.
IMAGINE, you have 1 dual core processor, 1 physics co-processor. OR, 1 dual core processor, 1 GPU co-processor. If AMD puts more sockets in, like 3 sockets, 1 for CPU, 1 for GPU, 1 for PPU...I can only think of the madness that it will do to games.
In essence, every mobo already has "sockets" for add-in processors. PCI slots already allow this, but if I understand what you are implying (and I prolly don't) is that you would have actual sockets (like 939 for the processor) that everything attaches to the mobo by. If that is what you are hinting at you sir are creating madness. Madness that I would like to see as well. Damn that'd be a screamingly-fast system...
I think there's a need to do some gameplay evaluations between Conroe and Athlon 64 FX-62, to see whether the extra grunt is worth anything at resolutions you're likely to play at on high end video cards. When we get one in our labs, I think it warrants some investigation. :)
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead Oh dear... I can see my FX60 quaking in it's little boots already. I think this is going to cost me dearly isn't it? :)
Shouldnt be that expensive, unless you go for an XE version as most of the chips are quite reasonably priced. Should be able to pick up a chip and mobo for ~ 300-310 GBP, then its a case of ram to suit... Not bad at all..
The new MacPro (replacing the G5) is reported to run on these chips. (Also the new Xserver is running on woodcrest), would be very very nice to see a Dual CPU (ie 2x dual core = quad core) Mac running the conroe.
Cannot wait to see what jobs has created with these new processors, will be announced in early Aug
Originally Posted by automagsrock In essence, every mobo already has "sockets" for add-in processors. PCI slots already allow this, but if I understand what you are implying (and I prolly don't) is that you would have actual sockets (like 939 for the processor) that everything attaches to the mobo by. If that is what you are hinting at you sir are creating madness. Madness that I would like to see as well. Damn that'd be a screamingly-fast system...
Yes, basically you got the jist of it. Instead of the added extra cost of PCB/Memory of GPU/PPU cards - you just buy a GPU/PPU core and put it in the socket.
More info for you guys at Ars Technica: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060602-6977.html
You can make a slot like PCI slot, the only difference is that it uses coherent hyper-transport (instead of the bus interface).
its lookin good, tho the multitasking is a bit dissappointing, especially as I am a multitasking hore. Maybe the quad cores will improve this when they come.
I hope to be the first on my block with a conroe (so to speak). But I must have an Asus nforce 590sli... where is it?
[one kidney later]
@Lazarus Dark: If I were you I wouldn't splash out on a core 2 before K8L comes out. At least then you can make an informed decision.
Looks to be the one to buy for gaming now, at least until games require multitasking suppoty :) , the only thing that will make me not go with intel is the hassle of selling mobo, ram and cpu, and cpu cooler all to get it, so i wont most probably, at least not for as long as possible
Is conroe slower than the fx62 chip when it comes to multitasking? or how about the 4800 x2 amd athalon chip?
I want a super gaming chip but one that can multitask well too :s
Comments 26 to 41 of 41
I think what's happening here is that both cores are using the L2 cache constantly with different loads between them so the cache size changes, (plus inter-core communication) which might make it a tad slower.
IMAGINE, you have 1 dual core processor, 1 physics co-processor. OR, 1 dual core processor, 1 GPU co-processor. If AMD puts more sockets in, like 3 sockets, 1 for CPU, 1 for GPU, 1 for PPU...I can only think of the madness that it will do to games.
The water is a little murky at the moment.
In essence, every mobo already has "sockets" for add-in processors. PCI slots already allow this, but if I understand what you are implying (and I prolly don't) is that you would have actual sockets (like 939 for the processor) that everything attaches to the mobo by. If that is what you are hinting at you sir are creating madness. Madness that I would like to see as well. Damn that'd be a screamingly-fast system...
Of recent the major bottleneck in running SLI & Crossfire has been the CPU, well now thats been sorted whats holding us back now.....DDR 2 speeds?
Reagrding Conroe motherboard support I found THESE the other day at Xtremesystems
and there is also THIS
Shouldnt be that expensive, unless you go for an XE version as most of the chips are quite reasonably priced. Should be able to pick up a chip and mobo for ~ 300-310 GBP, then its a case of ram to suit... Not bad at all..
Cannot wait to see what jobs has created with these new processors, will be announced in early Aug
see here and here
:)
Yes, basically you got the jist of it. Instead of the added extra cost of PCB/Memory of GPU/PPU cards - you just buy a GPU/PPU core and put it in the socket.
More info for you guys at Ars Technica:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060602-6977.html
You can make a slot like PCI slot, the only difference is that it uses coherent hyper-transport (instead of the bus interface).
-ed out
I hope to be the first on my block with a conroe (so to speak). But I must have an Asus nforce 590sli... where is it?
@Lazarus Dark: If I were you I wouldn't splash out on a core 2 before K8L comes out. At least then you can make an informed decision.
-ed out
I want a super gaming chip but one that can multitask well too :s