bit-tech.net

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700

Comments 51 to 71 of 71

Reply
zoom314 4th November 2006, 10:28 Quote
Considering Valve announced that It is adding Dual core and Quad core support to Its source code I think the era of new single core games begining to end.
Tim S 4th November 2006, 10:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother-Gooser
Timothy Smalley explain yourself! :P well PM me if you like. This is all rather annoying now becuase I was gonna go quad lol, but don't think I will now!

That said if I want to I can with ease as it is the same socket, argh, when it gets alot closer to the time i reckon i should worry more lol otherwise i'll have sod all hair left by then!
:p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringold
Let me see if I understand correctly; Nehalem is a whole new architecture, in that Core 2 is a totally new design from Netburst, and not just a refresh of Core?

I ask because Netburst held around for five or six solid years, and K8 and even K8L is and will be patches to the original Clawhammer chip that come out.. when? Been a while there, too.

Yet Nehalem, another whole new architecture, after just 2 years?

Not that I'm complaining, a quicker pace of improvement is great, I'm just a little surprised. Things are moving at light speed, compared to the crawl that has been recent history.

Edit: I also need to read the forums much, much more often. Decoding the spoilers are as exciting as the reviews. :p
Nehalem is a completely new architecture as far as I know, but I don't know how much different it is at the moment. I'm assuming we'll see a shared cache over four cores (similar to the way Core 2 shares L2 cache between its two cores) - I'm also guessing that we will see a higher IPC and the capability to handle more threads at once. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by customh
I DO need an explanation, or a PM from anyone explaining this... multiplier locking or what?
:) you'll have to wait and see.
specofdust 4th November 2006, 11:23 Quote
This thread became funny the minute people stopped being able to interprete Tim's hints :D

The higher threads thing sounds interesting. I wonder does this mean they're reintroducing something like hyperthreading? 8 threads on a C2Q would provide enough paralell power for paralell stuff to really start to take off. Whereas 4 doesn't seem like quite enough to have massive parellism.
Tim S 4th November 2006, 12:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by specofdust
This thread became funny the minute people stopped being able to interprete Tim's hints :D

The higher threads thing sounds interesting. I wonder does this mean they're reintroducing something like hyperthreading? 8 threads on a C2Q would provide enough paralell power for paralell stuff to really start to take off. Whereas 4 doesn't seem like quite enough to have massive parellism.
You can already work on four instructions per clock, per core on Core 2 - I'd expect that you'll be able to work on more than four IPC per core on Nehalem. :)
mooosic 4th November 2006, 13:06 Quote
Thanks for the review, helpfull :)

__________________
funny movies http://4fun.bee.pl
Tim S 4th November 2006, 13:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooosic
Thanks for the review, helpfull :)
No problem - welcome to the forums. ;)
customh 4th November 2006, 15:08 Quote
I dont like you Tim Smalley i dont... i just wasnt awake enough when i read it...
Mother-Goose 4th November 2006, 15:30 Quote
I think i need to find out more about Nehalem lol
customh 4th November 2006, 15:35 Quote
Indeed, I do too :D
DougEdey 4th November 2006, 15:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother-Gooser
I think i need to find out more about Nehalem lol

Nehalem is a place in Oregon, its featured activities include: Lodging, Fishing and Kayaking. It's close to a very scenic area.

http://www.nehalem.com/
Tim S 4th November 2006, 16:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
Nehalem is a place in Oregon, its featured activities include: Lodging, Fishing and Kayaking. It's close to a very scenic area.

http://www.nehalem.com/
Brilliant.
Narvi 5th November 2006, 00:23 Quote
Are there any true multithreading software out? Like Valve is trying to do with its Source engine? If there are not, then quad core is probably underrated right now.
customh 5th November 2006, 00:26 Quote
doug you are a horrible person.
DougEdey 5th November 2006, 00:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by customh
doug you are a horrible person.

Yes, yes I am. That's probably why I have no girlfriend.
customh 5th November 2006, 00:49 Quote
ooo poor doug, much the better though, girls are a waste of time and emotion at this point in my life, things may be different for you as i dont know how old you are.
PS: we should stop spamming, we can do this in MSN...
Ringold 5th November 2006, 00:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Narvi
Are there any true multithreading software out? Like Valve is trying to do with its Source engine? If there are not, then quad core is probably underrated right now.

Well, if you check the review, you'll note most encoding software tends to be to various degrees.

Only apps I use daily that are nicely multithreaded:
WinRAR
7zip
BOINC (sorta, okay, not really, but it works)

And once in a blue moon, I'll use MediaCoder to compress with x264, but it only seems to use 70-80% on my dual-core system so it could be further improved in that regard. (open to suggestions for better apps too)

Source will be the first game with serious multithreading in it.

So, it's coming. If it were in my budget range, I wouldn't call quad core useless or anything, but I can't bring myself to pay more than about what an E6600 goes for at the moment on a CPU.
Tim S 5th November 2006, 11:34 Quote
Any 3D modelling software is heavily multithreaded. :)
DougEdey 5th November 2006, 11:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S
Any 3D modelling software is heavily multithreaded. :)

And has been since network rendering.
Mother-Goose 6th November 2006, 09:15 Quote
From the looks of that article it would make more sense to buy the Q6600 when it comes out and OC it rather than plumping for the QX6700, or just get the X6800 dual, mmmm future proofing makes me thinking Q6600
Bluephoenix 10th March 2007, 04:02 Quote
I've been using a QX6700 and have actually run it against a friend's X6800 (borrowed) with the X6800 at 3GHz and my QX at 3.15GHz

the QX6700 topped the X6800 in multiple game tests and also in encoding and decoding, the QX showed about a 60% lead in CAD anaylsis and rendering (SolidWorks COSMOS, Lightwave)

My recommendation for those who want to have a system that will do fine for a while is to get a Q6600 or a QX6700 and overclock it

[and when paired with 2 GTX's on a 24" and 4GB XLC the graphics are just obscene]

(for the test the systems were identical in all aspects except for processors)
DarkLord7854 10th March 2007, 04:16 Quote
argh old thread resurection..
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums