backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by Viditor.. on Mar 15 at 8:47 AM


Intel's Kentsfield CPU (top) will be the first quad core desktop chip, Clovertown will be the server equivalent - Courtesy AnandTech.com
According to Intel, it says quad-core for desktops will be ready by 2007

IDF is definitely showcasing a host of exciting technologies, but today Intel showed details of some very interesting technology in regards to where servers and desktops will be heading in 2007. According to company slides, Intel expects to be shipping multi-core Xeon processors based on the Montecito core by mid-year 2006. Targeting the MP segment, Intel's next-generation Tulsa processor will be manufactured using 65nm fabrication technology with large 16MB caches.

For the desktop segment, Intel indicated that Kentsfield will be the first quad-core processor and will be released in Q1 of 2007 after Conroe. During mid-year 2006, Intel will introduce its Bridge Creek platform but it did not indicate whether or not it will be Kentsfield ready. Recently, AMD also indicated that it will be introducing quad-core processors in 2007 for the server segment, but did not talk about the desktop space. According to Intel slides, Kentsfield will be focused on immediately after Conroe.

Intel indicated that quad-core processors will only be needed for the very highest-end desktops. Corporate users and enterprise level productivity software will also be a target for Kentsfield. Tigerton, Intel's quad-core MP processor, will also be released in early 2007.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Intel does a lot of TALKING but that's about it.
By Beenthere on 3/8/2006 9:31:12 PM , Rating: -1
Intel is good at delivering hype but bad on delivering quality CPUs.




By zsdersw on 3/8/2006 10:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone who doubted my assertion in another story's comment section that there are idiots here need only look to this guy's comments (Beenthere).


By AMaench7 on 3/8/2006 10:25:27 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed..as it is right now they are about a cycle behind AMD. Their only saving grace as of late was the Intel Core Duo(Yohan), that is the only processor giving AMD a run for their money.

I especially enjoyed the tests Intel ran the other day on their new state of the art system versus a cycle behind AMD. Then claiming it could kick the crap out of AMD and that we should all hail them as pioneers. Wait till AMD launches full DDR2-800 support and puts Intel back in their seat again.


By hans007 on 3/8/2006 11:21:12 PM , Rating: 2
hyperthreading is not a thing just for the netburst architecture.

i am sure it will come back when threading becomes more prevalent. right now, 2 cores are probably ok, as the benefit to going to say 4 logical cpus i dont think intel feels is worth using hyperthreading at this point as most desktop users would not see a difference.

it is different in the server space, as the power5 and sparc chips all have some form of hyperthreading. in reality the company most behind on this type of technology is AMD as it does not appear to be on any of their roadmaps.


as it is, from my understanding in college, hyperthreading would do something like this. say you have an instruction that just does integer addition. if the cpu has say a shifter unit, or say a divide unit , you would then be able to say run 2 instructions if the other one was only going to use the shifter. so it can in certain situations make a huge difference, thus why sun and power5 use it.


By Xenoterranos on 3/9/2006 1:32:37 AM , Rating: 2
But now it's all about economics isn't it. Why are they going to spend the time, money, and die space to re-develop hyperthreading for this architecture when they can just keep heeping on gobs of cache? I mean honestly, 16mb cache? I can't decide if thats a design decision or a bandaid?!


By JackPack on 3/9/2006 2:54:44 AM , Rating: 2
16MB is for Tulsa only.


"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki