backtop


Print 72 comment(s) - last by uksupramk3.. on Jul 29 at 10:33 PM

"Tulsa," "Merom," "Kentsfield" and "Clovertown" moved up

Yesterday during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report, Intel CEO Paul Otellini revealed that Intel has moved up its launch schedule for quad-core processors to Q4 2006 instead of Q1 2007 as originally announced by Intel in roadmaps and public relations.

Otellini claimed "We notified customers that we're pulling in both a desktop and server of the first quad-core processors into the fourth quarter of this year from the first half of 2007."  These two processors, dubbed Kentsfield and Clovertown, respectively, are essentially twin-die packages of Core 2 Duo.

In late May, Intel announced that the company will ship a 3.2GHz Core 2 Extreme processor followed by quad-core Kentsfield in Q1'07Kentsfield has always been slated as an Extreme processor, meaning it will carry a larger price tag than the traditional Core 2 Duo series.  Intel's quad-core server processor, dubbed Clovertown, is virtually identical to Kentsfield but will use the Socket 771 package instead of Socket 775.

Furthermore, Otellini confirmed that quad-core isn't the only processor series moved up.  The CEO confirmed Merom has been moved up and is already shipping to revenue, as was reported by HKEPC (English) several days ago.  Intel's Tulsa processors for Xeon MP are also already shipping to revenue according to Otellini, but the availability of these processors has largely been overshadowed by yesterday's launch of Itanium 2 Montecito and the recent launch of Xeon DP Woodcrest

Typically there is a two to three week lag between revenue shipments and retail availability, so expect to see many of these new "shipping to revenue" processors before the end of the month.


Comments     Threshold


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

RE: To combat 4x4 I take it.
By TomZ on 7/20/2006 12:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I can't really see 4x4 or Kentsfield being super popular anyway - I guess it is just that old struggle for the title of being the creater of the most powerful CPU, or CPU configuration.

I would want one - sign me up! I don't do any gaming (sadly), but I do tend to run a lot of apps at once and often times have several apps busy processing at the same time.


RE: To combat 4x4 I take it.
By clementlim on 7/20/2006 1:22:38 PM , Rating: 2
Is there anyway to analyse that quad cores actually works as 4 cores other than they quicken the application by 10-20%? Theoritically, they should push 400%...of course that is impossible, but just a theory.


RE: To combat 4x4 I take it.
By TomZ on 7/20/2006 1:38:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is there anyway to analyse that quad cores actually works as 4 cores other than they quicken the application by 10-20%? Theoritically, they should push 400%...of course that is impossible, but just a theory.

Sure: You can run 3 CPU-bound operations, then add a 4th, and the first 3 don't run any slower as a result. I've run similar tests on my dual-core and dual-processor machines before.

Most common applications aren't multi-threaded beyond some simple multi-threading in order to decouple GUI from "work" to keep the GUI responsive while the application is doing "work." For applications like this, the only benefit of quad-core is maybe that you could run more of these at the same time, but any individual application probably won't run any faster on quad-core.

If you had a particular application that was highly multithreaded and CPU-bound, then in theory you could get a 4x throughput increase with dual-core, but these applications are rare.


"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

Related Articles
Intel's "Woodcrest" to Launch Monday
June 23, 2006, 1:42 PM
The Count of "Montecito"
July 16, 2006, 3:39 PM
Intel Bumps "Tulsa" Ahead to Q3'06
June 12, 2006, 5:40 PM













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