backtop


Print 41 comment(s) - last by symbolset.. on Oct 12 at 1:54 AM

Intel documents reveal two quad-core processors within the next six months

For those of you who hadn't seen this coming -- you should have -- Intel's desktop quad-core "Core 2" processor is on the way.  Intel's most recent launch update claims the chip will come in two iterations, the first of which will be here in November 2006.  Both chips have Socket 775 packaging and utilize a 1066MHz front-side bus.

The Extreme Edition 2.66GHz chip, dubbed Core 2 Extreme QX6700, is poised to launch this year in November.  Like other "Extreme" chips from Intel, the estimated price tag is $999 for the new processor. The CPU is compatible with all second-generation Conroe-compatible Intel 975X motherboards, but not all "965" series motherboards. Unfortunately, there are no more details on which motherboards are compatible yet.

A mainstream quad-core Kentsfield will launch early next year, dubbed the Core 2 Quadro Q6600, and will debut with a 2.4GHz core frequency.  A price tag for the Q6600 has not been set yet, but the processor will retail for less than the QX6700 but more than the Core 2 Duo E6700.  The E6700 has a street price of approximately $530 USD, but price cuts will bring the cost of the CPU down before the Q1'07 launch of mainstream Kentsfield.

Intel's original launch scheduled claimed that only the Q6600 would launch next year.  This has been revised several times by Intel representatives who have publically pre-empted AMD's quad-core plans.  AMD retaliated earlier this year stating that quad-core demonstrations would come before the end of the year. Given that AMD has a traditional habit of demonstrating its new processor technology during the Intel Developer Forums (IDF) that occur twice annum, it's quite likely that we will see these first demonstrations at next week's IDF.

A server version of Kentsfield, dubbed Clovertown, is also expected to ship this year with Socket 771 packaging.


Comments     Threshold


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

awesome
By tobrien on 9/19/2006 9:22:36 AM , Rating: 2
That's great to hear, but weren't they originally slated to come out in June of '07 or is that something else?




RE: awesome
By PT2006 on 9/19/2006 9:27:13 AM , Rating: 4
That's AMD's quad core processor, K8L


RE: awesome
By nerdboy on 9/19/2006 5:00:09 PM , Rating: 2
AMD quad core will actually be a quad core. There will be 4 processors on a single Die. Intels is going to be two dies with a duel cores on them so its not really a true quad core.


RE: awesome
By shadowzz on 9/19/2006 5:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
Someone else said this once already. WTF does it matter?


RE: awesome
By xFlankerx on 9/19/2006 9:29:41 PM , Rating: 3
Lol, it doesn't matter at all. It just gives the AMD boys a reason to feel superior where the performance doesn't really make it.


RE: awesome
By Tyler 86 on 9/19/2006 11:47:28 PM , Rating: 2
It matters, but it's of no real concern to most.

It probably will have little impact on performance, but direct integration has previously yeilded grand performance.

It's just hopeful.


RE: awesome
By Samus on 9/20/2006 12:43:41 AM , Rating: 2
if yeilds are good, one die will be cheaper to produce than two, as there is less manufacturing substrate waste.


RE: awesome
By Tyler 86 on 9/20/2006 1:10:29 PM , Rating: 2
Although you 'waste' less, you have the potential to 'waste' more.
With an 'average' defect per millimeter ratio, you lose less dies with 4 small dies in the space of 1 that got eaten...

Ah, but of course, if yields are good, then it doesn't matter... because yields are good.


Oh oh oh... almost forgot... from Intel
By Marlin1975 on 9/19/2006 9:38:09 AM , Rating: 4
[Intel]Oh oh oh... almost forgot. You are going to need a new chipset and new board for this chip. Sure the 965 just came out but you will now need the new super 966 chip. [/Intel]


I hope this will not be true as I and many juts got 965 boards in HOPE it would at least make it to the next Intel chip/update.




RE: Oh oh oh... almost forgot... from Intel
By edpsx on 9/19/2006 9:57:51 AM , Rating: 3
Are you really suprised by this? Everytime Intel releases a new chip they always change the platform its going to be on as well. They make more money and so do motherboard manufacturers for selling more products. But the real question is WHY? Why do we need quad core processors in desktop computers? Almost NOTHING is written for multi threaded application so whats the point? I think this is a jump of the gun by intel just to try and gain more ground from AMD.


By edpsx on 9/19/2006 10:00:33 AM , Rating: 2
And one more item.. if youve noticed AMD tends to stick with the same socket/platform for awhile even on newer upgraded processors. This allows the customer to upgrade more easily. There are many more cpu's that get made for one specific socket type so as not to confuse the crap out of you when you go buy new computer parts. And no Im not an AMD fan boy.


By RMSe17 on 9/19/2006 10:03:21 AM , Rating: 4
Quad core is more geared towards a workstation, and a workstation is going to have a workstation geared chipset, 975X. The chip works on 975X. I really dont see what all the fuss is about. It makes sense.


RE: Oh oh oh... almost forgot... from Intel
By VooDooAddict on 9/19/2006 11:06:01 AM , Rating: 2
I for one see a big use for this in Dev Workstations.

I lead developer on a 3 person Dev/Testing Team. We need to do lost of our own testing and system validation on VMware.

May times I take my work home over the weekend it would be great to have a system at home capable of running a full Virtual Machine replica of the distributed system.

I'm waiting to see the pricing on this and the 8 core Mac Pro before buying/building my next home dev system.


RE: Oh oh oh... almost forgot... from Intel
By adamfilipo on 9/19/2006 12:20:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yeap cant wait for the Net Apple Mac Pro Octo
with dual Clovertown processors

hopefully over 3ghz or apple will have a confusing time marketing them


By Pirks on 9/19/2006 2:21:31 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
hopefully over 3ghz

read the article again - clovertowns are gonna be up to only 2.66 GHz 'cause they're quads and hence emit double the heat amount of your standard issue dualcore conroe/x2, so forget about mac pro clovertown 3GHz, apple won't stick the clovertown in a vapochill case, they're too cheap for that
quote:
apple will have a confusing time marketing them
don't worry about marketing - apple successfully marketed BOTH ppc vs intel and then intel vs ppc - and apple sheep where buying it always in droves, rest assured they'll buy mac pros 2.66GHz just like they were buying ppc and everything else apple was marketing


Vista
By Murst on 9/19/2006 11:10:53 AM , Rating: 2
These things will rock for Windows Vista.

Its not a perfect implementation of a quad core (I believe its 2 C2Ds stuck together), but its not like applications are really written to take advantage of 4 cores, at least not the ones I run on my home computer.

On the other hand, it is perfect for making the system more responsive, as Vista is certainly designed to take advantage of multiple cores/cpus.

I can't wait for the day I can run a game like WC3, SQL Server, and Visual Stuido at the same time on my comp. Looks like that day isn't too far away. Time to save up some money :)




RE: Vista
By retrospooty on 9/19/2006 11:39:05 AM , Rating: 3
"These things will rock for Windows Vista.

Its not a perfect implementation of a quad core (I believe its 2 C2Ds stuck together), but its not like applications are really written to take advantage of 4 cores, at least not the ones I run on my home computer. "


How so? You are contradicting yourself. True most apps arent written to take advantage of 2, much less 4 cores, and Vista is. Its not like Vista itself is so CPU hungry it is waiting for CPU bandwidth to process instructions.

Here is what will happen.
Vista, XP or OSX or Linux variants for that matter- no difference at all.

Multithreaded apps - Will see significant improvement ONLY if CPU limited.

Now, what multithreaded apps are CPU limited using current C2D or A64 X2 architecure? Not much, not much at all. This is a great CPU, but for the price, its not worth getting until software catches up.


RE: Vista
By Targon on 9/19/2006 1:11:34 PM , Rating: 2
With all the services and "junk" that will come with Vista, the more cores that you have in your system, the faster your applications will run, just because the number of background processes/services per core will be lower.

Applications are clearly moving toward a multi-threaded design as well, even if there arn't many advertisements about the fact. That would be an interesting thing for a site like Anandtech to test for, and not just for things like first person shooters, but for other games, including MMOs.


RE: Vista
By Murst on 9/19/2006 2:59:30 PM , Rating: 3
No, no contradiction here.

Although no applications that I know of which I currently use are really multi-threaded, Vista certainly is.

It can manage its own processes & threads across multiple cores, and the more cores you have, the lower the load on each processor.

Also, keep in mind that each process (not just threads) are managed by Windows. If a core/cpu isn't doing much and another core/cpu is busy, Windows can assign a new process to a different core/cpu.

Therefore, even though I may not be running many multi-threaded processes, Windows will still manage multiple single-threaded processes across cores, while itself managing its own threads/processes across multiple cores.

Finally, I realize that Windows XP and earlier versions could do this, but this will really be great in vista as it is the most CPU hungry OS to date (at least from what I've seen in beta)


RE: Vista
By Ringold on 9/19/2006 3:20:50 PM , Rating: 2
Murst, you don't use WinRAR? I thought WinRAR magically appeared on everyones HD at some point or another, and since 3.6, has been multithreaded. Not just in name, either; that puppy really eats just about every cycle my X2 @ 2.6ghz can feed it, and really nearly doubles performance over single-core compression times.

I don't use any of those fancy rendering apps that can use any number of cores though so asides from WinRAR and BOINC, that's all I've got. Though multitasking is much better, but with almost all lag already removed with two cores I don't see the benefit there with 4. Not on the home side. But at these price levels we shouldn't be talking about the typical home user anyway, should we? Obviously Six-pack Joe won't be buying Quad-core for the balance of 2007 to run Deer Hunt XXX: State of Ranch.


RE: Vista
By Murst on 9/19/2006 5:09:59 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I don't use WinRar, but that's not really the point of my post. I'm certainly not saying that there is NO applications which aren't multithreaded.

This website also isn't for typical home users. I come here because I want to know what technology will be coming out in the future and how to improve my computer at home. Do I need the latest technology? Of course not, but I want it. I don't care if the average home user will be using this stuff. This is for my own personal use, and I can clearly see the benefits of moving to a quad core CPU.

Just because you don't don't believe that you will benefit from some new technology which is coming out does not make it useless ;)


RE: Vista
By symbolset on 10/12/2006 1:54:54 AM , Rating: 2
What benefits from multicore? Who runs just one app at a time is a better question. It's about responsiveness.

Most video rendering sofware. Blender. DVD Burning. CD burning. IE. Pro-E. Autocad. What, don't you post youtube? How do you do that while you're strolling around in WoW? Don't lag or your BF2 1LT will get fragged.

These are all going to see grand responsiveness improvements with multicore and the more cores the better. Who wants to wait for their video to render before they can burn a CD, listen to Internet radio, browse the net or all three? Who wants a Moment of Silence in their DVD just because a system event (BTW, what's up with that?) just kicked in?

Some of us like to do stuff while our computers are doing other stuff. Multitasking on a single core just ain't what it's supposed to be and judging by the resources it consumes Vista isn't going to help. Try it. You can play games while you're recording TV and watching a different channel and burning a DVD, and your teamspeak is crystal. All this and the whole time _quiet_ because it's just not getting hot tho the fan's a gentle breeze and not the leaf blower you're used to. You'll never go back.

About the money -- the cost is fading fast as they're retiring old procs much faster than they used to. Two cores cost less than one did just a little while ago. '386 servers used to cost $10,000. Pick your comfort point and go for it. If next year they're more and faster, upgrade. It's not like the new high end procs don't fit in the same 975X motherboard that hosts last year's P4. If you gotta get a low-end CPU today, those cool new procs will slide right in when their descending price hits your rising price point sweet spot.



By Rookierookie on 9/19/2006 11:12:49 AM , Rating: 2
Well, Quadro may be a sensible name for the CPU line, but for some reason I don't see nvidia being all too happy with it...

On the plus side they might be able to market some Quadro-on-Quadros...or even Quad-Quadros-on-Quad-Quadros...that's going to be great on the tongue.




By soydeedo on 9/19/2006 11:47:56 AM , Rating: 1
well hell. after the amd/ati merger maybe this alludes to a future nvidia buyout. then you get a quadro platform for serious work with a quadro processor and quadro gfx card. =P


By adamfilipo on 9/19/2006 12:18:34 PM , Rating: 2
well atleast they didnt use Quatro cause then Audi would be upset

i doubt nvidia would care since they dont make competing products


By ZmaxDP on 9/19/2006 1:27:59 PM , Rating: 4
Are you implying that Audi DOES make procuct which Intel competes with? I've yet to hear of the new car with an "Intel Inside" for the powertrain. Or, for that matter, a line of computers from Audi. But then, I am out of the loop on these things...


motherboards currently compatable
By irev210 on 9/19/2006 9:40:00 AM , Rating: 3
All core 2 DUO 965/975 mobo's support kentfield.

The best right now is the P5W Deluxe because it supports all of the multi's. The p5b deluxe currently only offers multi's up to 12x :(

The biggest problem with overclocking these CPU's is the intense FSB. The quad-core really does a number on the FSB. Mobo's that can do 500mhz+ on core2duo are lucky to hit 400mhz with kentfield, with low multiplier.


With the introduction of kentfield, we will see a greater need for high quality air cooling. The units are very overclockable, just generate a TON of heat.

The k6700 easily overclocks to 3500+ on GOOD air. People will be very happy with them.

The next gen intel extreme chipset 975v2 on 90nm should help out the FSB problems that kentfield is having.

HEAT and FSB are going to be the big topics for this chip.





RE: motherboards currently compatable
By irev210 on 9/19/2006 9:43:13 AM , Rating: 2
i should edit, support is up to the manufacturer.

Right now here are thje ones i've tested-


ASUS-

P5W DH Deluxe
P5B Deluxe
and the workstation core 2 duo boards

DFI-

Infinity 975



There are many more. Even the Dell XPS 700 supports the kentfield out of the box.

Anyway, hope this helps.


By RamarC on 9/19/2006 10:33:07 AM , Rating: 2
Tom's used the p5w dh deluxe in their kentsfield tests:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_...


Will It Fit?
By thegrimreaper3 on 9/19/2006 9:24:11 AM , Rating: 1
So does that mean that a quad core 2 will fit in my e1505? I was about to upgrade to a core 2 being that i just bought it about 2 weeks before the core 2 came out so I'm stuck with a core duo...




RE: Will It Fit?
By PT2006 on 9/19/2006 9:27:50 AM , Rating: 2
Your notebook uses Socket 479. These chips are socket 775. We probably won't see quad core notebooks for a long time.


RE: Will It Fit?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 9/19/2006 10:57:26 AM , Rating: 2
Because the power requirements and thermal disipation would either suck your battery dry in 20 minutes, or it would cause your laptop to warp and melt. Sorry man but this is not a laptop processor, probably not until the Core 4 series, or a shrink to 45nm.


RE: Will It Fit?
By Pirks on 9/19/2006 3:35:04 PM , Rating: 1
xeon L5310 is a low voltage 1.6 GHz clovertown with TDP about 50 watts, should perfectly fit into an alienware "portable home heater" aurora notebook or a similar class portable workstation machine, so quad core lappy is probably not THAT far away, 50 watts to dissipate are perfectly manageable for a notebook, considering all 4 cores are not going to be 100% loaded all the time so average TDP is maybe 30 watt or so - here's your new slick dell portable workstation for all those who run maya on their lap in the packed train/bus (gotta be real maniac animator, from ILM, not less! :)))


Against Windows' EULA?
By RobbieMc on 9/19/2006 10:22:18 AM , Rating: 2
Techincally wouldn't quad-core be against the EULA for WinXP? See section 1.1 of the EULA:
quote:
The Software may not be used by more than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation Computer.




RE: Against Windows' EULA?
By shadowzz on 9/19/2006 10:28:16 AM , Rating: 2
I think in the same EULA Microsoft also clearly defines a "processor" as a CPU Socket.


RE: Against Windows' EULA?
By MuskBassist on 9/19/2006 10:52:15 AM , Rating: 2
Correct, Windows XP can already run on systems with two dual-core processors.


Trademarks, and more importantly
By vgermax on 9/19/2006 11:46:57 AM , Rating: 2
The Core 2 Quadro was stated to be an internal designation/release. The Core Quadro (with or without numeration) trademark has not been registered with the Patent and Trademark Office. For reference, Core 2 Duo is a considered a variant of Intel Core Inside Duo. With regards to Quadro, it is registered as a trademark in 59 separate filings (some live, some dead) not all from Nvidia.

More importantly, how well are the developer tools are progressing that allow for balancing, and optimization of software for multi-core processors? The console development tools seemingly kick-started this for a broader range of applications. More specific to Intel, also, is a question of when a proper point-to-point bus will be adopted. I believe this was known previously as CSI.




RE: Trademarks, and more importantly
By darkfossil on 9/19/06, Rating: -1
RE: Trademarks, and more importantly
By ZmaxDP on 9/19/2006 1:47:36 PM , Rating: 3
I love it when people make blatant generalizations. It makes what is probably an otherwise intelligent person and makes look like a moron.

Maya
Viz/3D Studio
FormZ
Mental Ray
Gelato
Maxwell
Lightscape
Lightwave
And pretty much any rendering application on the face of the planet scales quite well with multiple cores.

Encoding
Decoding
Zipping
Unzipping
Most compression technologies now can be multithreaded for improved performance and scale quite well as well.

Multi-tasking

Then there's a whole barrage of Sound editing and Image editing softwares that love CPU cycles and can use multiple cores. Most of these scale almost as well on 4 cores as they do on two.

I have a four core computer, 2 Opteron 275's - and that was an upgrade from two Opteron 246's. The bump in performance far surpasses the minimal clockspeed jump from 2.0 Ghz to 2.2. Ghz. Yes, even on single threaded applications, for the reasons others have listed. It's easy to dismiss it until you've used it. Aside from my work - which heavily utilizes all 4 cores, it blows the socks off of my FX-57 in my home computer for everything BUT gaming. And, that has far less to do with the CPU and a lot more to do with the ATI workstation card in my work computer and the 7800gtx in my home computer. If I could afford the parts I'd happily swap out my FX57 for a dual processor dual core implementation at home. The gain in consistency (never noticing a slow down in performance no matter what you're doing) is worth it all by itself. Personally, I'm going to wait for K8L and AMD Quad core because AMD has been so great to me personally over the last few years. Intel has their pants around their ankles at the moment, but AMD will do the same in return in a few more months.

I'm not saying that the average consumer will NEED the additional cores, but to say that they won't notice, use, or appreciate them, is absolutely ridiculous. If you don't know, try not to act like you do. It makes you look a bit silly most of the time.


By Helbore on 9/19/2006 1:51:21 PM , Rating: 2
This is what I'm hoping for, too, but in the case of what the Clovertown release will do to the current Woodcrest chips. I'm in dire need of a new server to run VMWare and half a dozen VMs, but those Woodcrest chips are just too expensive right now. I'm hoping that clovertown, if it appears around November-December, will push the Woodcrest prices down a notch or two.


naming convention
By cnimativ on 9/19/2006 11:43:32 AM , Rating: 1
I like this naming convention by Intel. Some years down the road, we might seen something like "Core 4 Hex"!!!




"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs














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