Intel Core 2 Quad Announced Internally
September 19, 2006 1:56 AM
comment(s) - last by
Intel documents reveal two quad-core processors within the next six months
For those of you who hadn't seen this coming --
-- 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
, 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
-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
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
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
is also expected to ship this year
with Socket 771 packaging.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
9/19/2006 2:59:30 PM
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)
9/19/2006 3:20:50 PM
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.
9/19/2006 5:09:59 PM
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 ;)
"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins
"Kentsfield" to Debut at 2.66GHz
August 16, 2006, 10:43 PM
AMD Plans To Demonstrate Native Quad-Core This Year
July 21, 2006, 6:57 PM
Intel Quad-Core Pushed Up to Q4'06
July 19, 2006, 6:37 PM
Intel Quad-core "Kentsfield" Support Up In the Air
June 22, 2006, 1:27 PM
Intel Admits Integrated Memory Controller Benefits, Talks Quad Core
June 14, 2006, 8:28 AM
"Prepare to be Punished": Microsoft is Killing OneDrive With Cuts, Blames Users
November 3, 2015, 8:23 PM
Apple's New "Magic" Peripheral Line Packs High Tech, High Prices
October 13, 2015, 9:39 PM
Samsung Adds 2 TB 850 EVO, PRO SSDs for $800, $1000
July 7, 2015, 4:23 PM
Seagate Senior Researcher: Heat Can Kill Data on Stored SSDs
May 13, 2015, 2:49 PM
How to Recover Most Apps After Your NVIDIA Driver Crashes in Windows 10
March 30, 2015, 12:54 PM
Tinkerer Gets Old School Mac Plus Running on the Modern Web
March 24, 2015, 6:41 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information