Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 18-09-07, 05:03 AM
WC Annihilus WC Annihilus is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,057
Send a message via AIM to WC Annihilus Send a message via MSN to WC Annihilus
AMD Pulls Out Triple Threat

"AMD announced today that they will be going into a so far unexplored market in the processor world: the triple core processor."

Read on

__________________
Core i5 750 [email protected] under OCZ Vendetta 2

MSI P55-GD65

3x Kingston X25-V RAID0

2x Evga 9600GT SSC SLI

G.Skill Ripjaws 2x2GB DDR3-1600

Corsair VX550w, Ghettoed Antec Super Lanboy

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 18-09-07, 09:29 AM
ionicle ionicle is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Bridlington, East Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 3,237
seems daft...there's dual, and quad, even numbers...why odd lol
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 18-09-07, 09:32 AM
JN JN is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,678
I don't really know what to say about this other than...why?

[clutching straws]I guess it may offer better energy efficiency if you have a machine that only performs 3 primary tasks so a quad core would be using unneccesary energy, but c'mon....[/clutching straws]
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 18-09-07, 09:45 AM
nrage nrage is offline
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 314
I think the answer is "because they can" and "because intel cant" (using their current architecture in which a quad core is simply 2 dual cores on the same chip) ... but I could be wrong.

And like you say, it may provide a better cost/benefit option than dual or quad for some applications. Thereby giving them a small section of the market where they are sole supplier with no competition. Of course, this doesn't mean they can charge the earth for triple core, because that would simply drive people to quad or dual core instead.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 18-09-07, 01:16 PM
Yeungster Yeungster is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 530
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='nrage'
I think the answer is "because they can" and "because intel cant" (using their current architecture in which a quad core is simply 2 dual cores on the same chip) ... but I could be wrong.

And like you say, it may provide a better cost/benefit option than dual or quad for some applications. Thereby giving them a small section of the market where they are sole supplier with no competition. Of course, this doesn't mean they can charge the earth for triple core, because that would simply drive people to quad or dual core instead.
I agree. Most people are obsessed with the number of cores these days. If somebody was on a budget, and had a choice over a dual or tri core CPU, I would imagine a siginifcant number going the tri-core route (so long as there isn't a significant performance difference between them).
__________________
Corsair 750D with mesh airflow front panel, i7 6700K, Asus Z170-Deluxe, H110i GTX, 32GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4, 1TB BX100 SSD, RM750i, K70 RGB, M65 RGB, EVGA 1080Ti FTW3,3x 27" 1440p monitors (2x Dell U2715H & S2716DG 144hz)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 18-09-07, 02:50 PM
cuprasport cuprasport is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='Yeungster'
I agree. Most people are obsessed with the number of cores these days. If somebody was on a budget, and had a choice over a dual or tri core CPU, I would imagine a siginifcant number going the tri-core route (so long as there isn't a significant performance difference between them).
i suppose price will be a big thing, also if there isnt much diffrnce id go dual as heat will be alot less wouldnt it?
__________________
Intel C2D Q6600 @ 3.8 Ghz|Gigabyte GA_P35_DQ6|Corsair hx 620w

OCZ 8800GTX 768MB 692/2200|4GB Ballistix Tracer8500 [email protected]

Thermaltake Mozart
|Alphacool Laing DDC ULTRA|Thermochill PA120.2

D-TEK FuZion (CPU)
|Swiftech MCW30 (N|Noctua NC-U6 (S

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 18-09-07, 03:01 PM
Nagaru Nagaru is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,272
My guess is that these are 4 core chips with one core disabled to help yields. They could basically use any chip that has one bad core instead of it being useless.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 18-09-07, 03:15 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='Nagaru'
My guess is that these are 4 core chips with one core disabled to help yields. They could basically use any chip that has one bad core instead of it being useless.
Was my first impression tbh.

Die a quad and disable a core ? Or use the space 1 took up to do something else to benefit the L3 ? Or a flaw they`ve found (but not told any1) in the quad that this will cover ?

Seems on the surface to be a step back for seemingly no reason, the quote in the article talks alot and says nothing.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 18-09-07, 04:09 PM
nathan nathan is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,798
a step backwards from there quad imo. The only reason i can see is to make use of the quads that went up.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 18-09-07, 10:58 PM
Allsorts Allsorts is offline
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 270
I can totally understand this decision if there's a big price gap between the dual and quad cores.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT. The time now is 09:01 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.