• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

First-ever Dual-core AMD Desktop processor

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

ssprncvegeta

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2002
Location
near the aol headquarters in virginia
It isn't very often something truly, 100% exclusive and drool-worthy drops into my mailbox here, but today just happens to be one of those days - I can now present to you what is the first benchmark of a desktop dual-core AMD processor!



Read

Looks promising.:)
 
I have never heard of EB, though I have known of a few. If the results are true then this is a very good thing for AMD and all of us who use their CPU's.
 
I thought AMD wasn't planning on making any Dual cores for the desktop quite a long time, or at least selling them. Ed's article "AMD Confrence Call" on the front page seems to agree. link

There is a thread started by the same guy at XS here

They tear into this benchmark pretty good, and with good cause considering that the P4 scores are without HT turned on, and there is absolutly no information about what the different systems are and where this benchmark came from. Apparently the poster got it in an e-mail from a friend.

Here is a translated thread from a much more believable source, that actually has decent proof of what they are doing. link

And a thread at XS again about this link
 
that's the new dual core EE, being released with the D series I think. Here is a tomshardware review of them link

I'm not overly excited about dual cores. The only thing I (and most of the people on these forums) use that truly maxes out your processor is gaming, and until games are programed for multithreads, a dual core will do virtually nothing for you.

It looks to me like AMD will have dual cores for the server market (where they will actually improve performance) and stick to single cores for the desktop for quite some time (until softwear makes a dual core usefull). Intel is already rolling out dual cores and will be selling them to the masses (idiots) who will no doubt believe that dual cores are twice as good.

For a few applications which can take advantage of dual cores they are great, but until games take advantage, I don't have much of a use for them. :shrug:
 
matttheniceguy said:
that's the new dual core EE, being released with the D series I think. Here is a tomshardware review of them link

I'm not overly excited about dual cores. The only thing I (and most of the people on these forums) use that truly maxes out your processor is gaming, and until games are programed for multithreads, a dual core will do virtually nothing for you.

It looks to me like AMD will have dual cores for the server market (where they will actually improve performance) and stick to single cores for the desktop for quite some time (until softwear makes a dual core usefull). Intel is already rolling out dual cores and will be selling them to the masses (idiots) who will no doubt believe that dual cores are twice as good.

For a few applications which can take advantage of dual cores they are great, but until games take advantage, I don't have much of a use for them. :shrug:

I agree, if you're an Intel user, I believe that just sticking with Hyper-Threading will do you more good in gaming at least.... for now.
 
Mattthewrongguy, where do you get off calling people idiots who are buying dual-core CPUs? I'm buying one and I'm sure as hell not an idiot. I DON'T PLAY GAMES ON MY COMPUTER!!!!! I do Audio/Video editing, so that makes me an idiot, right? Seriously, somebody spending over a thousand dollars on a machine used for games rather than buying an X-box and PS2 is more likely to fall into that category.

Please watch making sweeping generalizations and referring to people as idiots just because their needs don't match yours.
 
Play nice boys....

I am a gamer and want dual core... becuase when i am not gaming i am running more than 1 program always. Plus i wount have applications lock up when switching from one to another..
I would accept a 5% slower overall computer for the smoother ride.

oh and Ed's thoughts for the day: http://www.overclockers.com/tips00764/
 
the link didn't work. EB site said that the topic or post requested was not available.

i'll try it again later. i wanta see the benches on dual cores.
 
theMonster said:
Mattthewrongguy, where do you get off calling people idiots who are buying dual-core CPUs? I'm buying one and I'm sure as hell not an idiot. I DON'T PLAY GAMES ON MY COMPUTER!!!!! I do Audio/Video editing, so that makes me an idiot, right? Seriously, somebody spending over a thousand dollars on a machine used for games rather than buying an X-box and PS2 is more likely to fall into that category.

Please watch making sweeping generalizations and referring to people as idiots just because their needs don't match yours.

I agree with you up to this point:

theMonster said:
Seriously, somebody spending over a thousand dollars on a machine used for games rather than buying an X-box and PS2 is more likely to fall into that category.

:eh?:

You obviously haven't played any games that have been made for BOTH the computer and the latest consoles (Xbox, PS2, etc) and compared the console versions to the computer version. The computer version usually has MUCH better graphics and smoother gameplay. Plus, you can do so much more...
 
theMonster said:
Mattthewrongguy, where do you get off calling people idiots who are buying dual-core CPUs? I'm buying one and I'm sure as hell not an idiot. I DON'T PLAY GAMES ON MY COMPUTER!!!!! I do Audio/Video editing, so that makes me an idiot, right? Seriously, somebody spending over a thousand dollars on a machine used for games rather than buying an X-box and PS2 is more likely to fall into that category.

Please watch making sweeping generalizations and referring to people as idiots just because their needs don't match yours.


Wow... sorry for the mix up, you got me all wrong. I wasn't meaning that everyone who was buying a dual core was an idiot at all, for many people they are great. I was meaning that Intel will be selling a lot of these dual cores to "joe sixpacks" who will then proceed to use them for internet browsing and collecting viruses and spyware with kazaa.

For people such as yourself, who do Audio/Video editing, a dual core is a big improvement and makes sence. My comment about idiots was refering to the people with no real use for these dual core processors who will be upgrading to them simply because Intel said they should.
 
matttheniceguy said:
Wow... sorry for the mix up, you got me all wrong. I wasn't meaning that everyone who was buying a dual core was an idiot at all, for many people they are great. I was meaning that Intel will be selling a lot of these dual cores to "joe sixpacks" who will then proceed to use them for internet browsing and collecting viruses and spyware with kazaa.

For people such as yourself, who do Audio/Video editing, a dual core is a big improvement and makes sence. My comment about idiots was refering to the people with no real use for these dual core processors who will be upgrading to them simply because Intel said they should.

I think you are missing the point, that is exactly what dual core is for and why they will be so good for joe sixpick.

He doesnt need the fastest CPU on the block.
But dual core will help him as like you said Kazaa is running along with media player and a browser full of flash adds... MSN, Real player and Quick time and every other program that starts up on boot.
His Virus scanner is probly Norton that uses way to many CPU cycles as it is and scans everything as its being accesed. To him, Dual core has made his computer feel alot smoother as the delay when switch windows, or doing anything is now gone. He now has a CPU that can deal with all the junk he has going on and one that can do ll the work he wants done. (I know it wont be that perfect but its a good start)

but then again here is another view. more on the launch for desktops and itel is out to lunch... something you might find interesting
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22603
 
I've seen atleast two sites with dualcore benchmarks before this, and one of them actually ran quite a few benchmarks.

Sure the earlier ones where with opterons, but it will still go quite a way in showing what the performance will be. Atleast further then a benchmark in one application.

Anyway, I find it quite strange that we have a post in front page discussions (this does mean overclockers.com does'nt it?) with a link to another webpage that requires registration to view.
 
dropadrop said:
I've seen atleast two sites with dualcore benchmarks before this, and one of them actually ran quite a few benchmarks.
You means Toms and Anands ???

dropadrop said:
Sure the earlier ones where with opterons, but it will still go quite a way in showing what the performance will be. Atleast further then a benchmark in one application.
its funny how benchmarking as we knew it before is going to have to change as you cant fully bench them now can you. :)

dropadrop said:
Anyway, I find it quite strange that we have a post in front page discussions (this does mean overclockers.com does'nt it?) with a link to another webpage that requires registration to view.
Yes it means overclockers.com
and no registration is needed to view anything posted in this thread
 
really cuz it told me to login...so i just said screw it and started reading down here
 
jAY said:
You means Toms and Anands ???

Nah, I mean taiwanese sites with benchmarks that have been going around for quite a while. I made a thread about the latter (and better) one, but it did'nt seem to intrest anyone...

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=379901

its funny how benchmarking as we knew it before is going to have to change as you cant fully bench them now can you. :)

I don't know. I think benchmarking will not change that much, maby more multithreaded apps will be included. For me that's fine, cause I don't play games. Just about all the apps I use that need power are allready multithreaded.

I guess we'll start seeing alot more benchmarks with two differant apps running at the same time though.

Yes it means overclockers.com
and no registration is needed to view anything posted in this thread

Well that's funny, cause when I click the link in the first page, I end up on Elite ******** forum login page. :)
 
dropadrop said:
Well that's funny, cause when I click the link in the first page, I end up on Elite ******** forum login page. :)

um... ok so i didnt even see that :D
but thanks for teh link
 
Well that's funny, cause when I click the link in the first page, I end up on Elite ******** forum login page.

When I first read this thread I was able to see the actual thread at Elite and there was no need to login. I guess they have had enough traffic directed to that thread that they are fishing for new members (who wouldn't). The thread didn't have much to say anyway other than people saying "OMFG bla bla bla I want it". The other links are more informative and objective, so I would say to just go by them.
 
Back