AMD Delays Release of Quad-Core Athlon II.

mxthunder said:

FSX blows as far as multi core support goes. Even with the patch installed, I only see 1, and half of a second core getting any usage when monitoring with task manager. Same goes for crysis. Love both games though.

I think if you had a "3.5" core, that would actually be slower than having a full blown triple, because of how windows balances out the load, some of the demand would be getting sent to the slower "4th" core.

Click to expand...

Windows would be unaware it would be hardwired to the cpu and and accessed as needed for load sharing when the other cores became overloaded.

That seems like a good idea, but what advantages would you see? The lame core was labeled lame for a reason and even if you fixed it, it wouldn't be working up to snuff with a quad. Imagine all the R&D $$$ put into that to find that is only decreases the other core's loads by 5%. Seems like a major waste to me.

ChanceCoats123 said:

That seems like a good idea, but what advantages would you see? The lame core was labeled lame for a reason and even if you fixed it, it wouldn't be working up to snuff with a quad. Imagine all the R&D $$$ put into that to find that is only decreases the other core's loads by 5%. Seems like a major waste to me.

Click to expand...

It would not function as a core more a co-processor only seen by the cpu.

Well, that has to be the lousiest news I've heard all year, exactly what I was waiting for buying a few of ever since I knew they were coming since the September time-frame. It's also something I believe to be quite foolish for them to do at this stage whilst they're doing so well in the market at present. Mass market and the upgraders are in that exact product market they're delaying since its economically feasible and versatile enough for most to do so. Early June launch for them products, at least one SKU of each would have been healthy. Releasing per opponents launch is stupid unless you're product is superior in its total package.

Neur0mancer, I agree with what you pointed out of the games that show more than 2 cores being utilized and there are more of such titles appearing in the market day by day now, but unfortunately it still remains true that hardly any games use more than 2 cores for anything but handling the game audio and GPU driver. Do the tests yourself; log the modules of a process pulling CPU power in SupCom and such titles. It's also the same underlying process(s) causing stutter or perceived slowdowns in some games.

Archer0915 said:

It would not function as a core more a co-processor only seen by the cpu.

Click to expand...

but it is still not a %100 working core? so as said they now have to spend moiney on R&D to make it a co-processor... when they could put that money to use in other more effective ways, like lower the output of gimped quads.

Mr.Guvernment said:

but it is still not a %100 working core? so as said they now have to spend moiney on R&D to make it a co-processor... when they could put that money to use in other more effective ways, like lower the output of gimped quads.

Click to expand...

Or maybe catch up to intel's die sizes? Even though I love amd and all they do, They have HUGE dies compared to intel's and that is definately not helping manufacturing costs even though they somehow find a way to keep the prices low and a for amd!!!

Mr.Guvernment said:

but it is still not a %100 working core? so as said they now have to spend moiney on R&D to make it a co-processor... when they could put that money to use in other more effective ways, like lower the output of gimped quads.

Click to expand...

+1 on what you said... but I also accidentally hit the quote button, while trying to wipe the off, from staring at your Avatar too long.

ChanceCoats123 said:

Or maybe catch up to intel's die sizes? Even though I love amd and all they do, They have HUGE dies compared to intel's and that is definately not helping manufacturing costs even though they somehow find a way to keep the prices low and a for amd!!!

Click to expand...

PH2 is smaller than PH1 and I7, we will see about I5 but I would assume that will be very similar size.
Problem is C2D does a very good job fo such a small dice the new duals will answer to that.

The new SKUs are there to replace old 65nm duals and that would make them competitive with intel at least until they move on to 32nm.

Yay!!! I'll be able to get me's a new dual! I want to see the performance against my current chip... I smell a results thread .