Advanced Micro Devices said Thursday it would offer a platform that would allow users to run two processors with four processing engines into desktop computers. This is generally the first time that computer enthusiasts can use two processors on an appropriate platform and certainly the first time that the performance-demanding users can enjoy advantage of as many as eight processing cores.
“AMD announced plans for a new enthusiast platform codenamed ‘4x4’ that will extend AMD’s long-standing commitment to those consumers who demand the highest-performing PCs,” an AMD statement claimed.
The announcement means that AMD is planning to allow using enthusiast-class processors in 2-way configurations, something, which market leader Intel and AMD have been trying to avoid in the past. No Athlon on Pentium processors currently support technology that allows the chips to work in pairs.
AMD has already been rumored in regards of introduction of a desktop processor that contains four processing engines, however, this so far it has not been confirmed. Today the company says it would allow computer enthusiasts to use two dual-core processors to achieve ultimate performance in applications that take advantage of multi-core systems. Moreover, quad-core chips will also be able to work in pairs, it seems.
“The 4x4 platform features a four-core, multi-socket processor configuration uniquely possible via AMD’s direct connect architecture,” the statement reads.
Additionally, AMD said it would develop microprocessors featuring four processing engines for performance-minded enthusiasts.
“The 4x4 platform will be designed to be upgraded to eight total processor cores when AMD launches quad-core processors in 2007. Project 4x4 represents system-level enthusiast enhancements and is designed for ultimate multi-tasking performance across gaming, digital video, processor-intensive and heavily threaded applications,” the firm said.
Comments currently:
47
Discussion started: 06/02/06 09:14:06 AM
Latest comment: 05/14/08 06:51:30 AM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
1.
Just like a 4x4 veichle - It may have a lot of "traction" but its very fuel hungry and in-efficient.
[
Posted by: Bosaka
|
Date: 06/02/06 09:14:07 AM]
2.
Is AMD trying to start a career as a comedian?
[
Posted by: 1234
|
Date: 06/02/06 09:31:50 AM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
I thought the same when Intel released the Pentium 4 EE
[
Posted by: Kaz
|
Date: 06/05/06 04:06:53 AM]
3.
only interesting i it's allowing the regular X2 line and maybe sempron line ...
for ultra high end users with 4xSLI this is basically the same thing so for the ones with money =no object it should give the best performance.
1234, you were probably sceptic too at the SLi launch (like ati) :P
[
Posted by: Lost
|
Date: 06/02/06 11:15:33 AM]
4.
Indeed, I still dont support multi-GPU technology even though it does deliver a bit more performance, but the gain is actually tiny compared to costs.
What makes this absolutely pathetic is that you HAVE TO use 1200$ CPUs.
[
Posted by: 1234
|
Date: 06/02/06 12:35:20 PM]
5.
Oh I get it it an April fools joke right?????? Hey!!! wait a minute we're in June.....WTF???????
[
Posted by: WTF????
|
Date: 06/02/06 03:07:56 PM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
6.
Enough of the chit chat! Let's just bash both AMD and Intel. LOL
[
Posted by: B@sh
|
Date: 06/02/06 11:50:02 PM]
7.
Core Duo 2 Sucks! Take that Intel fanboys
[
Posted by: B@sh
|
Date: 06/02/06 11:50:55 PM]
8.
Athlon 64 FX also sucks! Take that AMD fanboys
[
Posted by: B@sh
|
Date: 06/02/06 11:51:30 PM]
9.
Via C7 Processor Rules!
[
Posted by: B@sh
|
Date: 06/02/06 11:52:26 PM]
10.
My girlfreind sucks....but she wont swallow. :(
[
Posted by: :(
|
Date: 06/03/06 12:45:38 AM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
ur small canned sausage??looooooooooool
[
Posted by: dickhead
|
Date: 10/03/06 10:30:09 AM]
11.
What Ive been thinking about... 2 Dual-Cores would mean that their Quad-Core (K8L) sucks hard? Otherwise they wouldnt have any reason to launch this costly "master"piece...
[
Posted by: 1234
|
Date: 06/03/06 12:46:17 AM]
12.
I know! X-bit labs sucks! (Chuckles) LOL
[
Posted by: B@sh
|
Date: 06/03/06 01:19:13 AM]
13.
Quad cpu on quad gpu!
If I wore panties it would be wet!
(but I do not swallow)
Is this some PS3 beat-down race of what? Cos it definetly IS pretty funny...
[
Posted by: fullgrip
|
Date: 06/03/06 05:08:30 AM]
14.
"The 4x4 platform will be designed to be upgraded to eight total processor cores when AMD launches quad-core processors in 2007. "
But will the platform be avalible in 2006 ??
Getting this motherboard and a X2 and you will have a great upgrade path.. you can later get either one X3 or X4 or X2+X2 or X3+X3 or X4+X4 .. pretty sweet upgrade path IMO.
[
Posted by: performance is sweet
|
Date: 06/03/06 12:42:06 PM]
15.
So ... the FX started out as a rebadged top-bin Opteron 1xx ... then became a rebadged top-bin S939 chip ... now they're rebadging top-bin Opteron 2xx's as FX's as well. Wow, big deal.
The sole difference I can see between 4x4 and a dual dual-core Opteron system (besides the price, of course) is that with the 4x4 you get a maximum multiplier of 24x, instead of the maximum multiplier being stock for the Opteron system. Which doesn't really make that much of a difference anyhow as you can get quite decent overclocking out of a K8WE.
[
Posted by: Cynic
|
Date: 06/04/06 02:52:18 AM]
16.
This is some bullshit. Right now they barely have programs that take advantage of the dual cores and now they are saying 8 cores? man WTFEver! I've been an AMD fan for a long time but this here is total BS just like Nvidia's 4 card GPU...
[
Posted by: Po
|
Date: 06/04/06 03:48:01 PM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
"This is some bullshit. Right now they barely have programs that take advantage of the dual cores and now they are saying 8 cores? man WTFEver! I've been an AMD fan for a long time but this here is total BS just like Nvidia's 4 card GPU... "
Yes of course you are right, and 640k ought to be enough RAM for anyone ;P
[
Posted by: 4321
|
Date: 06/05/06 08:27:45 AM]
17.
This multicore processor configuration is some real shit. Only scientists and engineers that are using computers for insane multi parallel applications would be able to fully utilize this.
I can only see a normal computer user using this to improve their SETI@home computation times. That application can start a separate thread on each of the cores and really kick single and dual core processor’s ass. The time per unit calculation is not increased, but the amount of work units per time could be quadrupled...
But SETI@home is bullshit...
[
Posted by: 31415
|
Date: 06/04/06 05:59:37 PM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
WOW that almost sounds familiar.....oh YEAH!!!! It's called a freaking WORKSTATION!!!!!!!!
[
Posted by: WOoahhh
|
Date: 06/05/06 06:00:57 PM]
18.
1 core for the game engine
1 core to the graphics driver
1 core for the psychics
1 core for the system/directx load/other
Yes there will immediate performance gains. If they do overall improvements, even if it’s only 20%, 30% global, it’s good.
[
Posted by: Kaz
|
Date: 06/05/06 04:04:51 AM]
19.
Well, I for one will purchase this option when avaliable. Why, you ask? Programs such as Lightwave 3d 8.5 and build nine will totally take adavantage of multiple cores and when rendering near photographic quality animations one can never have enough power to render. Or how about Edius Pro 4 which by the way, takes advantage of multi core sytems, and not to mention Adobe Primier Pro 2.xx. So you who think multi core systems are stuppid and there is no advantage, stop playing games and get Lightwave 3d or any Pro editing package and yoiu will know what I am talking about. I am not a gamer but a creator of my own universe!! My 2 cents
[
Posted by: szutowave
|
Date: 06/05/06 08:29:31 AM]
+ expand thread (4 answers)
- collapse thread
There are already things called workstations with more than one processor. All this is is a cheaper platform using standard memory, aimed at enthusiasts.
[
Posted by: Wrong market
|
Date: 06/05/06 12:39:13 PM]
Yes, I know this, just hoping it is cheaper, just need rendering power with dualk cores
[
Posted by: szutowave
|
Date: 06/05/06 07:05:10 PM]
From my understanding the software has to be made to run to take advantage of the 8 cores. Or is there a way for a program to fully utilize all cores availble regardless of how many you have? Cuz if there isn't and the development has to write the software for 8 cores then...like I said this is pointless.
[
Posted by: Po
|
Date: 06/05/06 08:34:40 PM]
The aps I listed above will have no problem using 4 cores or eight, so this would be good for my productivity without having to pay for workstation prices.
[
Posted by: szutowave
|
Date: 06/11/06 10:54:00 AM]
20.
Octa core?????
Do you mean QUAD core!!!
[
Posted by: ITA
|
Date: 06/07/06 03:04:34 AM]
+ expand thread (3 answers)
- collapse thread
It will be 8 core. Two 4-core AMD chips...hence the 4x4.
[
Posted by: Po
|
Date: 06/07/06 07:23:25 PM]
2+2=4
4x4=16
[
Posted by: dickhead
|
Date: 10/03/06 10:32:27 AM]
4xDuo
[
Posted by: Andrew
|
Date: 05/14/08 06:51:30 AM]
Make Home Page
Add to Favorites
Print article
Send link to friend
Digg this
Post to del.icio.us
Post to Slashdot
