Whos buying me one for X-MASS?

phooey.
My uncle works for a computer complny called Klafters and says the system /w theprocessor most identical to mine (mine - 2.8ghz socket 478, system - 3.0ghz socket 478) performs better than thier dual-core 3.0ghz systems.

So you really think you can beat a Quad-Core? OK!:laugh: :nutkick:

By these CPU's coming out will they drop their prices on the Conroe's? Probably not I am guessing...

Im waiting for the cheaper QE6600 with 4x2.4ghz cores, coming next year instead. It will be cheaper and more valueble, atleast for me.

Azn Tr14dZSo you really think you can beat a Quad-Core? OK!:laugh: :nutkick:

I never said that.:wtf:

Well you said "Phooey"...and then you said that your comp is better than 3.0Ghz Dual-Cores.

tdp of 110 over 65 from the conroe...hmm i wonder if the second cpu die has anything to do with it..:rolleyes:

its well annoying how intel just glues to dies together... it's just no where near as good as the way AMD does it or indeed the Conroes/allendales do it. I think I'll hold out until K8L in which I will most likely switch bcak to AMD if what people are saying has any truth to it :)

i dunno, what have people been saying about the amd k8l? according to the few articles i read on it a lot of people dont expect it to best the kentsfield.

Is any game going to take advantage of 4 cores?

I dont think so, cause thats not fair to all the high-end users with a 1000$ Conroe. Alan Wake is rumoured to, but i dont know.

And we dont really need them for physics either with the X1k series doing it so much better then a CPU could.

TrackIs any game going to take advantage of 4 cores?

I dont think so, cause thats not fair to all the high-end users with a 1000$ Conroe. Alan Wake is rumoured to, but i dont know.

And we dont really need them for physics either with the X1k series doing it so much better then a CPU could.

Since when is life fair? What a silly statement.

TrackIs any game going to take advantage of 4 cores?

Currently & DIRECTLY? No... Quake 4 SMP spawns 2 threads w/ r_useSMP = 1 enabled in its configuration file... so, @ most? It DIRECTLY uses 2 cores @ most.

BUT, indirectly, GAMES & OTHER PROGRAMS RUNNING CONCURRENTLY @ THE TIME might get some 'boost' out of more than 2 CPU cores present, because other running processes threads can be run on other CPU's present & LESS SATURATED than the one a game is running on, lessening the load on the CPU the game is being run on!

(ESPECIALLY IF other running programs on your system bear 2-N threads that is, & MOST of what you run does nowadays! Taskmgr.exe can bear this out for you in its PROCESSES tab, & using the VIEW menu, SELECT COLUMNS submenu item, & being sure "THREADS" is checked off as a visible column)...

However, even IF other running processes are single-threaded only (the minority nowadays)? They can be run/started up on on less saturated CPU's, other CPU's where the game (or its threads) are NOT running...

* The OS kernel subsystem PROCESS SCHEDULER component should, in theory, send other running processes threads to the LEAST USED/SATURATED CPU present of 2-N cpu's, &/or a game's threads to another less saturated CPU on the game startup...

:)

(Thus, giving a game you are playing MORE cycles on the CPU it is running on, by sending other running process' threads to other CPU's present that are less saturated).

APK