Core 2 Extreme 40% faster than Pentium EE 965? 282
Marc writes "As far as I know, this is the first time that Intel has talked about what we can expect from its new gaming CPU, Core 2 Extreme. For once, there is no word on power consumption on this new chip, but Intel talks about raw speed and a 40% gain over the current 3.73 GHz Extreme Edition 965 - which would be rather impressive and could indicate a problem for AMD. In this interview with TG Daily, Intel also claims that a Core 2 Extreme-based enthusiast PC will leave the pixel power of a Playstation 3 in the dust. Gamers, this appears to become the most exciting year for you in a long time!"
"in the dust" claims . . . (Score:5, Informative)
"Intel also claims that a Core 2 Extreme-based enthusiast PC will leave the pixel power of a Playstation 3 in the dust.
but then I also see in the article:
"[I don't know off the top of my head] the number of polygons it can draw versus a Cell, but I think it's going to be higher, because there's a lot more bandwidth on the quad system than on the Cell system."
That doesn't sound like much of a claim to me.
Re:x86? (Score:5, Informative)
x86 is more complex. Its much harder to write a decoder for, and more difficult to debug the hardware. That adds cost (and a lot of extra transistors in the decode phase). But its a matter of complexity and cost, not efficiency.
Trouble for AMD, I think not. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Comparing apples and oranges (Score:3, Informative)
That's like the people who think their computer is slow because they have too many icons on the desktop...
Re:Sony's Market (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Comparing apples and oranges (Score:3, Informative)
I don't game much, yet I strip my background processes to the bare minimum.. If nothing is wiggling onscreen, and I'm not running any apps, I want that CPU activity to stay at Zero. Windows follows the "include everything" school of thought, loading services that most people never use, but for that odd windows admin who uses it in a Fortune-500 network, it's there waiting for him. Better for MS to waste CPU cycles invisibly, than have to deal with the average shit-brained corporate Windows IT guy trying to fix a problem he doesn't understand, thus can't explain, involving a daemon whose name he doesn't even know.
Re:Good (Score:2, Informative)