It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

 
Go Back [M] > Madshrimps > WebNews
QX6700 Quad Core, two times better than a dual core with double power requirement QX6700 Quad Core, two times better than a dual core with double power requirement
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


QX6700 Quad Core, two times better than a dual core with double power requirement
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 29th November 2006, 09:56   #1
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,612
jmke has disabled reputation
Default QX6700 Quad Core, two times better than a dual core with double power requirement

As we have not gotten tired to repeat, the world of the hardware walks infartantemente accelerated more and more. This year particularly has been moved, because we saw like, after a 2005 of sinsabores for Chipzilla, where AMD every time positioned of better way in the market their products stars very based on the K8 architecture (Athlon 64, Athlon 64 FX and Opteron) in decline of which Intel had to offer to us, their ultramegahertzica-but-little-efficient Netburst architecture, that in spite of rendering enough good did not reach to surpass to K8, which added to a price that did not manage to by hand compete hand with the prices of AMD was forming him an image of titan fallen to the ship drived by Otellini and company, came a 2006 that began timid; the opening in I publish of the process of manufacture of 65nm, on the part of the cores Cedar Mill and Presler (of which they could see a thorough analysis in these same pages), which logically did not offer nothing else that a diminution in the heat dissipation and the consumption of being able since they were single a “shrinking” of which already we had seen under the name of Prescott and Smithfield (although also we do not have to forget that Presler by a subject of optimization of costs separated both cores in different pieces from silicon). These products followed without being a competition too much hard for the small one but already more and more consolidated AMD; the thing put something more interesting when Intel decided to adopt a more aggressive strategy of prices and to locate to its processors doubles nucleus in a quite economic rank of prices. She is why we could see models doubles nucleus like 805 Pentium D or Pentium D 930 or 940 in quite attractive seats of honor of price for which they looked for an alternative not too expensive to be able to have two nuclei mounted in a plate mother. More efficient Athlon 64 x2 continued being mhz mhz, but their price towards which the blue option did not stop being interesting.

http://translate.google.com/translat...&hl=es&ie=UTF8
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
$183 Core 2 Quad Q8400 (2.66Ghz) Coming April 19 and price cuts! jmke WebNews 1 19th March 2009 18:37
Topower 850Watt Quad Graphics Card Power Supply jmke WebNews 0 15th September 2008 13:36
The new conqueror is here, the analysis of Core 2 Quad CPU, QX9770 windwithme Hardware Overclocking and Case Modding 4 16th January 2008 21:55
AMD quad core draws less power than Dual Core jmke WebNews 0 5th June 2007 20:28
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 CPU Benchmarks & Reviews jmke WebNews 4 3rd November 2006 07:27
the HFX® mini is the first heatsink case for Pentium M Dual Core jmke WebNews 0 7th March 2006 20:29
Which CPU to go for - Dual Core vs Single Core jmke WebNews 3 1st March 2006 19:29
AMD's dual core kimono falls fully open Sidney WebNews 0 21st April 2005 15:40
Intel dual core launch is no big deal at all Sidney WebNews 0 18th April 2005 16:57

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:20.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO