Jitway Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Unlike most Intel components, today's new entries were designed to fit together: A pair of Core 2 Extreme QX9775 quad-core processors are designed to work in tandem, using Intel's D5400XS desktop motherboard with twin sockets. Right now, and probably into the foreseeable future, that's the only way these components will work together. Each processor has an MSRP of $1,499 (its street price may be a little less in a few months' time), and remember, you can't do with just one. And the D5400XS motherboard will sell for $649. A bit pricey for me but I can just image how this would fly with about 8gb of memory. Full Story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tynvar Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 It's a good option if the games are somehow optimized to use 2 cpus. Otherwise the double quad would as somewhat faster than a normal one in games IMO. I mean it would be better but not enough for that money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizard Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Unless you use Linux, Windows XP 64bit or Vista, 8GB is nothing but a waste of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_cinder Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Unless you use Linux, Windows XP 64bit or Vista, 8GB is nothing but a waste of money. Addendum: Make that a 64bit OS in general. 32bit systems CANNOT address beyond 4GB, minus any memory mapped devices (Pretty much everything these days). The more expansion cards etc you have, the more of that 4GB address space your physical RAM loses to make use of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shibathedog Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Yeah this is the Skulltrail platform, but Intel decided "Dual Processor Platform for Gamers" was a better name or whatever retarded name they gave it. Anyway this is pretty much another e-male organ product, in real world benchmarks, you get a small performance gain for a LOT of money. No flocking WAY is it worth it. It rapes for things like SuperPi, folding, and artificial benchmarks, but for games its full of fail. EDIT: Remember, Games are barely using Dual, yet alone Quad cores yet. So what the flock is the point in 8 cores? Bunch of unusable garbage, especially since no one is going to develop for this since its so out of reach for most people. EDIT AGAIN: Look at this crap http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/02/08/int...rt_3/page9.html Definitely worth over 5 grand isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tynvar Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 I see this as more horse power on car with walmart tires. What's the point on having so much raw power if you can't use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_cinder Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 If targeted towards gamers, is absolutely useless. But those of you saying games can't use these number of cores, you know nothing.Any 1 process can be spread across multiple cores. It is however only truly beneficial, when a program can spawn multiple threads on separate cores. Other than a bogus cash-in attempt by Intel, this would be VERY beneficial to an artist/video editor etc. Someone who has need of having many apps open at once. You could be encoding video on 1 or 2 cores, while having another core working with an art app and another 2 cores working on rendering something. No real benefit to the avg user OR gamers at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shibathedog Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 well thats kind of what I meant. I just didn't elaborate. and it IS marketed towards gamers, thats why its retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Where is the Pentium 5 dammit? Enough of this quadruple double triple core mumbo jumbo. Let's make it a little easier please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizard Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Where is the Pentium 5 dammit? Enough of this quadruple double triple core mumbo jumbo. Let's make it a little easier please.You can think of it as P5s. Soley because it seems like after Pentium D (the small line after 4) came this series. Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad. Not that hard because if P5s were out, it would be the exact same thing, P5 Double Core and P5 Quad Core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Where is the Pentium 5 dammit? Enough of this quadruple double triple core mumbo jumbo. Let's make it a little easier please.You can think of it as P5s. Soley because it seems like after Pentium D (the small line after 4) came this series. Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad. Not that hard because if P5s were out, it would be the exact same thing, P5 Double Core and P5 Quad Core.How about Double Core = P5 and Quad Core = P6 and Double Quad Core = P7? At least it makes it better to understand by increasing numbers -> increasing performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now