for ur information, there is no native quad-core by Intel yet, C2Q is juz 2 dual-core joined together its not native quad(tats the mis perception Intel trying to confuse consumer with the marketing again, "i am the 1st to launch quad core", same to the Pentium D during dual core time) the 1st to launch a true native dual core is actually AMD on May 31, 2005 compared to the native from Intel on July 27, 2006. Pricing for processor can be differed even though its the same performance for reason like brand, marketing campaign n so on...
For the comparison of thermal, i dont think it will be much difference,
The TDP numbers for Penryn desktop quad-core parts will be 95 and 130 watts,
with desktop dual-core parts coming in at a 65W TDP.
The TDP numbers for Agena desktop quad-core parts will be 89 and 125 watts,
with desktop dual-core parts coming in at a 45W/65W/89W TDP.
The TDP numbers for 45nm the Xeon will be 50W/80W/120W, depending on clockspeed.
For dual-core, the numbers are 40W/65W/80W.
The TDP numbers for the Barcelona will be 68W/95W/120W, depending on clockspeed.
that is not truly relevant as only a small percentage of users would truly be able to utilise the general nature and strengths of a native quad core. The rest would be concerned about it's clockabillity, usable performance, and energy efficiency. And as to TDP, it is only a general indicator rather then an accurate measure of energy usage. What is more relevant is the general usage current draw of the processor when they conduct ther day to day business and judging by the numbers Anand put forward, it may be quite of a worrying issue. Phenom as a whole may (For now) be doomed from the start unless AMD revises their pricing structure as well as put forward a credible DDR3 performance
Nov 18 2007, 03:03 PM
Quote
0.1088sec
1.24
6 queries
GZIP Disabled