|
Page 1 of 2 Stung by the success of Intel’s Core 2 Duo processors in firmly
knocking AMD off the prized processor perch, AMD has been promising a
knockout blow of their own with ‘true’ quad core processors due later
this year.
In the second half of 2007, AMD will launch the world’s first ‘true quad-core’ processor, dubbed the ‘Phenom’, which promises better performance than Intel’s Core 2 Quad, also a quad-core processor, but one that is achieved by joining two dual-core processors together instead of creating a single processor with four cores as AMD have claimed. AMD will release dual and quad-core Phenom branded processors, and will streamline existing product lines with the new Phenom range to sit at the top of the heap, with Athlon in the mid range and Sempron remaining the ‘value alternative’.
AMD have also previewed ‘FASN8’, pronounced ‘fascinate’, which takes two quad-core processors to offer 8 cores of processing power, allowing users to ‘megatask’ all kinds of applications, including live TV reception, recording and more through a media center application, while having more than enough power to perform all manner of other tasks without slowing down.
In addition, AMD have launched the DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2000 series graphics card, available now, which AMD promises will deliver ‘the ultimate visual experience for desktop and mobile platforms’.
Clearly, multi-core processors, which were once the future, are now the norm. Even the Xbox 360 sports a tri-core chip, while the PS3’s Cell processor boasts 9 cores.
So, what’s the very brief history of the multi-core war? Well, ever since both Intel and AMD started down the path towards multiple cores on a single processor, one thing was clear at the time: AMD’s processors blew Intel’s out of the water when it came to performance.
Intel’s original dual-core chip was the Pentium ‘D’ and was effectively two single core Pentium 4 chips stuck together on a single die. Unfortunately for Intel, it didn’t deliver enough power to challenge AMD’s dual core models.
But Intel, used to years of leadership in the processor space, took the Pentium M chip used in Centrino branded laptops (and actually derived from the Pentium III), and set their engineers working. What they came up was the Intel Core Duo chip, a true dual-core processor that was quickly followed up by the Intel Core 2 Duo, a better dual-core chip that was 40% faster than the original Core Duo and used 40% less power.
By this time, AMD knew that their lead in the processor space was slipping due to Intel’s superior technology, so they started talking about a true quad-core processor due in the second half of 2007.
Of course, Intel had already figured out that maybe having four cores on a processor would be a good thing too, but instead of offering a true quad-core processor, brought the Core 2 Quad to market – a chip with two Core 2 Duo’s stuck together. Why? Because it was a quicker path to ‘quad-core’, even if it wasn’t a ‘true’ quad-core, thereby giving Intel an even greater performance advantage over the now-struggling AMD, left once again to compete on price due to giving up the lead in the performance stakes.
So, why didn't AMD just make a quad-core processor by sticking two dual-cores together like Intel did? Read onto page two for the conclusion!
|
- 
Fuzzy Logic 
