Dual Core AMD confusion
So, does anyone know when these are supposed to be released, as specifically as possible? I thought June, but wasn't sure.
And am I right here~~~
1. Dual core chips will be in 4200+ 4400+ 4600+ and 4800+ versions and these versions will consist of 2x2.1ghz, 2x2.2ghz, 2x2.3ghz, 2x2.4ghz?
2. I also seemed to remember seeing a price tag where the cheaper ones would be about $500 and the best ones would be around $1,000?
3. Also, even though the rating for say a 4400+ is only 400 more than a 4000+ single core it should be a huge amount better in folding, since it really is 4.4 total ghz instead of 2.4 that the 4000+ has?
4. They also should be compatible with socket 939?
And am I right here~~~
1. Dual core chips will be in 4200+ 4400+ 4600+ and 4800+ versions and these versions will consist of 2x2.1ghz, 2x2.2ghz, 2x2.3ghz, 2x2.4ghz?
2. I also seemed to remember seeing a price tag where the cheaper ones would be about $500 and the best ones would be around $1,000?
3. Also, even though the rating for say a 4400+ is only 400 more than a 4000+ single core it should be a huge amount better in folding, since it really is 4.4 total ghz instead of 2.4 that the 4000+ has?
4. They also should be compatible with socket 939?
0
Comments
As for speed don't expect any huge benefits yet as again the OS and applications aren't really designed to work with these new chips so they aren't optomized for them. Generally speaking most things will look at it as if it was just a single core and by it's nature run slower (since the chips themselves run a little slower).
That will change but it's the penalty for early adoption. As for folding in theory it should run faster, but again depends if it's bottlenecked by the OS or not.
Am I thinking this out wrong?
Once everything (os/software) is set up and optimized around the dual core cpu's they will be much faster. However until then you aren't getting the full benefit of the hardware. Same as having a 64bit cpu does no real benefit unless you are running xp 64.