Four cores or more?

[ubersonic]

Trying to push 8 cores CPUs when they did due to a vision of how things "should" be when the reality is they will never be that way or in the short term lead that way even though they "should" be is just hurting them more and more.

I think the problem is they went with "fake" 8 core CPU's to save money with their module design, if they had just stuck to true cores and released a Phenom III X6 they would have done much much better.

it will be interesting to see whether the current 8 core amds are good enough per core, to yield their owners massive value, in the long run, a bit like the q6600.
loads of people said q6600 was not as good value as dual core, frequency was more important, more cores not necessary yet etc etc. Maybe the Amd 8 core customers will be laughing all the way as time goes by...

No they won't, with the FX-8 they went core crazy, it has 8 cores (with four sets of supporting hardware) but only has roughly the same IPC as the Q6600 (which means it's no faster clock for clock unless you're using five threads or more).

 

[ginjaninja]

if each more modern amd core is as good as a 8 yr old q6600 core (really?) or a console core, then theres a chance that they they will perform well enough to make use of the 8 cores...as time goes by..

 

[ubersonic]

if each more modern amd core is as good as a 8 yr old q6600 core (really?) or a console core, then theres a chance that they they will perform well enough to make use of the 8 cores...as time goes by..

You misunderstood, each modern AMD core is as good as one of the cores on an 8 yr old Q6600 (clock for clock).