Intel celebrated the official launch of its Core i7 processor at an event last evening in San Francisco, featuring the first high-end desktops running the next-generation micro architecture. It's spinning the chip family offering as "the fastest processor on the planet." Indeed, by our count, they're certainly monsters. …
While AMD and Intel have gone back and forth in terms of CPU speeds and performance, I've preferred AMD's HyperTransport with the dedicated memory controller on the CPU itself, rather than requiring the NorthBridge to deal with all main memory access. Now that Intel is switching over to the same type of design, one of the main advantages of AMD's architecture is now moot.
I don't really care about Intel's Hyperthreading support, as a 4-core CPU running 1 thread apiece is still going to potentially quite busy in terms of memory access and so forth, and relatively few apps out there are going to show a difference between 4 and 8 threads. On the other hand, the ability to bump up the clockspeeds by a notch or two when the system is mostly running a single thread strikes me as a nifty idea.
intel will take the lead for a couple of months and then AMD will strike back with a better proccesser.i support AMD
the only thing i really care about is games, in terms of power.
so let's see some comparisons how the i7 stacks up against the c2d and the c2q's?
p.s. sutff and nonsense: http://www.eupeople.net/forum