Comments on: Intel’s Quad-Core Kentsfield processor released

By: Dexter Zafra

Dexter Zafra — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 21:22:54 +0000

I love the quad cpus it is suoperfast fast. I don’t have one yet, and no plan to upgrade, maybe next Christmas. This cpu is targeted for high-end users and servers. I think it’s a bit overkill for non-gamers and developers.

By: marc

marc — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:50:31 +0000

I wonder when will quadcore become available (for the masses) which should equate to cheaper Intel dualcores… that’s the perfect time to get a Core 2 Duo system!!!

By: Miguel

Miguel — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:18:45 +0000

But with Intel Virtualization Technology and VMWare (or its competition)… Virtual Machine heaven!

By: yuga

yuga — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 07:14:46 +0000

If the app doesn’t support multi-threading, the rest of them cores will sit idle.

By: JP Loh

JP Loh — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:35:41 +0000

I have a feeling that this one has a bad design. Heat problems specifically. But that’s just me. Is this processor for desktops or laptops too? Also, do the bus/pipelines have enough bandwidth to transfer data for four processors?

I’m also wondering if there’s a hardware-level task scheduler so that all the CPUs can be utilized even if the OS/software doesn’t support multiple processors/cores.

By: Kiven

Kiven — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 13:39:49 +0000

at worst no slower than the core duo yet most of the time 5-15% faster plus same power consumption? core 2 duo drains the battery as fast (or slow as it may be) as the duo.

performance to coin ratio my bet is on the Duo too unless the price is exactly the same…..or worth the 5-15% performance gain “most of the time”

Hardcore Gamers might want to check out Gamespot’s Quad core performance preview and Extremetech’s Quad core roundup. The Core 2 Duo kicked AMD off the gaming CPU crown a couple of months ago, and Intel is putting more pressure with this release.