yup, saw the photo? LGA style... bigger L1? i thought is all the while 64+64 on each core.. most of the benchmarks, (esp. gaming) still loses to c2d and consumes super high amt of power
Then what's the difference from FX62? I honestly can't tell from the specs... Didn't know the FX74 is out officially. So now I know it's a 2 + 2 core system. Doens't look very enticing to me.
it was announced quite some time ago, u can see from this page that FX70 series totally thrashes FX62 i haf no idea why either, the cpu core specs looks exactly the same as the AM2 FX62
The guide has just been updated! Currently covering over 585 desktop CPUs, this comprehensive comparison will allow you to easily compare up to 18 different specifications for each and every CPU! Here are the updates:- Link : Desktop CPU Comparison Guide Rev. 3.2
i'm surprised u didnt include wad i posted in #42 and why is the specs for E6300 & E6320 exactly the same? isnt the E6320 suppose to have a full 4MB L2? (same for E6400 & E6420)
oh... u missed out Q6600 (2.4Ghz w/ locked multi, TDP 105W): http://www.legitreviews.com/news/2763/ http://www.techspot.com/review/36-intel-core2-quad-q6600/ http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_quad_q6600_preview/ http://www.hardware.info/productdb/bGNkbZiUmJLK/viewproduct/Intel_Core_2_Quad_Q6600/ http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36494
Uhhh I forgot to add nvm, going to update it again and correct the mistakes. They ARE exactly the same except the 4MB L2 part
CISC vs. RISC You have the 'instruction sets supported' columns, and in them, you list "CISC" and "RISC" as instruction sets. That's like saying you were robbed by a guy wearing 'pastel' or 'bright'. They are descriptions of the instruction set, not instruction sets themselves. (IA32/x86, IA64 (Itanium,) and AMD64/x86-64/x64/EM64T are instruction set names.) Not to mention you're wrong on many of them. All current x86 processors present themselves to the OS as CISC processors. The fact that deep down, they operate more like RISC processors has no actual effect on anything. You might as well also list superscalar and out-of-order execution if you're going to list CISC and RISC. (And everything Pentium Pro and up, including all Pentium II and Celeron processors, are 'RISC at heart'.) Also, only the graphical logo for the Pentium 3 does it look like "Pentium !!!". Everywhere else, it is "Pentium III" (See here for a sample.) And *ALL* Pentium III's, even the Katmai's, include SSE. That is what made it different than the Pentium II.
yea, its highly unlikely that intel will introduce an exact same specs processor utilizing the same core as a diff model
X6900 exists? btw, where did u find the news on the Q4/06 release of X6900? i googled n all i find is "preview" & so-call "reviews" while they all use X6800 overclocked not seen a cpu-z screenshot nor photo of the chip
