• Index » 
  • Community » 
  • Tech » 
  • Intel Core 2 Extreme Quad Core Hands On (From Gamespot)
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7122|Argentina
Intel's Core 2 Duo volley scored a solid hit on AMD, which had dominated the desktop performance segment for a number of years with the Athlon 64. The Core 2 Duo's gaming performance moved Intel out of the dreadful Pentium 4 performance backwaters into the processing lead in a single day. Upon release, the Core 2 Duo instantly became the processor of choice for gamers and power users alike.

Speed was king in the Pentium 4 era, but parallelism is the new mantra of the multicore age. When Intel's NetBurst P4 processors hit the GHz wall, the solution was to add more processing cores. If you can't go higher, go wider so-to-speak.

Unwilling to sit still and enjoy its newfound success, Intel decided to move up the quad-core "Kentsfield" CPU launch from the first half of 2007 to the last quarter of 2006. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 quad-core processor will be available by mid-November, just in time to go up against AMD's "Quad-father" 4x4 platform. The Core 2 Extreme QX6700 will carry the familiar $999 extreme processor price tag at launch.

Quad Core:

Intel's Core 2 Extreme QX6700 follows Intel's new naming scheme to the letter. The Q signifies that the CPU has four processing cores, and the X, of course, makes it "extreme." The 6700 part of the moniker aligns perfectly with the rest of Intel's Core 2 processor lineup, as the QX6700 runs at 2.66GHz, the same speed as the Core 2 E6700 CPU. Each pair of CPUs has 4MB of L2 cache, bringing the total L2 for the entire processor to 8MB. Like other Core 2 CPUs, the quad runs on a 1066MHz front-side bus.

The QX6700 will be built on a 65nm process and is 64-bit capable. Following the trend of other Extreme Edition processors, the processor will come unlocked, which will give system owners a wide range of overclocking multiplier options.

The Core 2 Extreme QX6700 is pin-compatible with the rest of the Core 2 family. The processor should work fine with Intel's "Badaxe" 2 motherboards. Third-party motherboard manufacturers will release BIOS updates for existing Core 2 motherboards to enable quad-core compatibility. Whereas the Core 2 Extreme QX6700 will work in most existing Core 2 motherboards, AMD's "Quad-father" platform will require a new dual socket motherboard to support two dual-core processors.

Performance Testing:

We brought in an Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 and a 975X Express-based motherboard for some hands-on performance testing. We didn't have an AMD Athlon FX-62 in our labs to test against, but we used the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ as a fill-in. Trust us when we say that the FX-62 wouldn't have done much better. We stuck with a single GeForce 7900 GTX on the video card side to balance out the high-end CPU performance with an equally powerful graphics card. We also included encoding and extreme multitasking scenarios with our tests because few games currently support multicore processing. 

Conclusion:

Previously scheduled to make its debut sometime in early 2007, Intel's quad-core behemoth might be a little early. None of the games we tested take advantage of the QX6700's four processing cores. In all of our CPU limited game tests, the 2.66GHz QX6700 loses to the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme X6800 because of its clock speed disadvantage. The QX6700 makes a great showing in the 3DMark06 CPU test, but barely budges the overall score. The vast majority of PC games simply aren't built for multicore processing yet, but support is coming in several upcoming games including Supreme Commander, Alan Wake, Half-life 2: Episode 2, and Unreal Tournament 2007.

While the gaming advantage isn't quite there yet, the Core 2 Extreme QX6700 demolishes the competition in desktop applications. The quad-core CPU bested Intel's former flagship CPU by almost 30 percent in our video encoding test. The Core 2 Extreme QX6700 also performed well in our multitasking challenges where we encoded a video while running 3DMark06 simultaneously, shaving almost a minute and a half off the video-encode time of the nearest competitor and maintaining great gaming performance at the same time.

Intel's Core 2 Extreme QX6700 packs in a whole lot of performance, but it’s still probably early for the gaming crowd. You aren't going to miss much anyways, unless you happen to enjoy encoding videos and music while playing your favorite games. Regardless, the $999 price tag is daunting. Feel free to wait for the cheaper non-Extreme quad-cores when they come out in the first quarter of 2007.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700, Intel Core2 Extreme 2.93GHz, AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+, Intel 975XBX2, Intel 975XBX, ASUS A8N32 SLI, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GB x 2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Cards: Graphics Cards: GeForce 7900 GTX 512MB. Graphics Drivers: Nvidia Forceware 91.47.
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|7067|New York
Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6966|132 and Bush

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
While that is true let's not forget that just because the games themselves are not able tot ake advantage of four cores that doesn't mean there is no benefit. Running multiple programs at the same time such as a game, fraps, listening to music, or even burning a cd could be done at the same time a little easier with the exra cores. When I was running on a single core I had a hard time maintaining my FPS while recording with fraps . Now that I am using 2 cores the difference is incredible.

http://www.amazon.com/Core-2-Duo-QX6700 … 64-2532048

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-11-07 10:28:07)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
DeCon_1
Member
+16|6886|Atlanta, Georga U.S.A.
Same here bro.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6966|132 and Bush

I found some in stock if anyone wants to drop 1300 bucks. http://www.clubit.com/product_detail.cf … mp=HardOCP
Xbone Stormsurgezz
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7122|Argentina
Headstone is right, you don't need to waste 1000 bucks in a Quad core, when you can play without problem any new game with 2 cores.
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|7067|New York

Kmarion wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
While that is true let's not forget that just because the games themselves are not able tot ake advantage of four cores that doesn't mean there is no benefit. Running multiple programs at the same time such as a game, fraps, listening to music, or even burning a cd could be done at the same time a little easier with the exra cores. When I was running on a single core I had a hard time maintaining my FPS while recording with fraps . Now that I am using 2 cores the difference is incredible.

http://www.amazon.com/Core-2-Duo-QX6700 … 64-2532048
Your right to a point, But the problem is, The way windows is set to run now, it will only take advantage of just the duel cores while the other 2 basically sit idle. Theres no paths for the info to travel to and from where it needs to be. Your very right when you say other programs will take advantage of the quad cores, they will be the professional programs first. I think games are probably last on the list. When they actually get games to take full advantage of just the duel cores, man its going to be nice. None of this virtual hyper threading bull, but actually having two cores(while not totally independent,) will be a great boost in performance.
younggun
Member
+28|7009

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
There are many apps out there that can take advantage of multi-core. Photoshop, Any video encoding apps, and definitely all of the DC apps.

Alan Wake is a game debuting in Q1 '07 and it has quad core support. Not only does it have quad core support...it uses all 4 cores. 1 does physics, 1 does video, 1 does something else, and 1 does the audio and everything else left.

I do agree that dual core is the way to go right now but many, many people will also be able to take full advantage of this move to 4 cores.
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|7067|New York

younggun wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
There are many apps out there that can take advantage of multi-core. Photoshop, Any video encoding apps, and definitely all of the DC apps.

Alan Wake is a game debuting in Q1 '07 and it has quad core support. Not only does it have quad core support...it uses all 4 cores. 1 does physics, 1 does video, 1 does something else, and 1 does the audio and everything else left.

I do agree that dual core is the way to go right now but many, many people will also be able to take full advantage of this move to 4 cores.
YAh like i said, More of the Professional apps. One game isnt worth the price tag as of yet, when there just benefiting from duelies. Im still trying to figure out why Intel showed there hand so soon. I would have waited with the knockout blow for when AMD comes out with there Socalled cores utilizing the L3. LOL. Then i would have landed the quad 4mb L2 per on them.

All analysis is pointing to Full quad support being 4 years down the road. By that time, the steppings, and the whole Arch. will be amazingly different. For me personally, for home use, The best Duelie out in 6 months for the right price will last quite long enough to get to the point where Ill need a quad core to go along with the DX10 vid card whenever they get that battle sorted.

Quake is to fast for this old fart LMAO.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7122|Argentina

younggun wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
There are many apps out there that can take advantage of multi-core. Photoshop, Any video encoding apps, and definitely all of the DC apps.

Alan Wake is a game debuting in Q1 '07 and it has quad core support. Not only does it have quad core support...it uses all 4 cores. 1 does physics, 1 does video, 1 does something else, and 1 does the audio and everything else left.

I do agree that dual core is the way to go right now but many, many people will also be able to take full advantage of this move to 4 cores.
Alan Wake is TBA and it's only for Windows Vista?  Wtf?
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6966|132 and Bush

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
While that is true let's not forget that just because the games themselves are not able tot ake advantage of four cores that doesn't mean there is no benefit. Running multiple programs at the same time such as a game, fraps, listening to music, or even burning a cd could be done at the same time a little easier with the exra cores. When I was running on a single core I had a hard time maintaining my FPS while recording with fraps . Now that I am using 2 cores the difference is incredible.

http://www.amazon.com/Core-2-Duo-QX6700 … 64-2532048
Your right to a point, But the problem is, The way windows is set to run now, it will only take advantage of just the duel cores while the other 2 basically sit idle. Theres no paths for the info to travel to and from where it needs to be. Your very right when you say other programs will take advantage of the quad cores, they will be the professional programs first. I think games are probably last on the list. When they actually get games to take full advantage of just the duel cores, man its going to be nice. None of this virtual hyper threading bull, but actually having two cores(while not totally independent,) will be a great boost in performance.
If you had a set of programs the you constantly ran together you can assign each core to separate programs (affinity). All this can be done in task manager.t  I understand what you are saying with the cores processing instructions within the same program though.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-11-08 09:13:06)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
Bell
Frosties > Cornflakes
+362|6914|UK

Meh I am the kind of guy who doesnt need all that, but it's nice to know if I wanted I could.  It's like owning an expensive sports car that can do 150+, your never going to do that (on the road ) BUT I like to know its there just in case.

I myself am holding off till I see good comparisons with the next AMD's and will make my descision from there.  Plus, waitin for tht damm 8800GTX to come down enough so I dont need to re mortgage 8-)
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7131|Cambridge (UK)

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Yup, and problem is, The Games mentioned are going to take advantage of the Duel core Tech. NOT the Quad core. Quad core tech is atleast 4 years out on the software side of things gameing wise. The first things that will utilize that would be vidio encodeing and things of that nature. Its going to take a whole new army of programers to get quad core codeing off the ground.

Duels are the way to go, and there hands down cheaper and faster at this point. Core 2 Duos are fantastic. My next build after Xmas for sure.
No it isn't. All it needs is multiple threads.

Edit:
And the idea that developers will have to 'retool' for dual or quad core is just ludicrous.

microsoft.com wrote:

Developers with 32-bit computing skills will be comfortable and productive in the 64-bit Windows environment, finding the development environments virtually identical.
Do you really think that statement doesn't include games developers?

Think again, if you do. The core software development tools used by PC DirectX games developers are exactly the same a those used by business application developers.

And you know what, multi-threading really isn't complicated. You just write the same code. Bung in some mutexes and semaphores. And launch a thread control loop.

In fact games developers have an advantage over applications developers because all games have at there core a central control loop - written in exactly the same way that you write a thread control loop.

Apps developers are, to some extent, isolated from that layer of the application logic by nice friendly () frameworks - you can dig that deep, but it works and it's best not to mess with things that work.

Games developers, well, the core engine developers, get there kicks out of getting their hands dirty with low level control loops.

microsoft.com wrote:

Multiprocessing and multicore processor support
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition is designed to support up to two single or multicore x64 processors for maximum performance and scalability.
Now, does that say "designed to support up to two single or dual-core x64 processors"?

No, it says "designed to support up to two single or multicore x64 processors".

Quotes taken from : http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bi … top10.mspx

If there's a single professional engine developer that didn't make a mess of their underpants when dual-core dropped, then they should be shot!

I've done apps development and I've done multi-threaded apps development. I've also done games developments. And you know what the one thing that I took with me from apps development to games development, other than general C/C++ and 'software engineering' skills, that I took from the one discipline to the other?

It was the experience I gained writing multi-threaded app control loops from the ground up - everything from that point upwards is different. Not in terms of the 'engineering' or languages used, but in terms of the frameworks used - apps development uses frameworks like .Net, MFC, or many others, whereas, games development uses DirectX.

It's a bit like the difference between being a 'cook' and a 'chef', if you like - you use the same ingredients and techniques, but one is very 'functional', the other more 'artistic'.


Edit2:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

Your right to a point, But the problem is, The way windows is set to run now, it will only take advantage of just the duel cores while the other 2 basically sit idle. Theres no paths for the info to travel to and from where it needs to be. Your very right when you say other programs will take advantage of the quad cores, they will be the professional programs first. I think games are probably last on the list. When they actually get games to take full advantage of just the duel cores, man its going to be nice. None of this virtual hyper threading bull, but actually having two cores(while not totally independent,) will be a great boost in performance.
You know what Headstone, you're really good at talking out of your arse - I'm reading it and I can almost kinda believe it, it seems so credible. Trouble is, it is total and utter arse.

The 'windows is only set up for dual-core' bollox I've answered above.

And the idea that apps developers will be that far ahead of game developers - you really don't know what you're talking about, do you?

As I said above, all it takes is multiple threads. And a recompile.

It's easy. For both games developers and app developers.

Most app development is basically single threaded (in reality there's usually at least two, but as I said, the apps developer is isolated from that messy stuff by microsofts lovely frameworks).

And learning to write multi-threaded takes a little bit of getting your hands dirty and like a day to learn how to use mutexes and semaphores.

Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2006-11-08 15:37:21)

Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7131|Cambridge (UK)
Bump (hmm... why don't the forums auto-bump when edits are made? (edit: actually, no that would probably be a bad idea )) - just 'cos I made such big edits - in case anyone read the first version (which didn't say anywhere near as much)...

Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2006-11-08 15:45:38)

  • Index » 
  • Community » 
  • Tech » 
  • Intel Core 2 Extreme Quad Core Hands On (From Gamespot)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard