exciting times for video hardware

[rallynavvie]

Looks like the Intel quad-cores will be out at the end of the year:
http://news.com.com/Intel+quad-core+chips+arriving+in+2006/2100-1006_3-6096192.html?tag=nefd.top

I think I may be building a Clovertown machine for Christmas this year. Can't wait to see what 8 processors can do with TMPGEnc

[edDV]

Looks like the Intel quad-cores will be out at the end of the year:
http://news.com.com/Intel+quad-core+chips+arriving+in+2006/2100-1006_3-6096192.html?tag=nefd.top

I think I may be building a Clovertown machine for Christmas this year. Can't wait to see what 8 processors can do with TMPGEnc

If you think dual four core is great, look soon to 32 core (we hope!!!)
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/10/project_keifer_32_core/

[Skith]

the question is, what market will they be targeted at, and what will they cost? Can prices stay low with the rapid advancement (and inclusion of multiple dies). Not that I doubt it will happen, just wondering how far and fast can costs be lowered to keep the pace.

[rumplestiltskin]

{snip}Can't wait to see what 8 processors can do with TMPGEnc

Only if TMPGEnc is multi-processor aware. (is it?) Otherwise it will only use one core. However, you could run eight instances and do eight encodings at once.

[rallynavvie]

TMPGEnc is very much SMP-aware so it should use all 8 cores. I still haven't heard how Windows is going to handle that many cores (or even the dual/dual machines out there right now with 4) since XP says it can only handle 2 physical or 4 logical processors. Must have been worked into a recent patch since Vista won't be coming out until Q1 2007 (which I'm assuming SMP support will be built in to one of the Vista flavors).

As for the target market it's going to be the same old leet-kiddies who think an SMP rig will game better. And it may someday once game designers start working that in. For instance this whole physics card thing for gaming now is a little pointless because they could just have the gaming physics running on a seperate processor. Granted it would be sharing the memory bandwidth but who knows what they have in store for the quad's architecture/chipset. Intel is releasing both a consumer (Pentium Q?) and a professional (Xeon) chip so both are target markets, and the dual cores will still be produced I'm certain. I liken this to the differences between getting a P4 with or without HT back in the day. For most the simple dual-core (or single-core if they continue to sell) will suffice. Some, like those of us using video and design application meant to take advantage of such systems, will go for these quad-core chips.

As for price I haven't seen any numbers but with how much Intel has slashed prices in their professional range I'd guess the prices to end up roughly 75% more than the dual-core counterparts. However I'm not really planning on buying in until a few months later when we see what sort of issues show up and get a later revision if needed.

[rumplestiltskin]

TMPGEnc is very much SMP-aware so it should use all 8 cores.{snip}

As for price I haven't seen any numbers but with how much Intel has slashed prices in their professional range I'd guess the prices to end up roughly 75% more than the dual-core counterparts. However I'm not really planning on buying in until a few months later when we see what sort of issues show up and get a later revision if needed.

Thanks for the info about TMPGEnc's MP-awareness. I'll have to try it out on my Intel iMac.

As for the $$ issue, Apple's Intel line-up has been close to the prices of the units they replaced. I have the Intel iMac and the MacBook. Both run much faster than the units immediately preceeding them. The multi-core (at least dual) approach is definitely the way to go. The Quad (probably two dual-cores) Intel replacement for the PowerMac ("MacPro") will be released (or, at least, announced) in about two weeks.

There are tools (in OSX) that are not yet MP-aware (although the OS is). While these apps won't take advantage of the second core, the OS will if you run a second instance of the same app; so you can do two transcodings concurrently at the same speed.

Of course, you will get some heat but that's the price of admission.

[rallynavvie]

Actually if you're getting heat issues with your Core Duo Macbook it's because of the terribly shoddy job Apple did with thermal paste on the heatpipe that cools the CPU, GPU, and MCH. There was a post on one of the tech sites like Slashdot but it was cross-posted here somewhere too. They recommend cracking it open, cleaning off all the old paste, and applying a proper amount before putting it back together. The Intel Core Duo actually runs really cool, I think in part because of the way it handles its power consumption. I have one in my Sony Vaio lapper and had it working pretty hard and it doesn't get near as hot as even my old P4-M laptop.

And yes, the quad cores look to be simply two dual-cores mashed together. I didn't see how they're going to work the cache or the socket for it yet. With all the rave regarding the new Intel cores coming out soon I think Intel may have finally learned from it's Prescott disaster and it making better chips. But again that's why I'll wait for a stepping revision or two before I jump on the dual/quad wagon. In fact the most important factor for me isn't so much the CPUs as it is the platform. Seems chipset and architecture are just as important as clock speeds these days.

[rumplestiltskin]

Actually if you're getting heat issues with your Core Duo Macbook it's because of the terribly shoddy job Apple did with thermal paste on the heatpipe that cools the CPU, GPU, and MCH. There was a post on one of the tech sites like Slashdot but it was cross-posted here somewhere too. They recommend cracking it open, cleaning off all the old paste, and applying a proper amount before putting it back together. The Intel Core Duo actually runs really cool, I think in part because of the way it handles its power consumption. I have one in my Sony Vaio lapper and had it working pretty hard and it doesn't get near as hot as even my old P4-M laptop.

I've read about the thermal paste issue and one of my buddies (an Apple-certified techie) opened up his new MacBook Pro and cleaned off all of the excess paste. However (and this is the key), there was no substantive difference post-cleaning. The CoreDuo (in the Macbook and probably the Pro) kicks the fans on at around 71-72C but off at 70C. Intel says this is within spec but I'd prefer more fan and less heat. (The fan, by the way, is virtually silent on the MacBook; I had to put my ear against the keyboard to even hear it at all.)

As well, the heat issue in the MacBook and Pro is quite localized under one specific area (under QWERTY) of the bottom. The thicker iBook let this heat spread out more so the heat (though less hot) radiated from more of the bottom.

There's another chip from Intel (codename escapes me at the moment) that will probably be dropped into the next gen notebooks from Apple (and others). It uses less power for the same amount of work so should be cooler and provide even longer battery life.

Yes, these are truly exciting times.