1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Preparing iNTEL Quad-Core

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by infoseeker, Jul 20, 2006.

  1. infoseeker

    infoseeker Master Sergeant

    Intel quad-core server and desktop processors will arrive this year instead of next, Chief Executive Paul Otellini said Wednesday, firing a new competitive volley against rival Advanced Micro Devices.

    "We notified customers we're pulling in both the desktop and server (launch) of the first quad-core processors into the fourth quarter of this year from the first half of 2007," Otellini said. Intel's quad-core Xeon server processor is code-named Clovertown, and its desktop processor Kentsfield.

    Intel has been bruised financially in recent quarters, but is fighting to reverse market share losses. Both Intel and AMD now sell dual-core chips--those with two processing engines on a single slice of silicon--and are racing to bring multicore successors to market.

    Chips with more cores can juggle multiple jobs simultaneously than single-core models. However, while server software typically is able to use multiple cores, most desktop computer software hasn't been adapted for the designs.

    Intel's quad-core chips actually are packages consisting of two dual-core chips, but each package plugs into a single processor socket. AMD, whose quad-core chips are due in mid-2007, uses a more refined design with all the cores on a single slice of silicon.

    Intel has advanced several schedules recently. Its "Woodcrest" Xeon chip for dual-processor servers went on sale in the second quarter instead of the fourth, and its "Tulsa" Xeon for four-processor servers also is arriving sooner. "We pulled in the Tulsa processor launch by two quarters to the third quarter and have begun shipping that product for revenue," Otellini said.

  2. AbbySue

    AbbySue MajorGeeks Administrator

    infoseeker..could you please when posting links just quote a line or two from the article and give the link rather than copy/pasting the whole article into the post?

    It's really not an "Interesting Website Link" if there is no reason to click the link b/c the entire article is already posted. Added to that, some websites, like CNET (and thousands of others) don't allow it.

    An excerpt from their permissions page:
    CNET Networks does not allow the reposting of its online content (including video, audio, text, graphics, layout, and code) on a Web site or a public discussion board except in the case of a specific licensing agreement (see further details on video and audio usage below).

  3. infoseeker

    infoseeker Master Sergeant

    thanks for the info ABBYSue
    its really helpful for my part :)

    :) infoseeker :)

Share This Page

MajorGeeks.Com Menu

Downloads All In One Tweaks \ Android \ Anti-Malware \ Anti-Virus \ Appearance \ Backup \ Browsers \ CD\DVD\Blu-Ray \ Covert Ops \ Drive Utilities \ Drivers \ Graphics \ Internet Tools \ Multimedia \ Networking \ Office Tools \ PC Games \ System Tools \ Mac/Apple/Ipad Downloads

Other News: Top Downloads \ News (Tech) \ Off Base (Other Websites News) \ Way Off Base (Offbeat Stories and Pics)

Social: Facebook \ YouTube \ Twitter \ Tumblr \ Pintrest \ RSS Feeds