Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Anusha" data-source="post: 154627" data-attributes="member: 828">Of course, AMD cannot supersede Intel's Core 2 architecture. I'm surprised they got so close to Core 2 with the 90nm process technology (even though now it's 65nm, only the power consumption has decreased compared to the 90nm). Also, they are competing with a vastly inferior cache and SSE engine.When AMD releases the K8L, we'll see how the CPU war comes out of peace talks <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/default/wink.gif"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" data-shortname=";)" />. But by this time, Intel will have true Quad-Core (that's what Intel says, although the Kentsfield really is a Quad-Core but not much cache sharing as the upcoming Yorkfield CPU. Kentsfield has two L2 caches each shared between two cores, and Yorkfield will have a single L2 cache shared between all the 4 cores. This will lower the transistor count, hence the performance. We can expect some tweaks to the instruction sets, and this will yield more performance. So Yorkfield will be slightly faster than Kentsfield with a significantly low power consumption.</blockquote>

Top Bottom