Dual-core CPU Unknown three facts

Today, the hype about dual-core processors is so widespread that the understanding of the technology seems to be out of the truth. Both AMD and Intel compliment the merits of their dual-core processors on their web pages. Their campaigns are timely, as most industry watchers believe the dual-core processors will be in the pipeline in 2006.





But there are some startling and extraordinary facts lurking behind these phenomena, as well as in the media coverage of many of them. Below, we'll tell you five facts about a dual-core processor that you might not know about.





fact one: neither Intel nor AMD is the first vendor to launch a dual-core processor.





It is widely assumed that competition around dual-core processors has been in the PC Arena only, and AMD and Intel are vying to be the first to market such products. This view is wrong. In fact, IBM walked in front of the two companies, despite IBM's introduction of a X86 server processor. In 2001, the blue giant launched a dual-core power 4 chip for IBM's RISC servers.





AMD and Intel unveiled their dual-core program in 2004, and began supplying dual-core products for the first time in 2005 years. But the dual-core processors unveiled by the two companies are dazzling-including AMD's dual-core Opteron server chip and Athlon 64 desktop chip, as well as Intel's dual-core pentiums and Xeons. and AMD and Intel are continuing to announce new dual-core chips, dizzying.





even in the Mobile world, IBM is the first to launch dual-core chips to the market, its PowerPC 970FX Low-power version released in 2005. However, this is basically an OEM product, do not supply to ordinary buyers. The same is true of its X86.





in the X86 field, Intel won the mobile dual-core processor race with the Centrino duo it launched in January. The mobile chip supports the popular new imac, although the imac is a desktop computer. (Inside Apple, it is designed to resemble a large laptop plugged into the back of a flat panel monitor, as can be seen from its internal disassembly analysis). The new imac is also the first Apple computer with an Intel processor.





fact two: The problem is power consumption





for technical challenges, dual-core is being imposed on industry, and industry is not prepared beforehand.





The real reason for Intel and AMD to adopt the technology is not that the duo is a sudden emergence of an excellent idea. In fact, the chip manufacturers could have been very content to continue to launch faster and faster single core processors. However, this approach is not feasible, because with the clock speed of more than 3GHz, the single core processor began to consume too much power.





Indeed, Intel canceled the planned 4.0GHz "Tejas" processor in 2005 because the chip could consume more than 100W of power. As power consumption increases, the cost of cooling the ultra fast single core chips is increasing, requiring larger radiators and more powerful fans to maintain their operating temperatures.





utilizes a dual-core solution that can continue to improve processor performance while temporarily avoiding power and thermal problems. "This is because, as processor vendors, this is the only way we can lift performance within a certain power range," says Margaret Lewis, AMD Business Solutions director. ”





of course, people who make a narrow interpretation of semiconductors would want to prove their rationality from the chip voltage, the number of functions and other technical factors. (Some advances in these areas actually make it a challenge to drive down power consumption.) )





In addition, some people think that dual-core is not a panacea. As the June 2005 article in Linuxhardware.org, "deep understanding of dual-core" said: "From our standpoint, dual-core is not new; it's just a makeover of the old product (symmetric multiprocessing) ... The same performance problems with dual-processor systems built on a single processor are still present. ”





but, as a simple explanation, that's basically enough. Lewis added: "The laws of physics have not changed; We have just come up with ways to improve them." ”





Fact III: Dual-core processors are not equal to performance doubling





Dual core does not necessarily make your computer clock faster, but it will improve the overall performance of your PC.





This is a different nuance of the technical features. The dual core does not have anything faster than a single core processor. If you want only the original clock speed, you should buy the fastest processor you can find. Intel's fastest single core boxed processor is the 3.8GHz Pentium 4 model 670 and 3.6GHZ Pentium 4 model 660. The current fastest dual-core processor is 3.2GHz Pentium D 840. (a 3.6GHz dual-core Pentium D 960 is scheduled to be launched in the second quarter of 2006.) )





AMD's single core/dual-core processor has the highest speed comparable to each other. The single core Athlon 64 3400+ at a speed of 2.4 GHz. Dual-core Athlon X2 4600+ speed is also 2.4GHz. At the 2.4 GHz speed, however, the dual-core performance is clearly higher than the single core. Even if the two cores run at a slightly lower speed than 2.4GHz, the dual-core processor has a higher throughput than a slightly faster single core processor.





However, it may be surprising that dual-core processors do not double the performance. (This is due to a drag on shared resources between the two cores). "What we see is that performance is 1.4-1.8 times times that of a single core, and the actual situation depends on the application," said Lewis, AMD. ”





"When you increase the number of cores by one time, you keep the same power, but you increase the throughput by almost one times." "Shekhar Borkar, an Intel researcher, said in an interview in 2004. (Shekhar Borkar Obviously did not pay much attention to the loss of performance due to shared resources.) )