Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: eracer who wrote (149119)	1/26/2005 12:05:21 PM
From: Plissken	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

I still consider dual core on the desktop (not workstation, mind you) a complete non-issue. Thus it doesn't matter if Intel has it cornered any more than their strangelehold on water-cooled pogo sticks for pygmies. With dual core processors being forced to adhere to a single core power envelope and as such either a stricter throttling regimen or significant lower clock speed, they are noncompetitive in the high-end gaming arena. I agree that dual core outside of the server space has some relevance in software development, where I also see good use for virtualisation support. For the average desktop user it is nothing more than a gimmick for the easily impressed and bragging rights crowd (which may be one and the same). There are, right now and for as far as the eye can see, no application that makes reasonable use of dual core on the desktop that doesn't run into one of the limiting factors that come with the technology. Maybe apart from BOINC and 17-or-bust. The number one market for multicore CPUs will be servers and AMD will be there in force, while Intel still tries to rally their troops.