Maximum PC multi-core RSS Feed

Hands-on with Deep Viewer, Intel's Potential Killer-App for Nehalem

Norman Chan — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:30:00 -0500

During a private briefing with Intel at IDF yesterday to talk about Nehalem, we were given a demo of some cool software in development that makes good use of the multi-threaded cores of the new CPU. Francois Piednoel, the Senior Performance Analyst (ie. benchmarking guru) at Intel describes Deep Viewer as a "science project" of sorts. It's an image sorting application that they acquired from an independent software developer that reminds us of Microsoft Live Labs' Seadragon technology (which is used in the recently released Photosynth online app). We're talking about near-infinite scaling of visual data (in this case photos and videos) being processed in real-time on your display.

See Deep Viewer in action after the jump.

Intel Release’s New Midrange Chips On Monday

Justin Kerr — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 22:20:15 -0500

In an attempt to tighten the screws on AMD, Intel is continuing to roll out new midrange processors early next week. Despite the fact that they aren’t officially released yet, online e-tailers are already taking orders. The CPU’s will be based on Intel’s 45-nanometer process and both Alienware & Falcon Northwest are preparing to announce systems featuring the new parts in tandem with its release. The 95 watt Q9650 currently retails for $559 on Newegg, and features a core clock speed of 3 GHz. This paired with a 12MB L2-cache, and a 1333MHz front side bus make it a solid performer for the price. In fact, this puts midrange consumers within striking distance of the Dream Machine's 150 watt QX9775 which retails for a much heftier $1550. The QX9775 runs only 200MHz faster with the same 12MB’s of L2-cache. The main difference between the two is the 1600 MHz FSB, Skulltrail support, and the subsequent overclocking potential that comes with the extreme series. Looking for something more modest? The Q9400 is rated for 2.66 GHz and will feature 6 MB of L2-cache on a 1333MHz FSB. For those who prefer the dual core design, the Core 2 Duo’s lineup will be receiving an update as well. The new E8600 clocks in at 3.33GHz,with 6 MB of L2-cache and a FSB of 1,333MHz, while the lower end E7300 will sport a 2.66GHz clock with 3 MB of L2-cache, and a 1066MHz FSB. The 65 Watt E8600 is e-tailing for $279 and the E7300 will go for $144.

Ready to upgrade? What are you going to use?

Nehalem Primer: What We Know So Far About Intel's Next-Gen Penryn Killer

Gordon Mah Ung — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:08:59 -0500

We’ve been calling Intel’s next-generation CPU family code-named Nehalem a Penryn-killer because, sadly, AMD’s best and brightest have hardly been that. For those who haven’t sifted the sands of the Internet, and picked the brains of OEM’s and hardware vendors for every detail of Intel’s next-gen microarchitecture, here’s your quick primer on Nehalem that’ll make you big man on campus at the next geekfest.

How Many Cores?

Most Nehalem’s will be native quad-core with all four compute cores on the same physical die. Intel says that the design of Nehalem will also let the company build an eight-core version, codenamed Beckton, for servers. Intel also hasn’t ruled out the possibility of a multi-chip version so could perhaps see a double-die Beckton with 16 cores as well.

HyperThreading Returns

An improved version of HyperThreading will find its way into the core of Nehalem. This improved simultaneous multi-threading, or SMT, will let the OS see a quad-core chip as eight cores. Although some still debate its merit, the implementation of HT in the Pentium 4 generally added 15 percent more performance in multi-threaded applications.

Read on to find out more about Intel's Nehalem.

To Affinity and Beyond!

The Maximum PC Staff — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:35:58 -0500

I just completed a minor upgrade to my system, including the addition of a brand-spankin’-new Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 CPU. My question: When you right-click a process in task manager it gives you the option to set affinity. If I’m right, this gives you the ability to set a process or task to a particular core of your CPU.

It seems like this would help distribute the load of everything running and keep things flowing smoothly, but it looks like every process is set to use all four cores.

Is there a right or wrong way to go about changing these settings? Is it advisable to change them? I would think that if you divided them up, you could gain a performance advantage.

—Michael Seymour

Answer is after the jump!

Valve and Crytek won’t support PhysX any time soon

Michael Brown — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:34:05 -0500

Epic Games is starting to look lonely in its support for hardware physics acceleration.

Fast Forward: Multithreaded Booby Traps

Tom Halfhill — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 16:29:33 -0500

'Threadlocks' threaten multi-core PCs. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.