HP Superbowl Commercial

[PVTCaboose1337]

If any of you say, at the end of teh commercial, it was not a c2d, but a Xeon Quad core logo... Hmm... looks like HP wants to save some money. And fyi, the commercial was about home computers so... a mistake? I think not!:D

[Alec§taar]

If any of you say, at the end of teh commercial, it was not a c2d, but a Xeon Quad core logo...

INTEL's just "showcasing their latest/greatest", as they should, during such an event imo! Intel's done a GOOD job w/ the dualcore-conroe & above stuff...

I saw that, & w/ a buddy of mine who is into computers (had pizza/wings & ballgame on 51" T.V. setup he has for this SuperBowl #41 that just ended (yea, COLTS! I predicted they'd win as far back as Nov. 2006 here on the forums in fact) - great for sporting events)...

That same friend of mine's looking to buy a new CPU (he got the mobo already & it can accept any type of INTEL past 2 generation CPU stuff - flexible here, & on video too)

(The mobo is an ASROCK unit that also has an AGP + PCI-Express 4x videocard slot (which is good for him, he has an ATI All-in-Wonder based off an AGP x800, might as well keep it around, they don't make 'em anymore & they ARE capable of some cool stuff, so he wanted BOTH types of video))).

:)

That same pal of 30++ yrs. who's place I was @ for a "SuperBowl Party" today is looking to buy almost a completely new system, & our research today affected a purchase he made a day or two ago that is in transit...

What affected him?

This forums data!

I.E.-> My buddy saw data that made sense to him from what WE did here in ScienceMark 2.0 testing & Tom's Hardware Revews... tests that show INTEL cpu's doing EXTREMELY WELL, on Memory/CPU related tests.

APK

P.S.=> So much so in fact, that the same pal of mine I watched the SuperBowl w/ has decided to go w/ an E6300 (for $187 from ZipZoomFly) vs. his original choice of Prescott Pentium D 915 ($107)...

Why? Well - I showed him the results from our ScienceMark 2.0 competition, latest results!

That test now has systems w/ Prescotts Pentium D's & AMD AthlonX2 64 4800+ cpu's like mine only hitting midrange scores nowadays (where they were "Top 10" @ the start of this test) & the fact that those Intel Pentium D's are known to run "hot" (relative term, but that's what I kept hearing/seeing online).

After that, he was like: "I am going CONROE/DualCore"

Intel, again, has done a FINE job imo, w/ CoreDuo & above... apk

[Random Murderer]

If any of you say, at the end of teh commercial, it was not a c2d, but a Xeon Quad core logo... Hmm... looks like HP wants to save some money. And fyi, the commercial was about home computers so... a mistake? I think not!:D

save money? i think not!!!
the new gen of xeons, based on c2d cores, are actually more expensive than their c2d counterparts. take for example the e6300 and the xeon 3040. they both have the same clock speed, cache, fsb, and core, but the xeon costs nearly $20 more. why? the xeons have better memory controllers that can handle loads more ram without as much work, as they are meant for servers.

why hp chose this route for home computers is an enigma to me.


PS:
APK, that board he got wouldnt happen to be a 775Dual-VSTA, would it?

[Alec§taar]

APK, that board he got wouldnt happen to be a 775Dual-VSTA, would it?

He is buying the mobo for VISTA, specifically (he wants VISTA, as do I, but I can "hold off"), & bought 1gb DDR-667 Kingston RAM to pair w/ it...

For $80 more? He saw the E6300 results ($187) vs. Pentium D series CPU's (he picked up a D 915 for $107) & the ScienceMark 2.0 scores here w/ Quake 4 results @ Tom's Hardware did the trick!

He wants to be able to "dualboot", & use XP w/ his AGP based "ATI All-In-Wonder (based off the x800 series GPU). He eventually wants to get a GOOD vidcard to go w/ it, but is holding off on the PCI-Express bus end.

With good reason: The GeForce 8xxx PCI-e series is, imo, still TOO expensive.

Model #, from his email (he is asleep now, so I can't call him up on it, as it's late over here on the east coast @ 12.35 a.m. now) is this one:

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=775Dual-VSTA

* Yup, the VERY ONE you noted... as a "fatter of mact"!

APK

[Random Murderer]

He is buying the mobo for VISTA, specifically (he wants it, as do I, but I can "hold off"), but also to be able to "dualboot", & use XP w/ his AGP based "ATI All-In-Wonder (based off the x800 series GPU).

Model #, from his email (he is asleep now, it's late over here on the east coast 12.35 a.m.) is this one:

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=775Dual-VSTA

* Yup, the one you noted...

APK

such a nice board... i have it sitting next to me...
love it! he will to!

[Alec§taar]

And fyi, the commercial was about home computers so... a mistake? I think not!:D

I think not either - home users CAN make gains off of QuadCore CPU's imo... especially if they're BIG "multitaskers" & also if OS services keep increasing...

This is part of WHY I think "QuadCore" cpu's DO have a future!

See, imo @ least - you're going to see more & more 'background processes/daemons/services' in OS' over time!

See this thread:

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?p=254661#post254661

w/ VISTA services listed on as "AUTOMATIC" by default, alone... more to run, period. Far more than XP had, & more than Windows Server 2003 does by default in fact.

Heck - over time, even the ones you have now will get more complex (e.g.-> AntiVirus programs datasets grow EVERY MONTH, for example, crossing near 20mb per set now in fact).

The more cores you have to run the systems today using VISTA & other OS' in the future from MS, even if they are single threaded (most code today isn't though, other than games), the extra cores WILL help, especially w/ more backgrounded tasks like services... &, so will OS tuning!

BUT, if you need to run a lot of services? Extra cores won't hurt things, even if the code is single-threaded only, & most Win32 code today, isn't.

APK

[PVTCaboose1337]

Quad cores will make gains, but we have not even optimized for dual cores yet. Are we not jumping the gun?

I understand the Xeon, but the QUAD core ones are actually cheaper than the other quads intel has.

[Alec§taar]

Quad cores will make gains, but we have not even optimized for dual cores yet. Are we not jumping the gun?

I don't think so... not really:

E.G.-> Right now, I am pushing 34 processes that bear 2-67 threads on each of them.

I.E.-> That's PLENTY of threads that can be run across 2-4 CPU cores... no added "optimization" needed.

APK

P.S.=> The Operating System's kernel component known as the process scheduler can handle spreading that load of threads already across 2-N CPU cores, if any process is saturating the first 2-N CPU cores, when & if needed to run them w/ out interference...

With the advent of OS' like VISTA? You see more possibles here, in more services alone... & barring "tuning them" (cutting off ones you don't need possibly), multiple CPU cores can help handle things running more smoothly, just by being there & the fact MOST CODE TODAY IS MULTITHREADED! apk

[Mussels]

I believe the easiest and best point is this - There is no such thing as dual core optimized... its MULTI-core optimized.

Everything out there that is made to work on two cores, will work on 4 or more as they get added into PC's.

[Alec§taar]

I believe the easiest and best point is this - There is no such thing as dual core optimized... its MULTI-core optimized.

Everything out there that is made to work on two cores, will work on 4 or more as they get added into PC's.

That's about it, & about right...

NOW, there ARE diff. ways to go about it!

(E.G.-> Some code actually schedules its own usage of CPU cores, by itself, this is EXPLICITLY OPTIMIZED code that uses Win32 API calls like SetThreadAffinity).

Multiple threaded code CAN & DOES do the same, albeit, w/ help from the OS itself (the process scheduler component I note above, a kernel component subsystem).

APK