The Quadfather versus Core 2 Quadro
11.30.06 - 01:13am
For roughly the last 6 months or so Intel has been confidently sitting on the performance crown in computing. The Core 2 Duo architecture has proven to be both highly efficient and capable of scaling very well and when compared to AMD’s K8 architecture there simply is no contest in regards to performance. The next revision of Intel’s lineup will feature quad-core processors that combine two Core 2 Duos onto a single package in a similar manner to the early Pentium D’s of the Netburst era.
While this isn’t the most elegant of solutions, it is considerably easier than designing a platform from the ground up and it gives Intel an immediate boost in performance by doubling the number of cores per package and theoretically doubling performance. Intel is currently banking on their superior memory pre-fetchers and core design to mitigate the memory bottlenecks formed by having 4 cores share a single memory controller. AMD has pursued a different route by creating an entire platform based around minimizing input/output bottlenecks with its HyperTransport interconnect system and on-chip memory controllers. In theory AMDs platform will scale better as more cores are added to the system but that doesn’t matter so much now when AMD only has dual-core processors to compete against the Core 2 Duo platform. With AMD quad-cores looking to be available in the middle of 2007, AMD needed a quick fix to combat the Core 2 Quad systems and they came up with the Quadfather.
The Quadfather is AMD’s new 4×4 platform which features two FX class processors in a dual-processor setup along with support for 4 PCIe video cards in SLI. The board alone is a monster and the power requirements are through the roof but how does the performance stand up against the Core 2 Quad? The NDA over the Quadfather was lifted a few days ago and numerous websites have released their impressions with this new setup and frankly it seems like Intel has once again pulled away with the lead. I myself have always been fascinated with multi-CPU computers from my early days wanting a dual Xeon setup but back then the price never warranted the performance and I believe once again this will be an issue. Asides from the weaker performance, clock for clock, compared to Core 2 Quad, power consumption has gone through the roof and I can’t imagine the amount of heat this thing will pump out. The only benefit that I can see as of right now is the extensive input/output offered by this board, especially as a “cheap” server. Two 2.6GHz FX’s coupled with twin RAID controllers and 4 PCIe cards for more RAID controllers and highspeed ethernet connections would be killer “cheap” server.
I don’t think this will be a platform worth pursuing until DDR2 prices drop and AMD’s quad-core solutions begin to appear, then having 8 cores on a single board might beat Intel’s future unified quad-core solution. Right now the Quadfather seems to be more of a novelty item but it will be very interesting to see if these processors are completely unlocked like the previous generation of FX’s. If so then perhaps when AMD drops to 65nm it’ll be possible to have dual 3.8+ GHz FXs crunching away on a single board which might give the QX6700 a run for its money. Interesting concept AMD but it may be the wrong time to release this.
Relevant Links
[H]Enthuasiast Review of 4×4
AMD Press Release
AMD Processor Pricing
Speak Your Mind