Print

[elfey1]

MS are prepared to take a loss on the console to gain a bigger market share just like the original xbox plus they will obviously will have struck a deal for a hell of a lot of these things so bulk drives the price down too

[twistedsymphony]

... The fact that they will be manufacturing millions of them

Yes the 360 CPU is more powerful than the one you linked... 2 threads per core means that core can split it's resources and perform two computations at once (as opposed to one at a time)... so three cores each capable of two thread means it can do 6 at once overall. In general the PPC G5 is a faster core than an equivalent GHz Pentium...

Think about it... way back when Pre x286 PCs cost upwards of $10,000 they hone their techniques and as they manufacture more and more they find ways to make it cheaper.

Also it doesn't cost them anywhere near $1000 to make that chip Majority of that cost is to help payback R&D expenses. MS doesn't do that, they make their money back in game sales not hardware.

[incognegro]

Ask IBM they probably can tell you

[Carlo210]

Didn't you jsut say that taking out features makes it cheaper? You just contradicted yourself.

You basically said  Taking out silicon saves money, and use that silicon on other things.

It's like 1-1=0 +1 = 1

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(Carlo210 @ Jun 23 2005, 04:14 PM)

Didn't you jsut say that taking out features makes it cheaper? You just contradicted yourself.

[twistedsymphony]

3 cores means it's 3 processors squished together onto one chip....

3 CPUs would mean there are 3 separate chips

(someone correct me if I'm wrong but) I believe the difference is with 3 CPUs the CPUs are managed by the mobo and the OS where as with a 3 core chip it mostly manages it self... and by manage I'm referring to how the system determines what goes where.

I think it would depend on how the system was built which one would be faster than the other. Multi core chips are relatively new tech, but multi CPU machines have been around for ages.... if that tells you anything.

[deftonesmx17]

I think the real difference is that you "can" add the processing power on a multi-cpu, where you cant with a multi-core cpu. In the end a multiple CPU design would be faster at the time just because they each are full blown processors and not just cores. Down the road multi-core cpus will be faster, but at the moment I believe a multi-cpu setup would win.

[project722]

QUOTE

Avenger 2.0     Posted Jun 23 2005, 10:34 PM
     I'm new to this multi core thing. What's actually the difference between a multi core and a dual CPU on the motherboard? Which one is better? And may you tripple the power of the Xbox 360, like 3 cores at 3.2GHz each = performance of 9.6Ghz?

No it will not be equivalent to a 9.6ghz chip. If you had to give it a Ghz rating it would probably fall somewhere in between 3.2 and 9.6.

Like TS said a dual or triple core CPU is like 2 or 3 processors on a single die. But the difference between a true multi-processor system and a multi-core system is that in a multi core system the other system hardware(memory controller, system bus, etc..) is shared by the multi-core CPU. A true multi-processor system has completely separate hardware and nothing is shared with the other CPU.