Yonah prices leaked.

9 months after you get one you'll be smacking your head into a wall for not getting 64bit...

And yes 64 bit will be THAT dramatic of a change.

now REALLY?

j


IN time it will be yes, but I wouldnt expect too much from vista and 64 bit for some time to come, there will be a plethora of bugs to work out and very little support for 6t4 bit at this time. You will be able to live without it comfortable for the next few years, perhaps four.

OH yeah, those of you who are going ga ga over those dual core processors, its the same deal as 64 bit, theres really nothing out there that supports dual core processors in much the same way there isnt much that supports hyper threading. It will be some time before this becomes mainstream and indications currently are that these dual cores dont perform any better than their single core brethren due to the forementioned reason above.

64-bit WON'T be that important as there is currently a limited number of 64-bit notebook processors. You can get a AMD Athlon 64 processor (or mobile Athlon 64/Turion 64) or a Pentium 4 6xx level processor. Those are the only ways to get 64-bit processors in notebooks. Intel has stated that they don't have any intentions of making a 64-bit Pentium M as the market does not currently call for it. The Yonah may or may not have 64-bit (EM64T) compatibility. For people who need the most technology, then yes, they will want a 64-bit processor. The Pentium M processor is currently the best processor out there for notebooks as you can get full PCI Express x16 graphics cards, dual channel DDR2 RAM, and the Intel chipsets are better than those offered for AMD processors (sadly as I would rather have my XPS with a AMD Athlon 64 processor).

i highly agree, untill A LOT of my apps come with the ability to use the Dual Core or the 64 bit, then im not gonna worry. Wats the use of using 64 bit when the OS itself is 32 and the mainstream of apps and utilities is meant for 32? Im giving this thing the same amount of time it took people to switch from 16 to 32...does anyone have anynumbers on that? its prolly gonna be about 4-5 years until we get to the place where ALL apps are 64 bit, and we have hardware that will take advantage of that processor as well,


Until then my friends, my i9300 will do just fine with the 1.86 processor that i have tied to my geforce6800...

i woulndt worry about Yonah, i would personally not get a yonah untill the second generation comes out, in which theyll pleasantly fix the issues with the first gen.

Im gonna now kick it with my i9300, care to join?

Gary

I'm interested in dual core right now, as I do a lot of video encoding. The Pentium-M isn't very good for multi-tasking as it stands, so I wouldn't mind having an extra core in reserve for whatever.

I'll probably have to get an AMD X2 in desktop form though, as it looks like Yonah will be 667 Mhz FSB. Does anyone know if Dell plans to add support through a bios update?

While it is true that it will be a while before most applications support 64 bit programming (and thus take advantage of it) it is NOT the case that we cannot take advantage of dual core processors right now. A dual core processor can concurrently execute two separate machine instructions that correspond to two distinct threads (to the operating system). All one has two do is pull up the windows task list to see that they have tons of background tasks. Having extra cores to support concurrent execution will definitely be beneficial to just about everyone right now. However this is not to say that software cannot be optimized to take greater advantage of dual core processors. For example a 3-D game can be designed to use one thread for providing animation while using another thread for networking functions (for multi-player support). This could certainly add to the efficiency of game code.

sweet, isnt amd bringing out some sort of "athlon 64" 64 bit cpu thats gonna revolutionize computing? sweet dude, i totally cant wait to be computing in 64 bits, im totally stoked, i bet its gonna be wayyy faster.

AMD has already released a processor that has "revolutionized" computing as we know it, the AMD Athlon 64 X2. It is a dual cored processor which can be over clocked quite a bit. I am excited about the dual core abilities of the Yonah. Hopefully Dell will add support for that processor in the XPS Gen. 2 with a bios upgrade. I would definately put the money down for one of these processors in my XPS.

actually i was being sarcastic about the a64 and 64 bit supposedly revolutionizing computing. it will happen, but its not gonna be a dramatic step, it'll be a gradual thing. hell how long has a64 been out? and were barely seeing xp 64 bit. i also dont believe its going to be as incredible of a perfomance bump. but then again, maybe the 64 bit fanboys know something i dont.

You know something the rest of the world doesn't know or something?

It will be AT LEAST another two or three years before we even start seeing a multitude of 64-bit applications and games so i kinda doubt anyone is going to smack themselves in the head for not having 64-bit support unless their just retarded. 64-bit is going to be a slow transition. I mean the Athlon 64's have been out since back in 2003 and yet we dont have any 64-bit games, continued lacking driver support, and a small user base. 64-bit wont be the next best thing until the user base is large enough for software developers to even bother with writing code for it.

Wow. 64-bit will sure change the world... instead of being able to put 4GB of RAM in my system, I can now put in many terabytes of RAM.

Oh, wait...there isn't memory like that yet...and even 4GB would need 4 slots (as of this moment)...and of course, there's no applications I use that are even 64-bit compatable.

I also agree that dual core is a similar story, though you can instantly see the benefit of it if you like encoding audio/video while playing games (for example). If I had the option to get dual core when I bought my XPS 2, I would have bought dual core and sucked up the price difference. But hey, it's all good...when the time comes, maybe I'll do a little project with my XPS 2. That would be an all-inclusive deal though...dual core and 64-bit, and other technology.

I'm definitely way more interested in dual core than 64bit at the moment. Dual Core Yonah would make up for the one weak spot of my XPS2's P-M that affects me -- 3D Animation. Also, with the widescreen I like to do lots of stuff at the same time, like play KOTOR II in a 1024x768 window, surf the web, chat, and run dreamweaver, photoshop, and maybe even eclipse or visual studio. More cores for simultaneous thread execution would rock. I can wait on being able to address 18 quadrillion TBs of RAM with 64bit, but I want dual core now!

2-3 years - yeah right, more like 1 year

There are several 64 bit apps right now. There are a number of reviews out there to show you the difference.

If you all are referring only to games, well then sure, 64 bit isn't bringing you anything now, on that I agree. On other apps, rendering, video, compression, 64 bit offers as much as 20-25% improvement at the same clockspeed.

Why do I know so much. I've been around for a few of these changes. Not like the move from 16 to 32 bit? I think you should think on that. I bet its exactly like that, and the SSE change as well. You can doubt but if you do so, you will spend your money foolishly.

Vista will be made for 64 bit first. 32 bit will be in "compatible" mode only. Weigh that out in your thoughts...

just because intel is releasing a new processor doesnt mean that windows 64-bit should not be accepted for a long time.

start using windows 64 and you will get bugs and then they will be solved. windows 64-bit is a dramatic change forward for sure and amd at present is beating intels big time.

but due to intels policies I dont get a good configuration.

no intel for me until it is 64-bit. they have robbed us of a better technology and they still think they can pull it again.

Why is 64bit better?

- 64bit instruction set provides extra registers so code is more efficient. Funny thing though, after all the complaining about x86 having so few registers, we see such a small improvement from these new ones.
- Runs 32bit software just as well as 32bit-only processors. For real.
- Provides >2,3 gigs of address space. If the motherboard supports it. This is good because ram is basically free today.

Why doesn't it matter?

- Do you run a single application today that actually uses more than 2 gigs of ram? For most of you, probably not.
- When an 64bit application runs, all pointers are 64bits (at least on windows). This means that each pointer in the program takes twice as much space.
- This makes for higher contention of data cache and memory bandwidth.
- Pointer intensive apps can slow down significantly when compiled as 64bit, example: spec2k gap
- If the app doesn't need >31bits of address space then it should not be built 64bits, period.
- There is no reason for microsoft to build Office as a 64bit app, it will likely run slower. Sql server on the other hand will care greatly, big databases are very real today, but not for most of you.
- There are very few of you that would benefit from running a 64bit version of photoshop.
- Unless the games are stupidly sloppy, there is no reason for them to be built 64bit. Consider the relative performance of FarCry built 32 and 64bits, no gain, even with the extra registers... There is no mechanical reason for the 64bit version to exist.

Assuming the current growth of address space (and application's ability to consume it) continues at its current insane pace, absolutely my mom will need a 64bit processor in ~5 years, but that is still far after any current pc will have any value.

Anenome: This is very different from the transition from 16 to 32bits. In 16bit time home users were actively managing their memory to stay within the 640k limit. It effected peoples ability to get work done. Folks were screaming for 32bits of address space. My parents have 1gig of ram, run office, photoshop, burn cds, and they never see more than 750megs checked out at a time. They have no issue. Today's relatively sophisticated pc OS performs memory management and insulates most users from the hard constraints of address size.

My opinion: dont worry about 64bit compatibility today. It doesn't matter. Its hype. Don't worry, it will be a long time before you'll be left out in the cold, relegated to the tiny 32bit section at the local software store. I wouldn't turn it down if it were a free upgrade, but I also wouldn't install a 64bit os on it.

As for Multicore? WORRY ABOUT IT, chew your nails. Its great and unlike HT it provides a real speedup. Lots of apps today take advantage of it. User loves it because those background tasks don't interfere with what you're doing. The OS loves it. Virus protection loves it. If you are building applications, you'll love it to no end (parallel builds).

Also, yonah, like the real p4, has SSE3, which rocks. More and more cpu-bound apps will be using that to good effect. Eats up dsp algorithms. Thats the one thing I regret about my xps gen2. I wish it had a yonah.