Tom's Hardware benchmarks Intel's first quad-core "Kentsfield"

[steveunderwood0]

Benchies up for Kentsfield...can be found here:

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/

[TrinireturnofGamez]

  Not much faster due to the fact that most programs aren't even optimized for 2 cores...

[.:Jedi:.]

EXACTLY!!! when i first read there were gonne be "quad-core" processors......i was thinkin y would u bring out quad core technology when the two cores on dual core cpus arent even utilised efficiently.

[Arcmanov]

These quad-cores would only really show their worth for media encoding apps anyway.  A total waste of money for gaming when you consider that single-core CPUs are still very capable.

[Beomagi]

hardly a waste for people in video or running multiple servers

I'd much rather use a 2.0GHz quad core, than a 3.0GHz single core. SURE single core cpus are capable, but NOT under the same processing environments these quadcores can handle.

[W1nTry]

More p/reviews
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35506
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35507

QC parts... sighs... and I JUST upgraded to dual core... ok thats not true, I sporting Yonah a while now, but in the least I now sporting X2... and by the sounds of it, I done have to upgrade to kentsfield or quadfather.... sighs... and then G80 and R600

[Arcmanov]

hardly a waste for people in video or running multiple servers

I'd much rather use a 2.0GHz quad core, than a 3.0GHz single core. SURE single core cpus are capable, but NOT under the same processing environments these quadcores can handle.

I think you missed my point.