Home › Forums › Computer Problems › Hardware › What is the difference between hyper-threading and dual core? › Re: Re: What is the difference between hyper-threading and dual core?
AMD certainly had the edge for a short time when dual cores came into vogue. The Pentium D, though pretty quick ( I have one in the living room ) wasnt as quick as the dual core AMD stuff of the time, and the Pentium D was cobbled together, not a technical advance at all, just an extra Prescott core added to a P4. The result is that it ran incredibly hot, and doesnt have the service life of most processors as a result. AMD were doing it smarter, with lower clock speeds and wider channels, which helped cooling enormously, and helped to keep the price down too. Unfortunately for AMD, they felt a bit too good about it, and stuck with the same technology far too long. Intel moved in a different direction with the Core family, got the jump on AMD, and AMD have been playing catchup ever since, because they took too long to react. AMD policy is pretty good though, they wont make a chip using more than 75 watts, and all AMD chips I have seen run noticably cooler than the equivalent Intel. They have always kept their pricing considerably lower than Intel too. Sadly, they dont have anything even close to equivalent to the i7, they got stranded in the barriers again.I'd like to see AMD take the lead again personally. If Intel had remained the only major CPU manucturer, then we would probably still be stuck with the P4. Competition is a beautiful thing when it comes to the consumer... if AMD could come up with something to rival the i7 fast enough, it will stir Intel into doing some pretty fabulous stuff i think.We live in hope 🙂
Mitz from Tips4pc