- This news story is archived and is closed to comments now -

Whats the point in having the triple core processors? That almost seems like a step in the wrong direction IMO. If AMD wants to catch up, they need to get into quad core, 6 core, and even start plans for an 8 core processor with some high speeds...

It'd probably pay to look at their roadmaps and previous partner announcements, they've been working on multi-core for quite some time and have no plans at stopping on 4.

It gives them a better foothold to run 3 cores and compete at a lower pricepoint against the E6850 and E6750 instead of selling dual core parts that either barely match or get stomped out. The point of the game is sales afterall, not playing fair and hoping the consumer understands.

Given the design of the chip they should be able to disable cores in the factory seeing as they have a dedicated quad core part and they're not dealing with 2 dual core chips linked over a high speed bus like Intel is dealing with right now. (Funny enough they're working around the clock on a single chip solution finally and admitting the problems encountered with just slapping down an extra pair of cores on a chip)

The biggest thing they need to tackle in general though is their power consumption and their clock speeds, many people have been cranking up the speeds of the present chips but it's not enough because the average joe doesn't want to have to void the warranty on their chip to get better numbers.

- This news story is archived and is closed to new comments now -