Spicalicious

So it's a 4x4. makes sense.. 4 cores.. with "4 virtual cores" or threads each. Not 16 full cores. But must be better for doing multiple things at once still.

Still impressed with that. 16 cores blew me away and I couldn't believe it but 4 cores with 4 hw threads per is still amazing. Most modern games still aren't using the entire 4 cores in pc gaming.

PPC in both machines is the same design. http://www.amazon.co...e/dp/0806531010 the ppc but not the rest, microsoft asked ibm to make them a cpu,ibm used there experience and rushed one out lol MS did just this last time. Back when 360 first came out most pc's were running a single core and some enthusiasts were running dual core. MS came out with a tricore cpu with two hardware threads per core. They paid extra for future technologym that wasn't yet available to consumers off the shelf. Same with the gpu at the time. MS paid ati a boatload of money for the new technology of th

Plus all current cpu's had two threads per core so they've already figured out how to develop . It's just adding extra cores and threads per core. Cell is a different cpu altogether and isn't even close to pc standards. It has 1 core +spe's. The gen cpus and pc gaming will only increase in cores and 4 threads is just an evolution of a perfected technology which was 2 hardware threads per core currently. The main difference is that there are more cores and extra threads. When have any of you ever said that a dual core with two threads per core was better than quad core with two threads

16 core cpu not 16 thread cpu 16 core cpu with 4 threads each is 64 threads lmao pretending that this still isn't amazing technology. rofl

It's funny how you don't know shit.

I hope this is true. lol,

fdsaf

fdsaf