Screenshots

About three months ago, when the Core 2 Duo processor families were first announced – 10 Intel® Core™ 2 Duo and Intel® Core™ 2 Extreme packing 291 million transistors -- the emphasis had been the ‘40:40 Message’: A 40 percent increase in performance and (more than) 40 percent more energy efficiency compared to Intel’s previous best processor.

In layman’s terms, the power of dual cores, or computing engines, should be experienced through enhanced processor performance that can manage simultaneous tasks faster.

Better performance in computing power and battery life

Cutting through the IT jargons, the duo cores are expected to operate smoother when multiple applications are running. Imagine the scenarios: Writing e-mails while downloading music or videos and conducting a virus scan – with a slack in computing speed.

These dual-core chips are also expected to deliver improved tasks, such as viewing and playing high-definition video, protecting the PC and its assets during e-commerce transactions, and in the case of mobile computing, enabling improved battery life for sleeker, lighter notebooks.

In short, higher performance and better efficiency in energy-management. The Intel lingo for this is the 40:40 benchmarks -- A 40 percent increase in performance and more than 40 percent more energy efficiency compared to Intel’s previous best processor.

According to multiple independent review organizations revealed in the last quarter, the Core 2 Duo processors had won more than nine out of 10 major server, desktop PC and gaming PC performance benchmarks.

The anticipation is great as we moved on to Quad Core. In the words of Intel’s president and CEO, Paul Otellini: “The capabilities of quad-core microprocessors will bring new possibilities for science, entertainment and business.” Indeed, I anticipated nothing less than that when I was delivered the pre-production processor kit late October.

As a blogger who dabbles in New Media content (podcast, video-casting) and digital photography sourced in high mega-pixel RAW files, processor-sensitive and high-speed entertainment and multimedia applications was very much on my mind.

There are new benchmarks I have gathered from an Intel post-launch QC update, comparing Quad Core to Core 2 Extreme dual-core processor:
• Up to 80 percent faster on highly threaded applications
• Up to 58 percent better for intense multimedia applications like high-definition video encoding
• Up to 57 percent better when enjoying immersive 3D gaming

Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core processor QX6700

The version of the Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core QX6700 processor comes in the 2.66GHz with a 1066MHz FSB (front side bus) specification, running on Intel’s existing 975X Express chipset family. Touted to be the world’s first quad-core desktop processor “up to 80 percent faster” than the company’s current Intel Core 2 Extreme Processor X6800.

In keeping with Intel’s past marketing strategies, the company heralds its new processor by first embracing its ardent target audience: Niche enthusiasts and hobbyists who demand high performance.

I was made to understand that Intel plans to offer a mainstream quad-core processor – targeting the Low Yat crowd -- starting in the first quarter, 2007. From the current Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core, it will then be branded as Core 2 Quad.

Tests

I affixed 1GB Corsair RAM chips to the Quad Core processor kit that Intel Malaysia loaned me, built on Intel’s existing 975X Express chipset. It’s further configured with a self-financed Western Digital SATA2 250 GB harddisk, an ATI Radeon X1650 Pro videocard, and packed in a Cooler Master medium tower casing. The monitor is the Samsung SyncMaster, 940BW.

I ran it using Adobe Photoshop CS2 and SONY Sound Forge 8.0, courtesy of Midstream Online, to test-run the performance on RAW file post-processing and audio recording, respectively.

The benchmark is my 2003-version of Intel P4/2.8Ghz/1GB RAM with similar WD 250GB SATA2 harddisk, backed up with an NVIDIA display card.\

Shooting with the 10.2 mega-pixel Nikon D200 digital SLR, each Uncompressed RAW file at 240dpi, 8 bits/channel gives me about 16MB resolution. After conversion to TIFF uncompressed, each picture file is around 50MB.

It used to take me about 15 minutes to post-process and retouch a RAW picture file, using the following workflow: Open File -- > Exposure -- > White Balance -- > Image (Highlight/Shadow, Curve, Contrast, Image Size) -- > Filter (Unsharp Mask) -- > Save As.

Opening the RAW alone used to take me about two minutes.

On Quad Core, it takes me about three minutes to finish the entire workflow!

What’s more, managing pictures files using the attached Adobe Bridge is now quite a breeze. Imagine, each of my one-day outdoor shoot could end up with about 5GB data on the CF cards. To view and discard the lousy shots, and to meta-tag the good ones for archive, it used to be a very painful, sluggish process. But Quad Core changes this tremendously, though a 2GB RAM is high recommended, especially when you have more than 6 high-resolution working files floating active on the workflow simultaneously.

I don’t have to say more, do I!

The suggested retail price for this Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core processor QX6700 is US$999. It is available in the market now.

Additional information about Intel is available at www.intel.com/pressroom.

Exclusive! Watch out for a special announcement in Screenshots tomorrow. I am in the mood of giving, but you have to tell me 101 ways to change to a new PC.