A 0% increase in clock over existing CPUs - but with double the cores! I really hope that major application companies have plans (underway!) to change their application architecture to support this trend.

If not, we'll all be able to run apps just as fast as we can now - just a lot of them. For me, that's not a very compelling usage model, especially past two cores. With things such as games and sorting/searching causing the majority of noticable 'slowdowns' for me, games are obviously the tougher to parallelize algorithmically. Physically, however, searches and sorts (of any size) are dominated by memory bandwidth and hard drive performance, so those won't improve either.

What good are all these cores for, again, unless you're doing media work?

So Moore's Law now bends towards the amount of cores?

How long till we reach the giga-cores-giga-hertz cpu range? I'm too lazy to count myself.

This CPU is strictly for bragging rights for n00bs with more ca$h than computer knowledge ... you know, the same people who bought the previous "P4 Extreme Edition" even though it was neck-and-neck performance-wise with a high-end P4. That chip was basically a server chip brought to the desktop, and Intel is pulling the same trick here.

Server apps will benefit greatly from 4 cores, but the only desktop app that will receive substantial benefit will probably be video editing and encoding. 99.9% of desktop users will see little or no benefit from 4 cores. In fact, since the new 4-core "Extreme Edition" runs at a slower clock speed than the model it replaces, I'm going to bet that the new chip will actually be slower than the old one at gaming and most other desktop tasks.

Why doesnt someone make it so that 2 or more people can use the same computer (nicely, I've seen the previous hack jobs for this).

You have Dual Core (soon Quad), SLI/Crossfire, 2 Monitors and Keyboard/Mouse on USB. Just make it so I can have 2 people playing 2 instances of the 1 game on the same machine.

Core 2 Quadro Q6600 and my favorite Core 2 Extreme QX6700, its Twice as many cores as the other extreme but not as fast. (lol)

Only a Foxconn motherboard could come up with something more annoying than our friends Nvidia aka GTXSGPO7975, ATI aka X1911X18X100XTXTTX (now AMD+ATI) and finally even Intel.

YAY /vomit

Actually whats truly sad is I can almost remember enough differences between all these cpu/gpu clockspeeds, pipelines, memory bandwidth blahblah etc to write up a TR-style primer chart on the fly.

So does that mean i should hold out for these so called Core 2 Quadros? I mean there are a month or two away right? Might as well wait.

In other news Core 2 Quadro sounds like a new razer. 4 blades to cut to the core, or something like that.

I'll be curious to see the price on these. I'm guessing the price will be $600 to $800.

Will AMD compete with this using 4x4 with two dual core chips, or will they bring quad-core to the desktop faster than they originally planned? Should be interesting...

Too bad that dual-cores are barely getting used in most apps and games.

AMD better step up the pace now