it's old news - Sharikou even sent Anand to school -)Quote:
Originally Posted by oldblue
Printable View
it's old news - Sharikou even sent Anand to school -)Quote:
Originally Posted by oldblue
Because he tells you want you hope to hear?Quote:
Originally Posted by PallMall
Blind faith, isn't it ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I find it funny if it should be incorrect. Its a very simple and basic test to find out the latency. But again, as gaming benchmark shows. Should and is aint always the same when a 4600(90nm) runs in circles around a 4800(65nm).Quote:
Originally Posted by oldblue
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...view/page5.asp
And since K8 is hardly memory bandwidth constrained. Something else leads to this high difference (And obvious mislabeling).
Yep and its sad...Quote:
Originally Posted by alucasa
Also I wonder when nn_step will post AMDs official announcement that K8L gonna use ZRAM.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...32&postcount=8
I mean, he states they are. Tho its barely on the research table and K8L is tapped out...
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2893&p=3Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Updated - 1/5/07: Although AMD previously did not mention any issues with our findings, we were contacted today and informed that the latency information both ScienceMark and CPU-Z produced is incorrect. The Brisbane core's L2 latency should be 14 cycles, up from 12 cycles and not 20 cycles. This would help explain the relatively low impact on application performance that we've seen across the board. We are still waiting to hear back from AMD on a handful of other issues regarding Brisbane and will update you as soon as we have more information.
The original K8 core, in both 130nm and 90nm flavors, had a 12-cycle L2 cache. With Brisbane, as reported by both CPU-Z and ScienceMark, 65nm K8 now has a 20-cycle L2 cache. Generally speaking you move to a higher latency cache if you're planning on introducing a larger cache size, but a quick glance at AMD's roadmaps doesn't show anything larger than a 1MB L2 per core for the next year. The argument for higher clock speeds isn't valid either as the highest clock speed on AMD's roadmaps thus far is only 3.2GHz.
Luckily the performance impact of the higher latency L2 cache isn't noticeable in all applications, thanks to the K8's on-die memory controller, but make no mistake - the new core is slower. We couldn't figure out why AMD made the change and with most of our key AMD contacts on vacation due to the holidays, we still have no official response on the matter. Rest assured that if/when we learn more we will let you know.
Updated: AMD has given us the official confirmation that L2 cache latencies have increased, and that it purposefully did so in order to allow for the possibility of moving to larger cache sizes in future parts. AMD stressed that this wasn't a pre-announcement of larger cache parts to come, but rather a preparation should the need be there to move to a vastly larger L2. Thankfully the performance delta isn't huge, at least in the benchmarks that we saw, so AMD's decision isn't too painful - especially as it comes with the benefit of a cooler running core that draws less power; ideally we'd like the best of all worlds but we'll take what we can get. Note that none of AMD's current roadmaps show any larger L2 parts (other than the usual 2x1MB offerings), which tells us one of two things: either AMD has some larger L2 parts that it's planning on releasing or AMD is being completely honest with the public in saying that the larger L2 parts will only be released if necessary.
Well this *might* not be such a bad thing after all. I bet that it would help out when trying to overclock with looser latency's. Much like it does with ram. Food for thought anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
NN-step . Please show were Z- ram is going to be used on K8l. A link would be nice. I really don't care one way or another but your saying it without facts to back it up = FUD. I think K8l will be a good performing cpu. But this Fud on both sides is stupid.
I just read in news section on the Penryn. were you stated the penrtn was a simple die shrink.
It been reported that Intel is going to add 30 ssee4 additions and it will be High K with metal gates. Thats a bit more than a simple die shrink.
I can get links to support this . It is also stated and I can get links to support it . That yorkfield will have 12mb. of shared cache between all 4 cores. Now I don't know if its true but I can get links to support it.
So all I ask from you is links that support K8L will have Zram. You can supply these links correct.
Turtle 1, Yorkfield will be based on 2 Wolfdale chips, 6MB os cache for 2 cores and another 6MB for the other 2, just like Kentsfield 4+4MB.
Intel's future native quad-core (probably only on next m-architecture Nehalem) will feature about 8MB of L2 cache shared beetwin all cores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
As I said I don't know what the trueth is. But I can get links= to any links you have saying otherwise. I am still waiting for any link that says K8L will support Zram.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...930234444.html
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...ies_yorkfield/
Would be nice if it were true :) . The link is dated Sep30-06, early rumor only.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
About Zram cache i think some posters here need to moderate themselfes a bit, this thread is getting uncomfortable. And why i dont think k8l will use zram: Why go for so small caches (4x512kB + 2MB) if they master die-space saving ZRAM tech?
That's not true: you can most definitely figure out K8L's performance by doing some simulations. It won't be exact, but it would be accurate probably within 5-10%. How would you do the simulations? With SimpleScalar, of course ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred_Pohl
http://www.simplescalar.com/
I'm going to be using SimpleScalar for future projects anyways, so I'll be fiddling around with it. If I get anything interesting I'll report back here. If I get something REALLY interesting watch for a news item :p
a deep-well doping capacitor in 65nm process using first generation immersion litho is the perfect way for amd to kill its own yield rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by ted3
Thats very unlikely. Since a 12MB cache quadcore yorkfield in die size would only be a tiny bit bigger than a Core 2 Duo 4MB today.Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
Shintai,
Are you sure you're not Adam Sternberg?
Slow?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Yeah right.
K8 L1 access latency at 2.6GHz: 1.15ns (3T)
K8 L2 access latency at 2.6GHz: before RevG: 4.6ns (12T) / RevG1: 5.4ns (14T)
3.0ns doesn't sound too bad now, does it?Wrong. The chip you mentioned has a cycle time of 0.625ns, that's not the same as access time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Just the column access strobe for such a GDDR chip ranges from 12T to 21T, yielding 7.5 - 13.75ns just for CAS.
Also, CAS isn't the only step in accessing a RAM chip, thus it will take several dozen nanoseconds before you can go about and w/r anything into/from a RAM chip.Innovative Silicon (ZRAM pioneer) claims a 3ns r/w latency, meaning it takes only 3ns to prepare the cell for a read/write. Since ZRAM can be accessed in 3ns it obviously is capable of >>400MHz. Otherwise 3ns access time wouldn't make any sense. :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
And btw, AMD licenced the 2nd gen ZRAM capable of greater freq than 400MHz.Quote:
Z-RAM isn’t fast enough to replace SRAM in the L1 caches of microprocessors, but L2 and L3 caches could use it.
-Innovative Silicon Inc.
Well, when you calculate K8L's overall real-world performance to within 5-10% accuracy, please post your prediction. Then please come back in ~6 months when real K8L benchmarks might be available so you can take a bow or eat your crow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowmage
Well after the Bell next week on tuesday. Well know A lot more. I must say Its not looking Good tho.
HP is Moving ahead of Dell by a large margin. Apple Is gaining Computer market Share. There is a excess of left over PC's from the Xmas buying period.
If K8L was really all that AMD would be talking about it. Ya I know that some will say AMD keeps quite. I say BS.
In Dec . AMD out and out lied to investors about sales. Which caused the Stock to rise. If I was one of tho's investers that bought on that news. I would be sueing for giving out false info. This should be illeagal and those involved should be prosectuted . Just as Margret Stewart was. I don't see where giving out insider info is any worse than putting out false info that secure a loan and cause the stock to rise.
At any rate if AMD is willing to stup to such tactics. IF K8L was all that. AMD would be talking about it.
1) it was Martha Stewart and that was for insider tradingQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
2) inaccurate predictions are things done by every company even Intel. So please get off your horse
No high horse here that wasn't a prediction it was an out an out lie. The conferance was on the 15 of dec. just 15 days before the end of the qt. AMD new they were lieing . Unless you want us to believe AMD was thinking the last 15 days in DEC were going to the greatest 15 days in the history of cpu sales. IF AMD would have said it befor the qt started I could undestand it. But with 15 days left in the qt. It was an out and out lie. It should also be treated as Fraud. Because thats what it was. They commeted fraud to secure loans. Many investors also bought stock on those comments.
I say get a clue and actually find how the story unfolded...Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Are you implying AMD didn't know how the reality will pan out with 2 weeks to go from that Q ?
They missed their targets by less than 5% when less than 17% of the quarter was left. Which means that missed their targets by about 30% for second half of December. Not only that but inventory skyrocketed in the last part of December altough prices were at an all timelow.So much for the "capacity constrained" AMD. I guess they didn't know that on Dec 15. :slap:
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4475
if i had the money,i would buy amd shares within a few days, they are really cheap at this moment :p
around 17 and they will rise
Good advice, Brent. At least you tried... I still remember being laughed at when I advised selling AMD back in March while it was still around $40. How anyone could have thought that it could go anywhere but down from there eludes me.
i know that :)Quote:
Originally Posted by brentpresley
just the reason why i would buy amd stock within a few days,it cannot keep up this downward spiral,it will stop getting lower, the most chips are sold in the budget category,not high end
for most people a 3800+ will do :)
not everyone spends +300€ on a cpu
the move to 65nm improves yields,they just started that transition,amd still sells plenty of chips
i would buy when the share should be around 16$
your first post i can agree with :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred_Pohl
i didnt understand why people were buying amd stock at that price :)
Being conpeditive doesn't sell chips. If that was so then why does AMD sell every chip they make. The problem is they can't make enough is whats holding there profits back. Nothing is even close to 100% yet in AMD. AMD knows how to sell chips. They never lost a thing.
You guys have a stock bottom price much higher than I . I have a target of $7. I believe next week on friday we will see AMD @ $14.> But its alright to be optimistic. But don't forget Intel is cutting pricies in 2nd qt . The -e4300 @ $115 using a cheap M/B will have the low end wrapped up. Let us not gorget the Celarons based merom. Also . So I see AMD hitting below $10 easily.
Thats good reasoning Serge problem is AMD isn't selling every chip their making inventory is building for AMD chips. Look at Dell when they were Intel only they were no 1 . Only after they made a deal with AMD did they slip to no. 2. The last qt. Shows Dell falling fast. So no AMD isn't selling every chip they make. Word is the OEM's are angry because the AMD systems are over priced and building in inventory . Further puttting downward pressure on AMD chips.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
Over priced? A X2 3800+ is $130. A E6300 is $189 last time I checked. Now whos over priced. Even amd's FX62 is only $525 OEM. I don't see how a flag ship processor could be any less in dual core. Last time my news was upto date was AMD was winning the price war with rediculessly cheap cpus that only 3 or 6 months ago cost from $300 X2 3800+ to $1000 FX62. 50% price falls. All AMD has been is the cheapest solution for similar enough as it is performance in the real world. Conroe we all know is the best but I wouldn't pay what they are asking for for a 15% performance difference if I was somebody looking for a upgrade.
I beleave you over exsurte the situation AMD is in. You act like they are going BK. It takes companies years to be effected not days or months. Intel was 2nd best for 3 years now AMD is 2nd best on performance yet performance isn't everything. Right now AMD is the best bang for your buck right now. Intel wasn't effected much at all. Neather will AMD in its current posission.
Once 65nm reaches higher yelds and matures AMD will be in a better posission to sell more chips again. But currently as far as I know you need to show some proof or thats just BS coming from a Intel fan as far as I know. Dell is one of the best companies on top right now so thats false no proof. And yelds arn't good for AMD at the moment because of the transission to 65nm. They sold most of there chips to Dell is current news and AMD can't make enough chips. Its Intel your getting confused with. Netburst is 90% of Intels storage, should be scrapped to make room for conroe. AMD's warehouses are empty because of dell and AMD can't supply the open market because as soon as it gets out of the factory its inventory is sold.
The problem here serge is the $189 Intel processor will out perform the top of the line $500 AMD processor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
When Intel cuts prices in 2nd qt . $115 e4300 with a cheap M/B will ot perform the $500 amd processor.
Your argument is OK serge. Except if we go back in time . P4 were slower and used more power than AMD. Yet Intel fans didn't or shouldn't have argued the performance differance or the effiecncy differance doesn't matter.
Go back and read what happened in any thread that this occured in . The only differance is now the shoe is on the other foot.
By the P4/AMD 64 standards of debate your argument is at best lame. IN every since of the meaning.
http://www.svdaily.com/gartner1.html
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...er_pc_numbers/
http://chip.seekingalpha.com/article/23367
I think bringing the FX62 into the picture is silly. Just forget it exists.
Just as silly is saying E4300/6300/6400s are faster than one.
The fact is, at the current time, stock for stock AMD have 65nm cpu's to compete with C2D up to the 6400, And a range of 90nm CPUs to compete up to the 6700 if you include the 6000+ (arguably).
When you look at the comparible models I personally think they're still overpriced, but not by much. Many people factor in the cheaper 'comparable' MB prices for AM2 as a reason for this not being such a problem.
Given Intel plaster their C2D adverts on nearly every PC related website I go to, One can only hope It wont be long before more people realise Intel p4 era is dead, and AMD will need to bring prices down further and become more of a 'bargin' alternative like it was several yrs ago. Supply and demand! ..
What inventory is building? the inventory of single cores,not the dualcoresQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
i pretty much think amd is selling every dualcore it produces
last time i checked the "angry people" didnt get any 4200+/4600+/5000+ etc. they were stuck with slow 3500+ and semprons,but nodobdy wants that
so please stop making up BS
and a share price of 7$ for AMD, NO WAY :)
edit/ i think serge is right here :)
Again I have supplied links . To back up what I was saying. You on the other hand have supplied no links to back up your statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
I have read the forums a long time. Serge use to say things that were correct . Back when AMD64 VS. P4 thats a fact.
Another fact is this. Since C2D has arrived Serge has not been correct about anything. Examples
Serge 4x4 will beat Intel quad core.
Serge AMD 65nm cores will over clock to 3.6+
Sege AMD quad cores for desktop will O/C to 3.6+ easily (not known at this time but I am taking any and all bets.)
So I would like to see Serge correct this time . But so far he is batting zero. All indictations seem to point to him being wrong yet another time.
Guys. Try and keep the personal shots to a minimum. Its irritating when someone comes along to actually try to find out information.
Oh so off topic now :) $7 for AMD stocks doesnt seem likely to me, would create an interesting situation though. When talking about competitive chips lets not forget how loud AMD were about power consumption, i will still hold that against them, and more so because of the 4x4. If AMD is bang for the buck then Pentium D is too? Anyone want to build a P-D system? :D I dont, but i do want K8L benchies, NOW.
*IF* the stock bottoms out at $7, I'll be extremely happy. Time for a large purchase again. :D
sorry,dont have all the time to browse trough my history :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
if i find a link i will post it,but i think its about 2 months ago
This thread has turned into some ego fest again, it's like watching a couple of old men in the park all boasting to one antoher about all the things they have done in the past. No one can be beat by any of the others, let alone by any outsiders in their little circle talk.Quote:
Originally Posted by riptide
Cnet:READ, http://news.com.com/AMD+Go+to+Barcel...tag=html.alertQuote:
AMD: Go to 'Barcelona' over 'Clovertown'
Chipmaker predicts that its quad-core chip will outperform Intel's by 40 percent when it ships later this year.
Quote:
also will outperform AMD's current dual-core Opterons on "floating point" mathematical calculations by a factor of 3.6 at the same clock rate
Barcelona & Penryn together :D
http://www.overclockers.ru/images/ne...01/quad_02.jpghttp://img181.imageshack.us/img181/9879/penryn038sx.jpg
Nice pic MAS, big die tells me this picture is the real thing. :)
Whats the estimated float performance gain per clock of Penryn vs Conroe? Less than 5%? Sure looks like i will go back to AMD this fall... Conroe at max clock still cant run MS FSX well at very high settings, max OC K8 barely runs it at all, so obviously i need a HUGE improvement in floating point, just hope K8L can OC enough to keep up with 45nm Intel.
some additional info concerning Barcelona
http://news.zdnet.com/2102-9584_22-6152645.htmlQuote:
"We expect across a wide variety of workloads for Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent," Allen said. The quad-core chip also will outperform AMD's current dual-core Opterons on "floating point" mathematical calculations by a factor of 3.6 at the same clock rate, he said.
I had no idea that Serge had ever been right about anything. I suppose I haven't been around here long enough because all I've seen from him is fanboy babble every bit as zealous as the BS spewed by Sharikou the Clown. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Oops, quad vs dual, then the float performance isnt so impressive, barely enough to match Kentsfield. :( I guess thats what it said at Cnet also, should have read it more carefully, and it was too good to be true anyway :)Quote:
Originally Posted by MAS
Btw, link doesnt work for me.
Edit: Ok now.
if it was quad K8 vs dual K8 the factor should have been 2.
3.6 means almost twice as fast clock per clock than K8 in FP apps,
wich was predictable :P
3.6 just means half-K8L = 1.8 x K8 dual :)
1.8x dual for dual , Isn't that a little Larger than expected?
K8L has double the SSE throughoutput of K8.80% sounds about right in practice , that is Linpack.
OTOH , Conroe has a similar advantage over K8 but reality shows that the gains are much smaller.Take AMD's 3.6x as the absolute max in the best possible circumnstances ( Linpack test) , realworld it will probably be a lot less.
Let's not forget that this claim is coming from AMD and most likely represents the very best possible scenerio. Likely a synthetic BM that heavily favors K8L over K8 or another theoretical estimate.
K8L in May
Quote:
AMD ramping Barcelona
Wafers in 'real soon'
By Charlie Demerjian: Wednesday 24 January 2007, 09:02
AMD WASN'T JOKING about Barcelona hitting Q2. I didn't believe it until a solid source came out and said the volume ramp is starting 'really soon'.
If really soon is defined as the end of the month, and you add in the 10-12 weeks it takes from shiny silicon pizzas in to pin laden chunks out, that would mean parts are available at the beginning of May.
It would not surprise me if it is trading yield out for time to market, so let's add a month before they are really available. That puts things at early June for volume, or when AMD said it would have it out. Minor miracles do happen
Still no product or ES or demo to be seen...Sounds like another R600/RD600 or a "65nm on track".
If you compare, Intels 45nm is only a few weeks after K8L. And Intels 45nm can boot any OS..and show a taskmgr aswell (hoho).
The hype is taking tension...
Also MAS..as some have said. In those synthetic benchmarks, Core 2 is 6x faster per clock than Core 1. Yet its quite a different scenario when real world kicks in.
not weeks but monthsQuote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
AMD is starting quad-core Opteron production this month, but intel has only some penryn ES (and i didn;t see york, only penryn)
as to K8L ES...
numerous brisbane ES tests came only after brisbane announce date - it's AMD's tradition
Where does it say production this month ? And what does AMD have if not ES ?Quote:
Originally Posted by MAS
Considering AMD's execution in the last year I propose you to revisit this thread in may and see who has the last laugh. ;)
Brisbane is nothing to brag about , in fact it is almost a failure.K8L OTOH is AMD's Conroe in theory.Quote:
as to K8L ES...
numerous brisbane ES tests came only after brisbane announce date - it's AMD's tradition
AMD should learn from the Dark Side how to promote a new CPU.Or maybe they they have nothing but hot air ?
Like I care. K8L rock. :toast:
Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Amd Closed today @ $16.03. I have 2 days for it to fall another $1.03Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
for above statement to be correct. The only reason I mention this is that. I was just reading the news section . I place I am banned from.
The story on k8l performance being 40% better than C2D . and the inquirer story that Amd will release these chips in MaY.
Whats that got to do with above? It seems to me I have been about 95% correct in what I have been saying. This story of the K8L being 80% faster than K8 is amusing. I believe if you reread what it says that only in ffu. It should also be read with a very large grain of salt.
AMD stock is falling faster than a speeding bullet. They just wiped out almost 2 years of profits. If K8l is coming in may. That means their are ES chips. AMD would be showing real world results with these chips to help stop the bleeding. Instead that put out a BS story to the inquirer so they would print it. Smoke and mirrors fella's. Thats all it is.
Buy the time K8L arrives AMD will be valued at less than they paid for ATI.
IF K8L is in production as reported. AMD would be showing. It if it in fact was 40% faster than C2D,
After AMD DEC. anylist report nothing AMD says can be believed. They duked thousands of people out of millions of dollars. I personally have wrote my state atty. About this and have E-mailed the DoJ. Someone has to be prosecuted for this fruadulent act. AMD crossed the line on that one.
Whats up with this inquirer stuff anyway. First you guys say its all BS. Now your using it as a holy grail. Fact is I was told I couldn't use Inquirer links anymore.
I believe K8L will be a good Cpu . Will it be better than C2D I don't know. Will it be better than Penryn ? Not a Chance. On the penryn thing. I keep hearing you guys saying that the D1 plant in Org. Is the only plant ready to use intels 45nm process. I think you should maybe research what the other org. Plant see what it can do.
The common comment seems to be that if AMD had anything to show, they would show it now, aka, we would be seeing benches with ESs. My question is (and I don't know the answer, I'm honestly curious) whether or not AMD has done this in the past. While there are quite a few ppl here at XS that would exult in ES benches of any type, how much benefit did Core 2 ever receive from it in terms of sales? AMD may simply have no interest in bringing out the ESs for whatever reason; for it to be only due to having nothing to show doesn't seem to be the only possibility...
A better way to say the above: What are the internal links to the reasoning that No ES = lousy chip?
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Well, lets look on it from another side. No ES means no serverboards, no desktop boards. Specially serverboards needs alot of testing. So unless AMD plans to launch K8L and bet everything, incl. server performance on the old HT standard....and that I find very unlikely. Unless they want to cripple themselves from the start.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
So no ES, no boards, no testruns, no product.
I don't know how big the impact was of Intel putting out es chips. Why don't you have a vote poll asking that question. But I believe it had a bigger impact than your willing to admit to.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
I remember when the first benchmarks were shown here. Fugger can vouch for this the server was put under hugh strain for quit a few days. Go back and read the comments. I don't know the exact no of hits but it was hugh. A lot of people who were going to buy AMD postponed that buy and waited for C2D'S. Check all the forums C2D is the boss everywhere.
I will be conservitive and say AMD lost at least 10,000 customers because of those early ES bench marks. Thats just the self build guys. Factor in the people they told who bought HP or dell or what ever.
A perfect example is the Apple fanboys were snarling wgen it was reported that Apple would use intel cpu's. After the early ES bench marks done here they were dancing in the streets.
So how big that impact of the early showing was I don't know. What I believe as do many others here it was bigger than you will admit. Ask any of the guys here that left AMD for Intel and see if those early benchmarks had a mindset effect on them.
That's a good point, I hadn't thought about that aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
The first K8 ES benchmarks appeared in early June 2002 and K8 launched 16 months later in late September 2003.:fact:
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0607012097.htm
PLEASE STOP TALKING ABOUT INTEL IN AN AMD THREAD
btw, the guy that called brisbane a failure needs to use his brain more
1)brisbane wasnt about getting a faster cpu
2)first tests with 65nm
3)higher yields
4) less expensive cpu's (they really need this on,their margin% is about 36%)
Brisbane is doing whats its supposed to do
Here are I believe the latest AMD road maps.
K8L H2 07.
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/3...06_Roadmap.png
Hello people, what if one day AMD die and bring along ATI. Will you intel fanboy live happily ever after?
Come on AMD delay in launching new CPU, stock price is dropping. Why you people still seemed to be very happy?? Is this supposed to be a good sign, intel fanboy???
How intel will look like and what kind of premier do we need to pay for a CPU if AMD really dead?? It is all about balance. Use you brain, kid. :slapass:
they don't understand that if anyone wins, we loseQuote:
Originally Posted by SunFlowerSeeds
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
AMD section to follow soon i hope, so bored with your thread crapping.
Amen.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
NN we all understand perfectly well. I think we all want K8L to perform well.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Some for differant reasons than others. But this stuff AMD is putting out in the news is pure fud. K8l 40% faster than C2D. I find that very unreasonable for them to say without showing us some realworld test.
Than you factor in the Dec. Demo of K8l running Task manager. using 4 cores. I think everyone one of us including you would have been happy to see 1 core with 4 dies doing some real world benchmarks.
If thats the best AMD could Demo in Dec. There is noway it can be ready in may for sales. You been around long enough to know this. Than you consider what AMD said on dec. 15 and than look at the results of the qt. report. Than you say we don't understand. Thats a low blow.
If you want to follow what AMD says blindly thats fine. But to say we don't understand is an insult. Until AMD can stop lying to investors and the public they have along way to go to rebuild their credibility.
Right now for me if AMD delivers on a cpu in the form of K8l that is 40% faster than C2D at the same clock speed. And they deliver these cpu's in April May.
They will win back there credibilty with many people including myself. But until that happens . Its all AMD hype. Now I know if April -May goes by and we don't see the processors. You guys will say it was the inquirer putting out fud. I know for a fact ATI use to feed the inquirer BS just to make them look bad. My wife's brother inlaw told me that. Now some of these same guys work at AMD.
I know these is an AMD thread. But those of us who are not going along with the hype aren't thread crapping at all. If anything we are bring reasoning to this thread.
I don't think any off us believe K8L will not be = to or > than C2D. Clock for clock. But 40% seems very unreasonable. That is what we are objecting to. It would be great if it were true. As it would push intel even harder. Not only that but I could no doubt by a 45nm Wolf/ York very cheaply. That wouldn't hurt my feelings at all. Than AMD's roadmaps call for K8L in H2 0f 07. Thats july to dec time frame. Not April may. . When has AMD ever delivered a new arch. ahead of road maps time frame? Than you say we don't understand.
Do people really want AMD to make crappy products and die? Why do people want to predict gloom and doom for AMD?? I for one want both AMD and Intel to be strong and competitive so they can push each other make better and innovative products. We the consumers benefit for healthy competition. People here don't have inside information (I don't think, anyway) so I suggest we all wait and see what K8L is really like. Company statements are that ... just statements company wants to put out. All companies want to shed the best possible light on their product. We'll see what the truth is when retail hardware hits the shelves. :woot:
right, desktop K8L - Q3 2007Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
but server one - Q2 2007
difference btw them - only buffered mem. controller
i wish everyone would stay on topic, if anybody has bashing or questions about the integrity of a product they should start their own thread. THis thread is obviously about product updates and future business plans.
Does anyone have a link to an official AMD roadmap or statement that says K8L Opterons are coming in Q2 and Athlons in Q3? I've seen plenty of unsubstantiated speculation to that effect but nothing even remotely substantive. The last official AMD roadmaps I've seen showed K8L officially launching sometime in Q3 with Opterons to follow shortly and Athlons in Q1-08. TIA.
Yes it doesQuote:
Originally Posted by Fred_Pohl
And its alrady been posted in this thread:rolleyes:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...9&postcount=48
I think Fred lives in some virtual reality world since he missed one of these articles :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Teroedni
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/...onf-part1.html
Quote:
We have all seen a similar picture that illustrated the changes in the K8L core. Thus, practically all of them (at least those that were mentioned) must be included into the first generation of quad-core processors, which are planned to manufacture (to be more exact — to appear in stores) in Q2 2007! It means that AMD intends to reschedule its "riposte to Intel Core 2" to an earlier date, even compared to the most optimistic forecasts (mid 2007). Opteron and Athlon 64 FX processors will be the first to upgrade to the new core. That's certainly the most important piece of news.
Which roadmap was that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred_Pohl
I looked at that roadmap you posted. I really need help getting a date from it. When it says K8l would available. I measured across the time line and its about 2 3/8" . so a rounded it to 2.25 than divided it by 4QT. which comes to .5625. or 5/8 " thats what one qt would equal./ So I than measured over from Jan1 07 5/8 " Guess what acorrding to that measurement K8L is suppose to be here in the 1st. qt of 07. I am really struggling with that roadmap as it doesn't seem to have a mathamatical value connected with it.
It just looks like a bar in 07 that reaches from 08 to the 1st qt of 07.
So one of you better graph readers can maybe explain this mathamatical oddity to me.
Or is this just a bar graph that just that shows K8L appearing sometime in 07.
Also the link below that says that HT 3 won't be here till 08 . Yet that road map shows it in 07.
What in the world...You actually did that??OmG.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Did you even read my previous post Turtle1 ?Or you read only the ones that give you the information that AMD will die soon,and in a horrible way /sarcasm
If your referring to this post. Ya I read it. I also read the link.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Were was this presentation given?
Who were the speakers and what is there job titles?
:clap:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flambo
Being new to the forum, my opinion probably isn't worth jack, BUT I gotta agree with the comments about this threads purpose.
It really is full of bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: amd vs intel on every page. Would be an Excellent thread without it (due to all the relevent info it contains not being hidden amongst bickering)
You can read,can you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
It's all on the first page i linked to...It was official presentation,and from a (very) official guy.
So click once and read it yourself.
And BTW,this info is online for a long time,it's not like it was out yesterday....
This is interesting
Going from a 4point Amd dual core cpu platform to a 2point Barcelona Platform actually decrease the power consumption from 474 to 242 watts:)
Thats pretty low for a system cointaining of 8 Complex Processor:D
Now a 8core system consuming only 242 watts is inded perfect for Wcg:toast:
Being a socket F 2p platform I might even be able to afford that when its out:D
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1169723585
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1169723585
What a load of crap...since when do NVIDIA NB burn 16w ?!
@Turtle1 AMD stock is rising ;)
heheh ye, you also gotta love they use the maximum possible A+V draws for the Intel chipset. If that was true, the P965 would use alot power power then 975X. And we all know how that turned out.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
But again, Its PR in the best Apple/Sun way.
But people might have missed the smallprint...estimates and actual result may vary. Its a free get out of jailcard for BS PR.
you guys have a point that an Nvidia NB takes more than 10W
but that doesnt take away the disadvantage of the FB-Dimms on the intel side of the story
Hello!
I found a news on a french website. If I understood it right, than they talk about AMD anounced in December that the Barcelona will be 13% faster in TCP OLTP and 46% faster in SPECfp than the XEON 5355.
http://www.hardware.fr/news/8566/amd...-qu-intel.html
interesting linkQuote:
Originally Posted by cumec
As I said I read it. I just wanted you to say were and who. Seeings how you have made effort to avoid it I will say.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Place- Moscow IT presentation
Speaker one-Pierre Brunswick Job title-Vice directorof Marketing and sales eastern europe and TURKEY
Speaker two- Guiseppe Amato Job Title-Director of sales Europe/Middle east and Africa. Very Creditable people I am sure who know their jobs well. I know many car salesman all very very creditable.
That link is about as valuable as post 189. ;)
Thta's the most stupid post i read in a while.Period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Speaker two couldn't have less important title :Director of sales Europe/Middle east and Africa....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And he is the one who gave the main presentation.
You really need to get a grip.Scary stuff man.
Thanks for the link and the sarcasm. Not sure how I missed it before. What do you suppose that faded Barcelona bar means? It appears to extend from Q1-07. Isn't it normal to release some ES chips a few months before shipping the final product? K8 ES was benched 16 months before K8 launched. Not that I expect a similar delay for K8L but I do expect ~3 months from ES to shipping product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teroedni
I'm really not sure how to read that roadmap. It's more than a little vague and subject to a lot of interpretation. It does seem to suggest that AMD has brought K8L forward by a few months from previous roadmaps. If true, good for them. They really need it.
Hay it was your link heres a qoute from that link. I wasn't placing any importance on either speaker. As they are both just salesman.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Then the floor was given to Guiseppe Amato — Technical Director of Sales and Marketing in Europe, Middle East, and Africa;) ;)
So what's you point man??That there is no point in your post??Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
The guy had a "go" back then to say Q2 for uniprocessor and QuadFx Altair and he did just that!Live with it man.
You seem to be also in some type of denial,like wishing AMD slips Stars into Q1 2009 and dies soon :confused: /actually not confused at all/
And by the way,that News section ban was for a reason,we all know that.You are doing the "right" thing here too,so be our guest.
Why do you insist on saying things that aren't true and the personnal attacks all the time. I never said I want AMD to disappear. I simply said I doubt that K8L will be here in april -may. I also don't believe K8L will be 40% faster than C2D. The road maps don't say Aptil -may. The Inquirer does. Hay if you want to put that kinda faith in the inquire feel free to do so. I won't except a salesmans say so either . But if you want to fine.
I didn't mention theInq in our little discussion, man.You are really something...
I provided the so much wanted link for you,directly from AMD's mouth and you are still not satisfied.Well,i can't do much for you there.Nobody can.
I bet that Stars will rock and will be better than Penryn(forget clowerton...).It's my opinion.So we'll see who is right in a few months.
I agree that K8l will be= or > than C2D at the same clock. But penryn is going to do 4.GHZ without breaking a sweet. Why do I think that? Because C2D @ 65 nm does 4.2- 4.3 on water. So the more effient penryn will have no problems with those speeds. Factor in the DDR3 and it should be great with loads of bandwidth. The thing I really like about the X38 chipset . Is the DDR3 and the pci-e 2 double the bandwidth . So you can use 8x pci-e lanes and have = to 16x lanes bandwidth. I have no doubts K8L is going to be a fast cpu. But Penryn wolfdales should scream. On water I am thinking and its just my belief no one else's it will do 4.5 easily and have the bandwidth to scale with ddr3.Along with 6md of shared cache. Thats all I know about X38 right now. But I think and again its just me that X38 will have the ability to do DP. I am sure that intel will need 2 seperate FSB's but we already know intel has that ability. I can invision the V8 or if you want the V4 destroyng everthing in its path.I didn't really mention Intels snoop filters as a possiabilty with X38 but that is possiable.
umm the term is "lucky conroe does that on water" the last time I checked the average Conroe overclock is in the 3.2-3.5Ghz rangeQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Well nn the 6800 do much better than the numbers your referring to. Also we all know guys are getting 4+ghz. with C2D on water. So the penryn should achieve it easily. Same as the K8 @ 65nm. they should all do about 3ghz. that seems to be where K8's wall is. I don't really know where c2d's wall is but i know its above 4.3 ghz.
yes I completely agree that SOME people are getting 4+Ghz with conroe but most are not. also per what you mentioned is also true for intel. perhaps the shrink of conroe may not provide a large improvement in max overclocks but it'll probably help the average a little bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Can we have the FACTS in the first post??