AMD 65 nm next month

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

09-09-2006, 10:16 PM
xlink

so if the ceiling is 6-6.5GHz on ln2 AMD reclaims the world record for performance... if they start hitting 4-4.5GHz on air, I will be impressed. with any luck they will.
09-09-2006, 10:24 PM
dinos22

Quote:

Originally Posted by xlink

so if the ceiling is 6-6.5GHz on ln2 AMD reclaims the world record for performance... if they start hitting 4-4.5GHz on air, I will be impressed. with any luck they will.

problem with your statement there is that AMD will be sold bugged much like the other ones due to that inbuilt memory controller unless you know something i don't
09-09-2006, 10:31 PM
xlink

i seriously doubt anything on the current k8 architecture will scale that high withough 2-3V seriously doubt it.

juust saying it would be nice...
09-09-2006, 10:54 PM
marauder16

If I could get to 3.2GHz (w/ x10 multi) on water with the 65nm K8 I'll be happy! :D
09-09-2006, 11:01 PM
Raybo

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinos22

problem with your statement there is that AMD will be sold bugged much like the other ones due to that inbuilt memory controller unless you know something i don't

You just answered all my questions. :toast:

I have 2 939 boards 1 Opteron and an X2 and a drawer full of DDR.

dino I might have takin' the post wrong and I don't think you know this but i'm a Chicago Cubs fan, I'll wait till next year.

:toast:
09-09-2006, 11:57 PM
dinos22

I meant COLD bugged ROFL

scratches head about Chicago Cubs fan thingy....i donno much about us football heh
09-10-2006, 01:56 AM
Caubecari

Will this 65nm beat conroe E6300?
09-10-2006, 02:06 AM
alexio

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caubecari

Will this 65nm beat conroe E6300?

What beats the e6300? It's probable that withing the year AMD will offer something on 90nm that outperformes the e6300 (atleast at stock).

I don't think this question should be asked here, as you can be sure that if anyone knows, they still won't tell us untill NDA is over.
09-10-2006, 03:28 AM
Squid_Spit

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinos22

problem with your statement there is that AMD will be sold bugged much like the other ones due to that inbuilt memory controller unless you know something i don't

Well we don't know that for sure, remember 130nm K8's had no problems under the cold.
09-10-2006, 03:56 AM
dimasdw

i don't realy sure amd 65 nm chip can beat conroe ,but i hope can .:)
09-10-2006, 05:38 AM
marauder16

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimasdw

i don't realy sure amd 65 nm chip can beat conroe ,but i hope can .:)

I don't think that's possible, higher clocks probably but beating Conroe not, at least not till K8L (that's what we all hope, bringing Intel back on the second place :D )
09-10-2006, 06:07 AM
breakfromyou

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squid_Spit

Well we don't know that for sure, remember 130nm K8's had no problems under the cold.

but they didnt have an integrated memory controller. thats what we all think causes the coldbug.

i dont care much about 65nm, i just want to see some K8L action.
09-10-2006, 06:19 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by breakfromyou

but they didnt have an integrated memory controller. thats what we all think causes the coldbug.

:stick:
ALL K8's have an integrated memory controller.
09-10-2006, 06:38 AM
Gam3Ra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

:stick:
ALL K8's have an integrated memory controller.

S754 haven't :stick:
09-10-2006, 06:52 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biggles

Going from 0.13 micron to 0.09 micron got AMD an increase of 600 MHz - from the Athlon 64 3700/3800/4000 at 2.4 GHz to the Opteron 256/856 at 3 GHz.

You're forgetting the FX-55, 130 nm, 2.6 GHz. The transition to dual core could be the reason for the small speed bump, even though single cores aren't much better. What I'm trying to say is that AMD possibly could have done some tweaking and reached even higher GHz if the world still was single core only, but the dual cores became high priority and they had to take a different road. Just speculating.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biggles

So using previous form, I expect rev F - the 0.065 micron processors - to get to around 3.75 GHz, in production processors.

I think you're talking about revision G, Revision F is the current one, Windsor, Orleans.....
09-10-2006, 06:55 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gam3Ra

S754 haven't :stick:

Yes THEY DO!:slap:
What are you talking about? You should do your homework before you post.
Everybody knows that 754 got a single channel memory controller, and that the 939 got a dual channel memory controller.
09-10-2006, 07:37 AM
Gam3Ra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

Yes THEY DO!:slap:
What are you talking about? You should do your homework before you post.
Everybody knows that 754 got a single channel memory controller, and that the 939 got a dual channel memory controller.

Realy.. sorry, I don't read all, I was reading does all K8 have DC memcontroler :D
09-10-2006, 08:36 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by _33

AMD 65nm + S939 ???

If they do release S939 parts, then it will have to be good news. Otherwize it's sad news for my DFI Lanparty and DDR1 memory. When you look at what happened with S754, AMD did release a Venice for that socket. So, I don't see why they wouldn't release the new 65nm chips.

I tell you why.
It's because 754 and 939 both use DDR RAM, so all they had to do was to put the Venice core in a 754 package, not really hard to do.
They can't do the same with a Windsor/Orleans (DDR2) core in a 939 (DDR) package. The only way would be to die shrink a DDR core to 65 nm, which is too expensive and just won't happen.
09-10-2006, 12:42 PM
ozzimark

99% certain that it's not the imc that causes the cold bug. why else would the >1:1 ratios work for getting ram speed higher than the limited htt on s939 cold bugged chips?

methinks it's SOI's fault :fact:
09-10-2006, 02:22 PM
AndrewZorn

im pretty sure its the IMC
09-10-2006, 08:55 PM
Serge84

http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/6...hancements.jpg
http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/a64_rev_f.jpg

They will not be the same. 65nm amds have slightly different construction then the 90nm K8's. They enhanced them to do higher clock speeds. Check out the load buffers, a extra decoder and so on. 3 main parts have been modified or added onto. Segesting what AMD clames, they did exactly what they needed with these modifications. We will see a Ghz war with AMD afterall.

Note the 65nm Rev G AMD has extra parts in it that don't exist in the 90nm rev F that go beyond even this, more transistors, extra stages, whatever comes with making a cpu able to gane Ghz.
09-10-2006, 08:59 PM
dinos22

would be good to see that >>>> GHz fight :D = AMD wins
09-10-2006, 11:42 PM
marauder16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serge84

http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/6...hancements.jpg
http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/a64_rev_f.jpg

They will not be the same. 65nm amds have slightly different construction then the 90nm K8's. They enhanced them to do higher clock speeds. Check out the load buffers, a extra decoder and so on. 3 main parts have been modified or added onto. Segesting what AMD clames, they did exactly what they needed with these modifications. We will see a Ghz war with AMD afterall.

Note the 65nm Rev G AMD has extra parts in it that don't exist in the 90nm rev F that go beyond even this, more transistors, extra stages, whatever comes with making a cpu able to gane Ghz.

Man I so hope that's true you're talking about, I want to see some 3.5GHz AMD on water :D
09-11-2006, 01:16 AM
freeloader

http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/6...hancements.jpg

That looks like the K8L picture. I believe the 65nm chips are just shrinks until K8L arrives.
09-11-2006, 04:56 AM
i found nemo

Quote:

Originally Posted by arisythila

Seems like there are some Intel guys that are :banana::banana::banana::banana: faced... Some dont even have a "conroe", but they wont hesitate to let you know conroe is all powerful. I was reading some stuff in there yesterday, and some Intel guys ragged on this guy because he had a question. Mind you, I didnt post in the intel section, I JUST READ. Matter a fact. I think when K8L comes out and dominates Intel. We should go over to Intel forums and then tell them how much Intel sucks.. What do you guys think?

~Mike

neh, don't stoop to their level :nono: i really hope that 65nm clocks better, seeing as 90nm should have clocked waaaay higher

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:58 AM.

XtremeSystems