AMD Barcelona/Shanghai Quads to top out at 2.5GHz initially?

Be nice to get more ES around here so we have somthing to look forward to. As of right now, all we have is numbers on paper as far as I'm concerned.

Both AMD and ATI have been keeping a lot more under wraps lately, it's a little odd...

(yes, I realize they merged, I think you get my point though :p:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alpha_tot

:confused: So this means @ the same clock barcelonas twice as fast core for core??? Or am I missing something here??? WTF is a tick?

---

A tick is the same thing as a clock cycle and yes that would imply each core is twice as powerful as a k8 core.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

well now it seems a K8L core is twice as powerful as a K8 core

K8 cores get 4 gflops per core
K8L cores get 8 gflops per core

so a single 2.5Ghz K8L chip will perform like a 5Ghz dual socket dual core server - now thats hard to believe

if this is true then K8L will be more powerfull than everyones thinking, and intel will have problems matching it even with 45nm quad cores

---

QX6700 is 42.67 gigaflops/s for double-precision. Core 2 Duo already went to 4 DP flops/cycle using SSE, K8L is just catching up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

last time I looked at server benches the only reason core based xeons ware faster was the higher clockspeed, unlike desktop where it is better clock for clock

---

Like which server bench? Most server benches don't use vector math in any significant manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accord99

Like which server bench? Most server benches don't use vector math in any significant manner.

---

Very true. 3.0GHz Woodcrest is up to 147% faster then 2.6GHz Opteron in intensive math calculations (like matrix multiplication):
http://www.cse.clrc.ac.uk/disco/Benchmarks/matrix.shtml

It should be impressive to see AMD on its own chipset, I dont think the hold out is intentional but more growing pains.

I hope they like the cold, we may see dual head coolers become more popular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by red

The 'Extreme' dual core Woodcrest 3GHz 5160 is 80W. The 'Extreme' quad core 2.66GHz Clovertown is 120W.:stick: You aren't reading the chart correctly. On the left side are dual cores, separated into 3 rows of performance, mainstream, energy efficient. On the right side is quad cores..:)

---

The TDP is NOT the actual power consumption. Your assumptions are not useful for decision making.

Quote:

---

3) It will be at least a match for Kentsfield.

---

i'm betting it will not match the Kentsfield. It will surpass it in multithreaded apps like a Mercedes vs Trabant ;)

And the 2.5 Rhumors are just... rhumors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

It should be impressive to see AMD on its own chipset, I dont think the hold out is intentional but more growing pains.

---

Exactly. My hope was AMD bought ATI to get back into the chipset business. So far we see nothing.

NVidia is really not the vendor of my choice for chipsets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcofell

A tick is the same thing as a clock cycle and yes that would imply each core is twice as powerful as a k8 core.

---

TICK :p:
________
400Gt Monza

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

That was A2 silicon. Not A0.

I have friends w/ A1 and A2 silicon first hand. A0 was never sent out.

---

Brent do you know clocks of this A1/A2 revisions (approximately?) and if they are usable/working or partially usable only?
Many thanks in advance for any hints ;) .

ahahah, what else besides alcohol!?!?!? dont tell me you are date raping your friends for stepping info!

Are they not good enough for benches because the performance doesn't match the paper specs or are they simply bugged?