65NM Process

Printable View

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

10-03-2005, 10:37 AM
nn_step

your welcome
10-03-2005, 02:48 PM
eliminate

so it will be the FX 61 before they come out with the M2? I see no new core being worth buying before the M2 currently
10-03-2005, 03:30 PM
Mats

S939 will never become 65 nm, just like S462 never used 90 nm. I think 65 nm M2 will show up 12 months from now, when nobody want's a 939 except for budget systems.

I wonder what will happen with HTT and RAM speeds. They will use 667 MHz DDR2, does it mean that the CPU will run at (333 x multiplier)? If so, then I guess there will be a long wait for both mature CPU's and mobos that can handle at least 500 MHz bus speeds for some decent overclocking. I don't know if you need new chipsets for the new socket. If not, then mobo manufacturers will probably try to sell mobos with old chipsets in the beginning. A 400 MHz capable chipset is the best for today, but will only give you a 20 % overclock with M2... :stick:
10-03-2005, 04:37 PM
saratoga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

S939 will never become 65 nm, just like S462 never used 90 nm. I think 65 nm M2 will show up 12 months from now, when nobody want's a 939 except for budget systems.

I wonder what will happen with HTT and RAM speeds. They will use 667 MHz DDR2, does it mean that the CPU will run at (333 x multiplier)? If so, then I guess there will be a long wait for both mature CPU's and mobos that can handle at least 500 MHz bus speeds for some decent overclocking. I don't know if you need new chipsets for the new socket. If not, then mobo manufacturers will probably try to sell mobos with old chipsets in the beginning. A 400 MHz capable chipset is the best for today, but will only give you a 20 % overclock with M2... :stick:

HT will stay the same, but the memory divider will change.
10-03-2005, 04:48 PM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by saratoga

HT will stay the same, but the memory divider will change.

How do you know that? Won't they run at 3x333 instead of 5x200 (HTT)?
10-03-2005, 04:58 PM
saratoga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

How do you know that? Won't they run at 3x333 instead of 5x200 (HTT)?

Because that would be both expensive and pointless.
10-03-2005, 05:07 PM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by saratoga

Because that would be both expensive and pointless.

Speculations...
However, I hope you're right, otherwise we'll get lower max multipliers and a demand for faster chipsets like I said. I hope we'll find out long before they show up.
10-03-2005, 07:21 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by eliminate

so it will be the FX 61 before they come out with the M2? I see no new core being worth buying before the M2 currently

may I suggest an X2?
I think that should be highier up on your list than the M2
10-04-2005, 05:14 AM
s7e9h3n

The FX59 WILL be a .09 3.0Ghz San Diego core cpu. This most likely will be the last single core processor introduced by AMD. After it's release (which by the way should be expected in the next 2-3 months) AMD will shift it's focus to dual core cpu's. IIRC, ddr2 cpu's will be released sometime during Q2 2006, starting with the Opterons.......
10-04-2005, 05:24 AM
s7e9h3n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troman

starting with the opterons..

that's okay since we all know that they(144,146 etc) oc like hell :D

Hehe...hopefully the 1200+ pin DDR2 Opties will do the same :p:
EDIT: THen again, that'll be impossible running reg ecc ddr2 on server boards......
10-04-2005, 05:35 AM
Apokalipse

are they definately going to be ECC only like the 940's?
10-04-2005, 05:43 AM
Ugly n Grey

Yeah the Opterons made for multiple CPU implementations will remain with ECC only from what I understand. It just makes so much sense in a server workstation environment... more so than overclockability (I never overclock a serious work computer myself)
10-04-2005, 12:02 PM
s7e9h3n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugly n Grey

Yeah the Opterons made for multiple CPU implementations will remain with ECC only from what I understand. It just makes so much sense in a server workstation environment... more so than overclockability (I never overclock a serious work computer myself)

Yup, right on point there. The main reason why the s940 single Opteron cpu was moved to s939 wasn't because AMD wanted to create a workstation solution which utilized non-Ecc DDR. Rather it had much to do with the cost of manufacturing for s940 motherboards in general. All current s940 motherboards are manufactured with a 6-layer pcb. This results in a much higher cost for the end-user and therefore very little demand for a single cpu s940 workstation solution. By shifting the socket to 939, the single cpu Opteron workstation becomes a much more feasible solution for those who are on a budget ;)
10-04-2005, 03:01 PM
nn_step

my thought is if you want more than 1 Cpu on a mobo you can afford a $200+ mobo
10-04-2005, 04:22 PM
IvanAndreevich

I think there's at least 6 months until the next FX chip so that puts us right where M2 should be announced. I'll be really surprised if there is a S939 FX-59.
10-04-2005, 04:37 PM
Lithan

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

lets just say you can go from a 90nm process to a 45nm process... each chip takes up 1/4 the space meaning that you can make atleast 4 times as many chips from the same wafer... even if you lose twice as many chips... The cost of production is 1/2 as much as to make a 90nm chip.
Plus the smaller the process the less heat it puts out unless you are intel....
Which is what Overclockers like... Hence you can sell it at a highier price..
They win both ways...

100% of the cost isn't materials though is it? Factor in the cost of building the fab, additional work, testing and packaging costs. You aren't exactly at 50% cost anymore. In fact for AMD, you're probably losing money for the first couple years anyway.
10-04-2005, 04:43 PM
Flak Monkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich

I think there's at least 6 months until the next FX chip so that puts us right where M2 should be announced. I'll be really surprised if there is a S939 FX-59.

Well I guess your gonna end up really surprised. All the roadmaps I've seen put the FX-59 as a 3.0ghz san diego core on socket 939.
10-04-2005, 04:47 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lithan

100% of the cost isn't materials though is it? Factor in the cost of building the fab, additional work, testing and packaging costs. You aren't exactly at 50% cost anymore. In fact for AMD, you're probably losing money for the first couple years anyway.

I based my estimate on pure manufacturing costs alone
10-04-2005, 07:51 PM
Mats

Is it the Socket F/1207 that will have integrated PCIE controller? Better 3D performance, worse/no overclocking because of ECC RAM, DUH!!! :stick:
I want both!! Will AMD really stop themself from making THE gaming machine by not using the integrated PCIE controller in A64? :confused:
10-04-2005, 07:58 PM
jahjahbinks

You guys forgot about R&D cost, each fab lab can cost up to several billion dollars.
10-04-2005, 08:10 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

Is it the Socket F/1207 that will have integrated PCIE controller? Better 3D performance, worse/no overclocking because of ECC RAM, DUH!!! :stick:
I want both!! Will AMD really stop themself from making THE gaming machine by not using the integrated PCIE controller in A64? :confused:

But do you really want to lock your self into exactly one type of Graphics card connection?
besides the latencies for graphics aren't that bad...
10-04-2005, 08:52 PM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

But do you really want to lock your self into exactly one type of Graphics card connection?
besides the latencies for graphics aren't that bad...

What's wrong with PCIE? Unless you have X850 AGP lying around which I don't.
Well, I was just speculating, or dreaming.. we don't even know what that PCIE controller can do in reality. As usual, wait and see... :slap:
10-04-2005, 10:20 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

What's wrong with PCIE? Unless you have X850 AGP lying around which I don't.
Well, I was just speculating, or dreaming.. we don't even know what that PCIE controller can do in reality. As usual, wait and see... :slap:

Lets see, Oh I know the fact that is going to be replaced within the next 18 months :slap: PCI-E2
10-04-2005, 11:54 PM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

Lets see, Oh I know the fact that is going to be replaced within the next 18 months :slap: PCI-E2

Well, good for you then. :toast:
10-04-2005, 11:56 PM
nn_step

you don't plan on jumping on the bandwagon too?

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