Since you obviously know everything about what AMD is doing, why don't you write a book and sell it to Intel for a Billion dollars :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Printable View
Since you obviously know everything about what AMD is doing, why don't you write a book and sell it to Intel for a Billion dollars :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Afaik not much has changed (yet?) for desktop processors. The most up to date info was 2.6ghz in Q4 and 2.8 in Q1 08. Quad FX processors for socket L1 could launch in late Q3 though as they are low volume parts anyway. Still i expect the worst case scenario for Phenom for it to top out at 2.4 ghz, although i think that's unlikely. s for the wattage you are wrong. Opterons are always ratted higher than desktop processorsQuote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Agreed. I tire of hearing his bull :banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Perhaps Zytek_Fan and nn_step should try and read the AMD press release and compare it to the Wiki!
Now tell me who is wrong, the Wiki or the AMD press release.
Actually desktops are higher than servers. The servers gets the premium chips.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
2.8Ghz in Q1, where? Also the wiki dont even use the numbers they refer to.
http://www.dailytech.com/Final+AMD+S...rticle7157.htm
Currently the most up to date info is 2.3Ghz in Q4. And 2.3Ghz+ in Q1.
QFTQuote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
No, that's not correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
It's "2.2-2.4" in late Q4 for the best Phenom Quadcore (so midpoint is 2.3)
In Q1, that becomes "2.4-2.6" for Phenom Quadcore (midpoint 2.5)
The only "2.8" is the upper end of the "2.4-2.8" Phenom DUAL core range for Q1 08. (The 6xxx series)
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40348
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40347
AMD to Launch "Barcelona" Slow this August
http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7890
Quote:
AMD announced today what analysts have been dreading for months: the company will launch its next-generation architecture this August, at top-out frequencies of 2.0 GHz. This next-generation CPU will become the successor of the existing K8 AMD Opteron lineup.
Welcome to page 25Quote:
Originally Posted by lapdog
Phenom delayed to Q1 '08
http://digitimes.com/mobos/a20070702PD201.html
This is in line with Charlie assumption (link) that AMD might went straight from B1 rev. to Cx rev. to sort out all clocking problems at once.Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
So this is good news in bad news... I would prefer 2.5GHz+ Phenom in Q108 than few 2.3GHz- Phenoms in December 07.
well as long as Barcelona is on route i dont care for Phenom(Idiotic name:/)
Im just waiting for my chance to go 2P quad for a Total of Octa Cores:D
Now that Platform will rock:D
well if Asus update the Bios it should work, But why would you want that Powerhog of an motherboard??Quote:
Originally Posted by californian7856
Why not go for a real server board instead,with way lower power cunsumption;)
Mobo makers say AMD Phenom delayed until 1Q08, but AMD says launch remains set for 2H07 (update)Quote:
Originally Posted by gallag
AMD has responded to this report by stating that the company's official launch schedule for Phenom remains the second half of 2007 and this schedule has not changed. The company added that it has not contacted motherboard makers concerning a delay to the schedule.
Lets not hope its another "65nm in December" type of launch.Quote:
Originally Posted by PetNorth
But currently I havenīt seen a reason on why it cant be 2007 yet.
Wouldnīt there be an issue with ECC vs non ECC memory. And maybe registered.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Teroedni
No,like shown before here on the forum,Opterons work without issues on Asus Quad FX mobo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I've come across some benchmarks done by AMD from a feb 2007 presentation.
They compare 2/4 Opteron 3GHz with 2/4 K10 2.3GHz.
Speed advantage for K10 : 53,3%
Most benchmarks scale by 55-66% considering a 53% speed advantage => K10 IPC over K8 is 0-20%.
Thank to enumae for the link.link
And how did you come by a 53% advantage?In those graphs,most results are 66% advantage with 30% clock deficit for K10.And you said most benchmarks scale ~60%...So you are guessing here.
Because for 2P you are comparing 4 3GHz K8 cores vs. 8 2.3GHz K10 cores ; 12GHz vs. 18.4Ghz.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
For 4P yuou double that.
Got link?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
0-20% also sounds like what is expectable IPC increase. We just need abit more validation.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
After checking the extensive powerpoint it seems ok. Just a shame that AMD is going the FUD marketing route. I really hope that powerpoint is the work of a single idiotic department. They even needed synthetic benchmarks to show an improvement over Intel.
Their sole focus on virtulization and theorectical numbers along with power consumption and synthetic benchmarks mixed with real also puts the nail in the coffin. K10 is a lackbuster in performance.
Its a sad year indeed for AMD. Hopefully they can get the ship turned around in 2008 or 2009.
Man...s7even has been running those on Asus Quad Fx board like 4 moths ago.Search the forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I think comparison DC vs QC is little out of place for any IPC performance evalutations. We donīt know how effective are those benchmarks in taking advantage of two additional cores hence we can only guess. DC vs DC desktop comparison would come handy.