Check to see if its B0 or rev or above. The later revs corrected a bug in the FPU logic as well as allowing better clock scaling.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Printable View
Check to see if its B0 or rev or above. The later revs corrected a bug in the FPU logic as well as allowing better clock scaling.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Demoulous
I know, through my own channels, about the fpu bug prior to B0 respin. I'm not asking anyone else to take it as fact, so please ignore it as its purely to satisfy my own curiosity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
Well, from what I hear, what was shown at Computex was the B0 spin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demoulous
http://www.gearlog.com/2007/06/amds_..._and_disap.php
Groo said the same thing, B0, and he's the one who reported the B0 "miracle" for the Inq. DT said "latest revision".
Is there anything to indicate that what was at Computex was anything other than B0 silicon?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FUGGER !!!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
We love you FUGGER, please show us something to make us drool? :up:
Good to see they are talking about B02 as well, it has some more FPU work amongst the rest of the fixes/enhancements and *should* be the final silicon. Expect them to light the blue touch paper in a few weeks, and it will hit at 2.5ghz max clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
From the link above
Back to Barcelona: DailyTech reported that partners were talking about speeds of 2.0-GHz. I didn't get that (I heard a "possibly 1.8-GHz at launch"), but we are still (unfortunately) talking about early silicon. What's known as the "B0" stepping is out, and the "B02" stepping should be available shortly, I was told.
Demolous why do you believe that B02 will hit 2.5ghz?
Isn't there more than just a scaling problem . If the 1 benchmark is correct. It doesn't matter if K10 scales to 3.3 it still is slower than Intel c2d.
So this new B02 has to fix more than just a scaling problem.
Now I have a question for ALL users. Everyone is saying that AMD needs to beat intel . So as to bring even lower prices. Intel didn't have to sell C2D at such low prices to start with. They had a better product . It is Intel who brought these lower prices not AMD as many are saying . If Amd k10 is better than C@D it well be back to higher prices again for AMD. But not Intel .
So if AMD leads in performance higher prices . If intel keeps the performance lead . lower prices.
Proven fact by history . Intel tries to maintain its margins. Ever time they do a new process we see lower prices . History shows this from the very Beginning.
The thing I don't get is why is it so important that AMD take the performance lead? Why can't Intel keep it? AMD won't just disappear. They are a value sector company thats all they will ever be. Whats wrong with that? So they had a batter come to the plate and hit a home run thats not the end of the game.
From what I have seen Intel leading in performance means lower prices . AMD leading in performance means higher prices. Now we could debate this till were blue in the face but history well show I speak the trueth.
One thing good that came out this week is this.
1. We know now why AMD showed only task manager in Dec.(AMD couldn't be honest with us. WHY?
2. AMDs dec report was a complete fabracation that cost investors millions of dollars . Why isn't someone going to jail for fraud. HECTOR
3. B0 had people dancing in the streets. More lies who is responsiable is unknown.
4 . May or june launch time . More lies who is responsable is again unknown .
5 , 1st half 07 release . Maybe true have to wait another 23 days to be another lie . AMD responsiable.
6. estimated performance figures . or should we just say it like it is . More lies from amd .
I don't care if your an Intel user or an Amd user. The lies that AMD has perpetraited in the last year is wrong and I believe taken as a whole because of stock movements was infact fraud screwing investors out of millions of dollars. Taken as a whole these lies = fraud . I for one am going to make sure its looked into and I have the $$ to do it. Hector should be like deported or something . I know if I met him on the sreet I would beat has ass to a pulp. The lieing piece of garbage
2. Bo stepping had people
Relax, people.
Like all software the first "runnable" versions are full of bugs. What's new?
Man you just don't like AMD do you :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
One of the reasons that I have stayed with AMD for so long is due to its affordability. While I was given a Pentium computer in high school, I've always upgraded to an AMD processor (minus a brief flirtation with C2D, a nice proc to be sure). I relish the days when my dad and I would eagerly go to PC Club and I would spend $150-$200 or so on a new chip, motherboard, and maybe something else (like a case if needed). You can talk about price to performance ratios, and drops in prices, et al. In terms of affordability though, AMD has always been more accessible. As for drops in prices, those have taken place on both sides as competition warrants. If AMD leads in performance this time, I don't see how we can assume that higher prices will automatically ensue. Intel is still dropping prices on the Quad the 22nd of July, regardless of what happens on 10th of June. AMD is still going to have to price things carefully, and you can be sure that Intel is going to keep up a price war especially if they truly feel that AMD has low output do to its process tech.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Agreed.
Because thats what the roadmap for June 07 states. Its a snapshot of what AMD know they can deliver and so they may launch with a higher rated part, but its very very unlikely for it to be slower.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
Just over a fortnight to go and then the gags are off us all. Unless something throws a spanner in.
Come on guys, it's pretty obvious that AMD is just f**king with our heads. Haven't you all realized what they do when a new line of processors is supposed to be released? First few revisions are crap, everybody starts to think that their processors will be crap, clocked low, loads of bugs, then bam...final version kicks ass. Wait a few weeks to see what K10 really does. OR if Fugger ever gets to play with one, that could give us an idea.
Or their K10 is really a bit crappy which is a far more logical explanation than conspiracy theories.Quote:
Originally Posted by breakfromyou
-huge die
-% of logic vs cache is really high
-a lot of low level tweaks
-independent voltage rails for cores
=> recipe for disaster.
cmon fugger.... :P
look foward to results
or if they get it to work, stellar performance....Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
:spam:
It works...Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
worse than kentsfield :ROTF:
I'm glad that you decided to see some third party reviews before making up your mind... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
I'm glad you decided to take my post in 100% seriousnessQuote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Even funnier, Anand, MaxPC and others have already seen Penryn tested:up: They were given info on Nehalem as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
AMD to remain budget quad option then if < kentsfield.