Hot hot hot! The new CPU AMD can be unlocked to 4 core!

this is really becoming a problem. if amd really cared they would laser cut the cores. im not sure why they dont already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roofsniper

this is really becoming a problem. if amd really cared they would laser cut the cores. im not sure why they dont already.

---

It's marketing genius, it gets people interested in their products. this dual core would smoke any intel dual core :D

Let's assume you are right with that. AMD will not in any chance sell a single chip at 80USD if the end user price is 100USD.
They won't sell any at 70$ even. You forget the retailer/OEM margin and VAT. (except maybe in the US, where the calc might make sense).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulhamm

AMD cost per deneb/shangai die is

300mm wafer area 70,683mm^2/243mm^2 die area=290 max dies per wafer
20%waste and 65% yield gives them 151 functional cores at a wafer cost of $5000USD that is $33.11 per die.
To make a fifty percent profit margin they need to sell their chips at an average cost of $66.22. If %20 of all the dies are some form of salvage call it 30 and you just dump them in the trash the price per core goes up to $41.32 per die. This means they must sell each chip at an average price of $82.64 to make the same %50 profit margins. Dual core and tri core make excellent economic sense.

If you dislike my numbers show me yours.

The die cost for the 955=940=810=720=710=550. The are all deneb/shangai, the only difference is the bin they get dumped into.

---

As long they can still get some profit per chips, getting small amount is till much better than not getting anything at all, worse off letting customers go to the "other" provider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulhamm

AMD cost per deneb/shangai die is

300mm wafer area 70,683mm^2/243mm^2 die area=290 max dies per wafer
20%waste and 65% yield gives them 151 functional cores at a wafer cost of $5000USD that is $33.11 per die.
To make a fifty percent profit margin they need to sell their chips at an average cost of $66.22. If %20 of all the dies are some form of salvage call it 30 and you just dump them in the trash the price per core goes up to $41.32 per die. This means they must sell each chip at an average price of $82.64 to make the same %50 profit margins. Dual core and tri core make excellent economic sense.

If you dislike my numbers show me yours.

The die cost for the 955=940=810=720=710=550. The are all deneb/shangai, the only difference is the bin they get dumped into.

---

Your math is roughly correct ;).

wow dual core UNLOCKED to quad

how cool is that :D

now you just have to unlock multies hahah :shocked: like my Opteron 146 decided to chuck in an extra multi lol

I don't see why people care so much about whether AMD will or will not be losing money from these dual cores.

We're consumers, not their bloody financial consultants :\

Impressive, i wonder what percentage will be able to unlock and hit clocks like this!

Marketing genius everyone likes to get more than they paid for, only people who dont like it are the ones hwo paid more for the same OC as others :P
Order an ass ton of the same chip so u have bulk.

The only problem I forsee with this is endusers actually complaining when they're system is not 100 % stable when they use a bios that unlocks the chip..........

Unfortunately its tough noogies.........If you email the manufacturer and complain they are likely to laugh at you.....then of course the end user will be slamming said manufacturer.....

I forsee a vicious circle...

I've already seen this in the gigabyte 790 thread.....endusers want, want, want....the mere mention that they might have a dud or not be 100% stable is forbidden.....its the bios's fault..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Your math is roughly correct ;).

---

hmm so he says 65% yield = 151 cores and just to make it add up even worse lets lob off 20% (30) more trash cores from the 151 aswell. so the yield is now 45%.... bs. no way are they pulling 45% yields on a mature process with SOI

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chew*

The only problem I forsee with this is endusers actually complaining when they're system is not 100 % stable when they use a bios that unlocks the chip..........

---

Sad but true chew*. I bought the 720BE with the hopes that it would unlock the 4th core and fortunately it did (and stable:D).

On the other hand, I've been around the block a few times and realized that I may not be that lucky. Personally, I would have just said "Oh Well" I got what I paid for and been happy with nice OC I got using only an X3.

Unfortunatly, there are always the select few who will complain they got ripped off because thier ~$70 chip won't unlock to a quad (COUGHlooser). :shakes:

I would really have to think you'd be FAR less likely to get a stable quad from an PhII X2.

Either way... It's pretty frikken cool. ;)
And I'd be willing to bet that with the extra surface area of the unused die to aid in cooling it will be a VERY good OC'ing chip as a dual. :up:

Quote:

---

They need SB710 or SB750 for that, plus the right BIOS. It will cost more than the average low end board, especially if there's no budget SB710 board that can do it.

---

Not true there are quite cheap low end bords with SB710 from Asrock which can do this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157154 ASRock A780GMH/128M 72$
SB 710 ACC, 4DDR2 1066 suport for all Phenom II, etc.
And at a good price for an AM3 board, all solid capacitors
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157152 ASRock M3A790GXH/128M AM3 112$
4gb DDR3 1600 suport. All these Asrock board have a good bios in unlocking and they are very cheap for what they offer.:up:

ok i am an old amd guy and didnt touch any amd cpu after my 3500+ so what missed is where do we know it is a dual core at the first time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frontl1ne

I don't see why people care so much about whether AMD will or will not be losing money from these dual cores.

We're consumers, not their bloody financial consultants :\

---

Because the financials have implications for sustainability and future trends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kromosto

ok i am an old amd guy and didnt touch any amd cpu after my 3500+ so what missed is where do we know it is a dual core at the first time?

---

Exactly.

I wanna see some stability test.
Even if it's true, this screenshots mean nothing to me if it isn't stable enough to run 24/7.

It's cool, but it has no real usage if it isn't stable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Nope,the 2 cores did not meet the frequency or TDP targets so they "turned them off" and launched a dual core.

---

Is there any trend amongst tri cores to report higher idle temperatures and power consumption relative to quads?

so what cpu is this? athlon2 x2? or phenom2 x2?
phenom2 x2 right? nice!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chad Boga

Because the financials have implications for sustainability and future trends.

---

To have any future whatsoever, they have to survive first NOW, right ? We know that AMD won't be competitive until their next gen mArch arrive -if that would ever become a good adversary for whatever Intel will offer right then, a BIG "IF" in itself, then bashing AMD effort to just stay afloat till better time arrive is rather hypocritical, isn't it ? Is there any other viable alternative for them than trying to be more competitive in the mid to low end segment this time around ? Are you suggesting that AMD just should lay down and file chapter 11 ? :shrug:

This is AMD's type of Hyper-Threading. :D

"Real men use unlocked cores." :rofl:

ok, enough with overclocking, next step is overCORING!!!!
Hey man I overcored my cpu to 45 cores, great result!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuvok-LuR-

ok, enough with overclocking, next step is overCORING!!!!
Hey man I overcored my cpu to 45 cores, great result!

---

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

but still i dont get where we know it was x2 at the first place where does it shows. cpuzs screens. i am asking because i want to learn where we got it pls help :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kromosto

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

but still i dont get where we know it was x2 at the first place where does it shows. cpuzs screens. i am asking because i want to learn where we got it pls help :(

---

Quote:

---

running default with 4 core unlocked, only 1,28V vcore CPUz detected X4 B50

---

There's your giveaway right there :). Unlocked X3s(to X4s) show similar model numbers(ie. non existent)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alfaunits

Let's assume you are right with that. AMD will not in any chance sell a single chip at 80USD if the end user price is 100USD.
They won't sell any at 70$ even. You forget the retailer/OEM margin and VAT. (except maybe in the US, where the calc might make sense).

---

You are confusing average selling price with lowest price. They do not have to make a minimum %50 profit on every chip. All they need to do is make an average %50 percent on all the chips they sell. For every 955 they sell at say $120 they can sell 3.33 chips at $50 and still hit the %50 percent profit goal. The purpose is to maximize the total profit not the individual chip profit. As long as they sell at anything above the total costs they make money. It is basic economics. BTW if you look at the numbers you will come to the conclusion that Intel is raking its customers over the coals. IE they are being raped if they are buying I7 965/975 for $1000 a pop. Yes AMD did the exact same thing with the X2 FU_X times. We prefer calling it smart business ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

There's your giveaway right there :). Unlocked X3s(to X4s) show similar model numbers(ie. non existent)

---

ty :up: