http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=34247
I've get a Core2Duo this month :slapass: :nono:
Printable View
http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=34247
I've get a Core2Duo this month :slapass: :nono:
conroe still beat the AMD ;)
i knew when i clicked on this post someone was going to say this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supertim0r
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supertim0r
then why done't u stick to the intel section
reallly guys try to avoid following ur needs for a flamware in every thread
i guess you know how well 65nm is gonna clock then? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Supertim0r
Seems like there are some Intel guys that are :banana::banana::banana::banana: faced... Some dont even have a "conroe", but they wont hesitate to let you know conroe is all powerful. I was reading some stuff in there yesterday, and some Intel guys ragged on this guy because he had a question. Mind you, I didnt post in the intel section, I JUST READ. Matter a fact. I think when K8L comes out and dominates Intel. We should go over to Intel forums and then tell them how much Intel sucks.. What do you guys think?
~Mike
there are already some 65nm benchs out there, same thing as am2 on 90nm regarding performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
so amd will need 3.4GHz to beat conroe x6800XE (maybe a bit more dependeing on the game/bench) + it needs to have more space to oc because a xe can easily go to 3.6GHz.
still good news that AMD is doing things fast to reduce the performance gap
it will definitely be interesting to see. i've gotta try to save up a bit of money to pick up one of those 65nm guys when they come out. :toast:
bleh, i'm not a Intel fanboy. Just performance fanboy. I would have a via if it was faster. Some people can't admit Intel is faster now. Back on topic now. Yes, I'll buy a 65nm amd when its available. Even if it's not faster. No fanboyism here
I hope in December X2 3800+ 65nm will be available in my country cause I'm definitely buying it, only problem is that I'm afraid that shops wouldn't separate 65 form 90nm, unless if there will be difference in price, what do you guys think?
smoke and mirrors...
If its originally planned for December release, it should already be shipping out from the fabs to the backend assembly plants right now.
Die shrinks will grant around 10-15% perfromance increase, so power to AMD. But it's not going to be anywhere close to Intel though.
I am just hoping AMD's marketing won't do some dumb pricing and keep 65nm 3800+ X2 at the same price as the 90nm parts, and Dell and HP better not suck up all of AMD's capacity. :(
http://img.oc.com.tw/b60799/20069511501413494030192.jpg <--from [H]
Are there any other ES's out at all, I have heard rumers of ones in Japan, but all I have seen is this ^ and one other site with a few pics of one(could be the same proc.).
I think that a 65nm AMD could hit 3.4-3.5, maybe better since the 90nm ones are hitting 2.9-3.0. We can't really tell though until they come out how they will clock. Like you said, I don't think they will beat a extreme OCed Conroe, but they might close the gap, maybe even close it a lot faster than some people thought. Although they could also have a lower thermal envelope, be clocked the same as the 90nm chips, and still for some reason have a 3.0ghz wall; that would be a bummer huh. I would love to see these come out though and all of a sudden see some AMD's hitting 4ghz.Quote:
so amd will need 3.4GHz to beat conroe x6800XE (maybe a bit more dependeing on the game/bench) + it needs to have more space to oc because a xe can easily go to 3.6GHz.
I am interested to see the quad core K8's. I know that they won't touch Kentsfield, that is K8L's job (hopefully), but it is nice to know that AMD seems to be on track with 65nm and quad core. Maybe if we see 65nm next month we will see K8L duals in early (like Jan. and Feb.) 07; better still I would love to see AMD to a quiet little sneaky release at like Christmass or something, doubt it will happen, but I can dream.
I just hope that this 65nm AMD does clock good and cause a little unrest in the Intel camps. I am tired of the flaming. I am not saying that Conroe isn't awsome, it is, I have considered getting one. There is also no denying that AMD may not touch Conroe until K8L, 65nm really might be to little to late. There is still no need for the flame and the hate. I have no problem with teaseing and pokeing, but some places (not at XS persay) it has gotten out of control. We are all the same, we just make choices, there really is no need for extreme fanboyism and hate/super flaming.
That said I can't wait to see what Big Green has in store for us in the coming months. I can't deny that I don't like AMD, again though I can't deny that Intel is kind of, well, stomping them right now in performance. I think Green will bounce back, and I think they will bounce back in a big way. Besides in a way Conroe users should welcome 65nm and K8L, because competion is what fuels this industry and I hope that K8L and Kentsfield can push it to the edge once more.
AMD 65nm + S939 ???
If they do release S939 parts, then it will have to be good news. Otherwize it's sad news for my DFI Lanparty and DDR1 memory. When you look at what happened with S754, AMD did release a Venice for that socket. So, I don't see why they wouldn't release the new 65nm chips.
Could be better wait for a second revision of 65nm(like Venice over Winchester)...
I'm guessing with the 65nm process 3ghz or less is the fastest K8 chip we will see. I'm pretty sure that if AMD will have something to compete with Conroe performance wise it will not be untill K8L. The only reason AMD is pushing 65nm is for budget CPU's and later on for K8L. Not for an increase in clockspeed anytime soon.
65nm is nice for people looking for reasonable performance at an amazing price though :)
Reading this, it is inevitable that AMD will just forget about S939. If so, well I know where my money will go for my next system ;) .
http://image2.sina.com.cn/IT/h/2006-...8f3857a384.jpg
The slide here clearly states the new chip will be for AM2 (DDR2). So let's not keep our hopes up for the S939, it's in the trash (read garbage) bin at AMD.
maybe instead of getting a conroe i'll just get a $50 sempron and a good $200 mobo and wait?
I would just get a Conroe box now. It's pretty much a given that all the 65nm parts will be in extremely limited availability and will be marked up worse than Conroe at launch.Quote:
Originally Posted by serious1
BTW, 939 is officially EoL. Stop having wet dreams about 65nm s939 parts. It aint going to happen.
yea let s939 r.i.p; change is a good thing. I cant wait for some 65nm benchmarks to come.
i want 65nm on my infinity :cool:
yes..the bad new is that 939 is dying ...:(
Going from 0.18 micron to 0.13 micron eventually got AMD an increase of 600 MHz in production processors, on a similar architecture. That's the fastest Palomino, the 1.73 GHz 2100XP through to the fastest Barton, the 2.33 GHz 3300XP. That's over a 1/3rd increase in clockspeed through process changes. It didn't happen overnight obviously, given that the Thoroughbred A came first, then the Thoroughbred B, then finally the Barton. But it was still quite an increase. 0.13 micron went as fast as 2.4 GHz if you count the Athlon 64s and Opterons, but that was a whole new architecture.
Going from 0.13 micron to 0.09 micron got AMD an increase of 600 MHz - from the Athlon 64 3700/3800/4000 at 2.4 GHz to the Opteron 256/856 at 3 GHz. Not as much this time, but still 25%. Again, it didn't happen immediately, there was the revision D processors (basically Winchester) before we got to the revision E chips (Venice, San Diego, Troy etc).
So using previous form, I expect rev F - the 0.065 micron processors - to get to around 3.75 GHz, in production processors. Given that there has always been overclockers who have managed another couple hundred megahertz out of the chips, I see 4 GHz being plausible. It may take another revision to get to that stage, but I do see it happening. Funnily enough, in talking to some process engineers, we reckoned AMD would get about 3.8 GHz from a die shrink, and that was before we did the quick arithmetic.
In light of that, Intel likely will remain top dog since they have headroom with Conroe. But AMD are at least going to be competitive again, and on performance, not just price. Not that they really care if the relatively few enthusiasts have been lost to Intel, they are still selling everything they can make and that is before counting the Dell sales.
3.75GHz in prduction processors wont happend anytime soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
90nm on air get to 3100mhz and that is with a 3-4 year old process with like 4-5 revision of cpus and a better socket.
I'm just looking to get a 3ghz plus chip on air that consumes less than 100 watts. I'll be happy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
Thanks for the update.
AMD lost its crown, did anyone else not know this?
:slap:
what update did ozzimark give besides the ambiguous wink smilieQuote:
Originally Posted by Raybo
so if the ceiling is 6-6.5GHz on ln2 AMD reclaims the world record for performance... if they start hitting 4-4.5GHz on air, I will be impressed. with any luck they will.
problem with your statement there is that AMD will be sold bugged much like the other ones due to that inbuilt memory controller unless you know something i don'tQuote:
Originally Posted by xlink
i seriously doubt anything on the current k8 architecture will scale that high withough 2-3V seriously doubt it.
juust saying it would be nice...
If I could get to 3.2GHz (w/ x10 multi) on water with the 65nm K8 I'll be happy! :D
You just answered all my questions. :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
I have 2 939 boards 1 Opteron and an X2 and a drawer full of DDR.
dino I might have takin' the post wrong and I don't think you know this but i'm a Chicago Cubs fan, I'll wait till next year.
:toast:
I meant COLD bugged ROFL
scratches head about Chicago Cubs fan thingy....i donno much about us football heh
Will this 65nm beat conroe E6300?
What beats the e6300? It's probable that withing the year AMD will offer something on 90nm that outperformes the e6300 (atleast at stock).Quote:
Originally Posted by Caubecari
I don't think this question should be asked here, as you can be sure that if anyone knows, they still won't tell us untill NDA is over.
Well we don't know that for sure, remember 130nm K8's had no problems under the cold.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
i don't realy sure amd 65 nm chip can beat conroe ,but i hope can .:)
I don't think that's possible, higher clocks probably but beating Conroe not, at least not till K8L (that's what we all hope, bringing Intel back on the second place :D )Quote:
Originally Posted by dimasdw
but they didnt have an integrated memory controller. thats what we all think causes the coldbug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid_Spit
i dont care much about 65nm, i just want to see some K8L action.
:stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by breakfromyou
ALL K8's have an integrated memory controller.
S754 haven't :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
You're forgetting the FX-55, 130 nm, 2.6 GHz. The transition to dual core could be the reason for the small speed bump, even though single cores aren't much better. What I'm trying to say is that AMD possibly could have done some tweaking and reached even higher GHz if the world still was single core only, but the dual cores became high priority and they had to take a different road. Just speculating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
I think you're talking about revision G, Revision F is the current one, Windsor, Orleans.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
Yes THEY DO!:slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gam3Ra
What are you talking about? You should do your homework before you post.
Everybody knows that 754 got a single channel memory controller, and that the 939 got a dual channel memory controller.
Realy.. sorry, I don't read all, I was reading does all K8 have DC memcontroler :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mats
I tell you why.Quote:
Originally Posted by _33
It's because 754 and 939 both use DDR RAM, so all they had to do was to put the Venice core in a 754 package, not really hard to do.
They can't do the same with a Windsor/Orleans (DDR2) core in a 939 (DDR) package. The only way would be to die shrink a DDR core to 65 nm, which is too expensive and just won't happen.
99% certain that it's not the imc that causes the cold bug. why else would the >1:1 ratios work for getting ram speed higher than the limited htt on s939 cold bugged chips?
methinks it's SOI's fault :fact:
im pretty sure its the IMC
http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/6...hancements.jpg
http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/a64_rev_f.jpg
They will not be the same. 65nm amds have slightly different construction then the 90nm K8's. They enhanced them to do higher clock speeds. Check out the load buffers, a extra decoder and so on. 3 main parts have been modified or added onto. Segesting what AMD clames, they did exactly what they needed with these modifications. We will see a Ghz war with AMD afterall.
Note the 65nm Rev G AMD has extra parts in it that don't exist in the 90nm rev F that go beyond even this, more transistors, extra stages, whatever comes with making a cpu able to gane Ghz.
would be good to see that >>>> GHz fight :D = AMD wins
Man I so hope that's true you're talking about, I want to see some 3.5GHz AMD on water :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Serge84
http://129.15.202.185/athlon_rev_g/6...hancements.jpg
That looks like the K8L picture. I believe the 65nm chips are just shrinks until K8L arrives.
neh, don't stoop to their level :nono: i really hope that 65nm clocks better, seeing as 90nm should have clocked waaaay higherQuote:
Originally Posted by arisythila
As far as hitting higher clock speed, I hope they can too...but remember AMD is currently having difficulties with voltages on their 65nm...according to the few articles I read on inquirer. Then AMD said they had those problems minimized but not fixed as they stated they would probably have to release the 65nm .05v higher than planned. If thats true doesnt that mean initially possibly hardly no OC headroom?
not everything that flies is comestible.Quote:
but remember AMD is currently having difficulties with voltages on their 65nm...according to the few articles I read on inquirer. Then AMD said they had those problems minimized but not fixed as they stated they would probably have to release the 65nm .05v higher than planned.
Not long ago one from my Chinese beta testers sent me this snapshot
http://jungle.mam.by/work/athlon64_G0.jpg
God I hope its not faster LOL just bought a E6600! :p
I doubt it will beat Intel, but it will close the gap, which is good I suppose.
:D
What would a normal vCore for a 65nm processor be?
probably around 1.25 just like the picture posted...:rolleyes:
Ryan
Hmmm... That pic indicates a doubling of the L1 instruction/data cache. It would probably be a pretty cheap/easy way to increase performance slightly, but I don't really believe it yet.
How reliable is the source of this pic?
hm I thought it wouold be more like 1.15v. But I have the feelig that even at that vCore it can run above rated speeds.
Looks fake.
256KB L1$? Hyperthreading? That would require a complete arch. overhaul to add those features and its unclear that it'd do anything to improve performace as L1$ latency would go up significantly. Its unclear wether hyperthreading would do much to improve performance on the K8 too.
Guys...L1 is 256KB as 128*2(two cores).L2 is 2*512KB...Duh
On the other hand,who says it's Hyperthreading?Maybe it's something else.
And 1.25Vcore is very well in line for dual core CPU.And that is an Eng Sample ,not retail CPU.
So,it seems AMD is pretty much on track with 65nm.
Very wierd, it shouldn't measure them this way since they're completely seperate even if they are on the same die...Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
The voltage is certainly possible, but hyperthreading? It'd take a complete redesign on the same order of difficulty and complexity as it took to make K8L to add that feature, I doubt they have the time or resources to do that. In fact it wouldn't be a K8 anymore, it'd be a K8.5 or K8++ or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
i think that there is a limit to how low they can go on the voltage , it is said that it takes 1.1v minimum for the bandgap using the material that they are usingQuote:
Originally Posted by biohead
lol at people hung up on hyperthreading..........RELAX it could be a software glitch.......we've seen it many times before (different software showing odd results that is)
yes, hyperthreading most likely will no be happening. :fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
OK didn't know that, thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
lol I hope it is faster just so intel can have some pressure to make their next chip. Dont want either one of them slacking off. Of course I'll be crawling back if indeed amd 65nm regains the lead. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Concorde Rules
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...erhound_QC.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by freeloader
This is K8L.
On other thoughts...
Did we forget 939's get over 3ghz all the time. Even 3.5ghz is almost normal for the extreme ppl anyways. The windsors are limited for some reason. The older CPU's that have all the materials in them they use to have are actouly better then the cleaned up cores with no lead in them. Could this be the reason why they are such bad OCers?
I would like a FX-60 on a old 939 DFI board really if this is how its going to be until K8L. But there is a possiblity of 65nm being that good like it was from 130nm to 90nm. We should see atleast a 600mhz difference in OCing like they said. If when the end comes when they perfect stepings. We may see cpus even better then rev E. Nothing can beat a rev E in AMD's weapons arsonal. FX-60 highes clock 3.9ghz. FX-57 highest clock almost 4.2ghz. Off by about 15mhz.
That is what legends are made of!
both this cpus you show are old by now there is a new revision coming fue tu a bug/problem in this revision.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...911064959.html
no goodies for socket 939.
Mikael
Because that CPU is dual-core: L1-I: 2x64KB=128KB, L1-D: 2x64KB=128KB.Quote:
That pic indicates a doubling of the L1 instruction/data cache.
mesyn191
LOL! Kid, I do not post fakes :-) I have told this many times at XS.Quote:
Looks fake.
Yes, because CBId reports the full L1 and L2 cache size like that. Take a look at the following snapshots:Quote:
256KB L1$?
http://cbid.amdclub.ru/html/a64x24400E6.html
http://cbid.amdclub.ru/html/a64x23800E4.html
Yeah I've told them already ,but they won't listen:rolleyes: .
It's full(summed up) value of cache for both cores.
It takes THE MAN himself to clarify the obvious thing.Thx VVJ:toast:
K8L = K8.50...and of course the hyperthreading part is a software glitch. i hope the best for AMD. does anybody know if AMD is going to use SiGe with the 65nm processors or K8L?Quote:
Originally Posted by mesyn191
Sorry no AMD65 next month. be luck if it gets here this year.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34282
So it seems AMD is not on track ,
I doubt they will. For some reason the AMD fans wants AMD to pull every new tricks in their next product release, in this case 65nm straight die shrink of AM2 K8.Quote:
Originally Posted by breakfromyou
Here's a tried and true combination in the Semiconductor world:
New design + new process + new material == failure
AMD won't be an exception and they will also fail miserably if they choose to do so.
sorry , you are wrong againQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?id=467
We also spoke about the move to .65nm manufacturing process with the Opteron now moved to it and the Athlon64 line-up following in the next few months.
The Opteron is on a 65nm process? Since when?
Since may of 2006 when they started production in fab 30 after they made the transission. Since fab36 also started production since june. Since other companies are helping AMD manufactuer 65nm cpus in their fabs. Since AMD announced they will come out in oct. Since final production (ES) where out in japan. Need I go on?Quote:
Originally Posted by freeloader
What you just linked to is meaningless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
did you actually read what you posted?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
"AMD is committed to shipping 65nm products to customers by the end of the year [2006]. Our plans are to be substantially converted to 65nm by mid 2007."
so there will be 65nm parts by the end of the year, and most of the fab output will be 65nm by mid '07 :fact:
We went from saying AMD65 parts next month to amd parts by the end of the year. I new AMD was saying AMD 65 by the end of the year. I only stated we would be lucky to see them by the end of the year.
This thread was started on the news of AMD 65n next month . not going to happen . I still say be lucky to see them in retail before 07.
True I don't have Conroe . But my wife does I am waiting for KentsfieldQuote:
Originally Posted by arisythila
As for going to Intel section When K8L comes out in 08 and demolishes Conroe Penryn will be flexing its muscle. You guys have been bad mouthing Intel for 2 years so that would be nothing new ;)
amd is already making 65nm cpu'sQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
will we see them next month ? maybe , will there be some for the am2 socket , i don't see why not
It would be helpful if you could make the small change (below) to your original article.
"AMD is committed to shipping 65nm products to customers by the end of the year [2006]. Our plans are to be substantially converted to 65nm by mid 2007."
Jan Gutter, PR manager, AMD(EMEA)
maybe you missed this the first time , and this is not inquirerQuote:
Originally Posted by Turtle 1
http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?id=467
We also spoke about the move to .65nm manufacturing process with the Opteron now moved to it and the Athlon64 line-up following in the next few months.
@ Turtle 1
think about both articles (about 65nm next month and 65nm at end of the year)
AMD has 2 diffrent markets.
OEM and Retail.
It could very wel mean that OEMs have 65nm next month and retail gets it end of year as in december.
Further when is next month? is next month this month or is next month October?
If next month is October then i gues end of year and next month si the exact same thing.
Ok.
So, will 65nm be out within October odd?
Because Im pretty set for getting myself an FX62 this month.. which there is obviously no point in if 65nm is coming out.
well i doubt that amd will have any fx cpu's at 65nm before the first of the year , even though i did read on one site that the fx-64 65nm would be out in the first quarter , but i would not bet any money on it , it wasn't that good of a sourceQuote:
Originally Posted by Gag3
y not.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ghost
if 65nm would hit the OEMs coming month then 1st quarter we could see 65nm FX if AMD has good yields and can manage the supply.
dont forget March is stil 1st quarter.
Both FX-64 and FX-66 will be on 90nm tech but on SOI-3 which will add germanium into transistors to increase switch speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ghost
yes , like i said the source was not a good source
http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/
i always thought that the FX-64 was going to be 90nm cpu
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?...me=0&endtime=0
no :banana::banana::banana::banana: sherlockQuote:
Originally Posted by The Ghost
If you take normal 6-8 weeks leadtime at the back end processes and 2-4 weeks leadtime to OEM/disti, AMD should be grinding out 65nm CPUs from their fabs right now in raw wafers and very limited quantities.
As I said before, AMD is walking a laser thin line to balance between their 90nm capacities and 65nm conversion, and if they have any slight misstep, they will lose significant marketshare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ghost
amd is already making 65nm cpu's!
Exactly!!! Again since may of 2006 in fab 30 after starting transission, since fab 36 in june, since other companies are helping. There are aready (ES)'s out all over the place out of the country. So the above is wrong again. How can you say the aren't making any when we can clearly see them as clear as day. Your only lieing to yourself with your statments. OEMS will be out in oct and nov.