!!!The Ultimate K8L Thread 2007 & Beyond!!!

[Agent11]

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37444

[w0mbat]

!!!The Ultimate K10 Thread 2007 & Beyond!!!

[Serge84]

They are limiting the speed to 2.5ghz because its a opteron. 2.6ghz for the X4's. And the only cpus that will reach 2.7 to 2.9ghz are the AFX's and X2 Kuma's. They are not limited by clockspeed, if that was so the Kuma's would be only clocked at 2.5 or 2.6ghz but, they are not.

Nobody here is speaking logically. That other company doesn't clock its arc to its max speed when it comes out, they wait for when its needed or when the customers demand greater performance to be compeditive with the rival company. Not because its limited but because its just not needed at the time.

K10 is not K8 so we can shutup about how it won't clock higher when its not even the same damn arc we are talking about here. AMD sees that the higher clockspeeds are not needed or that they have reserved them for the AFX's only so they stay more exclusive. When a arc 1st comes out they clock it at the lowest possible speed they can such as when K8 1st came out.

However K8 could oc the same 3 years ago as it could now yet worse for some reason until F3 came out. Rev E6 killed rev F2 in OCability and made AM2 look like a joke. However K10 isn't even K8 at all so why compare clockspeed limitations to a 3 or almost 4 year old arc to a brand knew one? Where is the logical thinking in that when we have no idea how it will OC at all until it comes out. Don't be spreading CRAP over here when nobody knows what the hell they are talking about because they are all for the other company and wants to see AMD fail.

We seen what K8's max was a long time ago and knew of its limits years before it was finalized in stock. Now its time for a new core with unknown limits at its lowest clockspeeds possible 2.9ghz is its lowest clockspeed at launch means it will have a high stock limit when its life ends 2 or 3 years from now when APU's come out from AMD. Thinking otherwise would have no logic to it at all if you really beleave otherwise. Because AMD is doing the same thing like that other company did with their arc. Clocked it at 2.93ghz and waited about a year to clock it 1ghz higher just to stay compeditive when needed.

Quite childish I must say to think differently unless anybody can comment? Because thats how history goes with all cpu arcs before this gen and so forth. Where they clocked at the max on launch ever? No! We only see when they are 2 or 3 years after launch.

http://badhardware.blogspot.com/2007...03147767030984

[ether.real]

Also remember that lower clockspeeds mean higher yield, and less voltage, meeting TDP goals. No way to know what the headroom is until these get out into the wild.

[ramenchef]

Mmm, can't wait to get my hands on a K10 proc. And yea, clock speed isn't everything. You have to factor in the whole processor. It's like comparing an AM2 2.4 vs a Prescott 3.4.

[Shintai]

Also remember that lower clockspeeds mean higher yield, and less voltage, meeting TDP goals. No way to know what the headroom is until these get out into the wild.

Not really much headroom when you are doing 125W at stock, is there?

[tritium]

Shintai,

Why don't you go troll in the Intel section.

125w is the max for a particular process node (ie. 65 nm quad core processors) We have no idea what speed that will be achieved at.

Regards,

[Serge84]

Amazing a quad core QX6700 has the same watt's as a K10 and it doesn't mean thats its max speed. It does 5ghz in a OC. So where was your brain when you tried to figure out what K10 can do? We are not talking about K8 here and K8 can sometimes do 4ghz in the past. It just needs too much voltage and cooling to get there most are willing to pay for. Doesn't mean that chip is limited, only depends on the skill of the OCer, the coolent, the voltage, motherboard limit, how well the silicon was forged and so forth.

One wattage conclusion doesn't mean thats its limit silly. Yeah go back to the Intel forums. The wattage has nothing to do with its max headroom. *Rolls eyes* Get it through your thick head this is NOT K8 got it? Its 90% totally different new. NOT K8 NOT A 3 YEAR OLD DESINE!!! HELLO???

WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT CAN DO BECAUSE ITS NOT OUT YET. AND COMPANIES HAVE NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF COMPUTER MANUFACTURING RELEASED A PROCESSING UNIT AT ITS MAX SPEED AT LAUNCH. LOOK AT THE EXAMPLES AROUND YOU UNLESS YOUR BLIND TO THAT FACT.

P1 never started at 266mhz P2 never started at 500mhz P3 never started at 1.5ghz and P4 never started at 3.8ghz. K7 never started at 2.2ghz. K8 never started at 3ghz. It all took time to get there because they wanted to spread out the arc to as long as it could spread out until needed by the demands of the consumer. So how is K10 suddenly different from conroe or any other cpu in the past? Please tell us all that smarty pants. Ooooooo

[Shintai]

Shintai,

Why don't you go troll in the Intel section.

125w is the max for a particular process node (ie. 65 nm quad core processors) We have no idea what speed that will be achieved at.

Regards,

Yes we do...did you even check the slides?

Here is some more:
http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Quadcor...rticle5992.htm

[Shintai]

Amazing a quad core QX6700 has the same watt's as a K10 and it doesn't mean thats its max speed. It does 5ghz in a OC. So where was your brain when you tried to figure out what K10 can do? We are not talking about K8 here and K8 can sometimes do 4ghz in the past. It just needs too much voltage and cooling to get there most are willing to pay for. Doesn't mean that chip is limited, only depends on the skill of the OCer, the coolent, the voltage, motherboard limit, how well the silicon was forged and so forth.

One wattage conclusion doesn't mean thats its limit silly. Yeah go back to the Intel forums. The wattage has nothing to do with its max headroom. *Rolls eyes* Get it through your thick head this is NOT K8 got it? Its 90% totally different new. NOT K8 NOT A 3 YEAR OLD DESINE!!! HELLO???

WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT CAN DO BECAUSE ITS NOT OUT YET. AND COMPANIES HAVE NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF COMPUTER MANUFACTURING RELEASED A PROCESSING UNIT AT ITS MAX SPEED AT LAUNCH. LOOK AT THE EXAMPLES AROUND YOU UNLESS YOUR BLIND TO THAT FACT.

P1 never started at 266mhz P2 never started at 500mhz P3 never started at 1.5ghz and P4 never started at 3.8ghz. K7 never started at 2.2ghz. K8 never started at 3ghz. It all took time to get there because they wanted to spread out the arc to as long as it could spread out until needed by the demands of the consumer. So how is K10 suddenly different from conroe or any other cpu in the past? Please tell us all that smarty pants. Ooooooo

K8L is still a K8 design with its limitation. It´s clockspeeds and high TDP also shows its weakness there. 4Ghz K8? You mean a single singlecore K8 with extreme cooling an a suicide shot? And the normal OC is what..3-3.1Ghz tops if you got a superchip?

Snap out of the dream, or you gonna get a rough nightmare soon. And anytime anyone kinda dissagree with the overhyped pipedream of K8L. Then we all get told to go to the Intel forum. Because we don´t want anyone to break the illusion..just like the specFP_rate benchmark...

[mAJORD]

lol

-K8L is not a K8 design.

-3-3.2 is a normal overclock for higher end K8 chips, not super chips. Super chips do 3.3 to 3.5 to pull rough figures out of my head. Get with the times.

- what the hell has anyones response to your trolling had to do with disagreeing with an over hyped pipe dream???

I agree there is a lot of eye rolling hype and whatnot in here, but it's to be expected. Unfortunatly for you though, the hype is a lot less annoying than your trolling.

It's quite obvious the soul purpose of your replies is to bag AMD, (hence you being labelled a troll) which i just DON'T understand, when, as an intel fanboi, you should be content and happy that intel are leading the cpu race atm. Seriously, it's bizare.

[mAJORD]

Very sorry if this interview is a repost. I couldn't find it here.

http://www.hexus.tv/show.php?show=28

Interesting talk.

The above power disipation argument is touched on in the video. As are some very bold claims regarding performance.

[awdrifter]

It's pretty funny that the video begins with an Intel C2D ad.

[SOLDNER-MOFO64]

K8L is still a K8 design with its limitation. It´s clockspeeds and high TDP also shows its weakness there. 4Ghz K8? You mean a single singlecore K8 with extreme cooling an a suicide shot? And the normal OC is what..3-3.1Ghz tops if you got a superchip?

Snap out of the dream, or you gonna get a rough nightmare soon. And anytime anyone kinda dissagree with the overhyped pipedream of K8L. Then we all get told to go to the Intel forum. Because we don´t want anyone to break the illusion..just like the specFP_rate benchmark...

I think it may be you who's dreaming bud, I've only purchased 3x A64's that couldn't go over 3Ghz. My 3500+ WINNY does 3.1ghz, my 3700+ does 3.25ghz and my X2-4400 does 3ghz also...and those are just the ones I still own, nevermind the others.

As for superchip A64's, well....those goto 3.4ghz & 3.8ghz as I'm sure you know since they're ALL on this very forum

When it comes to nightmares I'm afraid INTEL are the only ones in REM-STATE. You remember 5yrs ago INTEL had a cpu that outperformed every AMD at the time. All the talk was INTEL,INTEL,INTEL. Then, from nowhere AMD released AXP and INTEL had trouble. They've since been inferior to AMD and that lasted until C2D's launch.

Now AMD are gonna let INTEL have some time in the sun, god knows they need it. That's almost a year INTEL have held the performance crown, only 3 more to go to equal AMD's previous title reign. Ofcourse that won't happen, since AMD are gonna launch K8L and INTEL are going back in the shade. Except this time it'll be more like the dark side of the moon

Clockspeeds mean nothing, 2Ghz A64's rape 4Ghz PENTIUMS, so whats the point in chasing them?

Regardless of TDP's, CLOCKSPEEDS, projected clockspeeds, DIE sizes, architecture ancestry......K8L are gonna make C2D look like PENTIUM. It'll be AXP v PENTIUM all over again

AMD FTW

[SOLDNER-MOFO64]

I had 50 AMD X2 and A64 chips (3200 A64 to X2 4200, all 939) in this past week for testing. All of them were week 20-51 2005 parts and not a one could hit 3GHz (Prime95) stable. The 2006 parts OC much better than the 2005 parts, but 3GHz for an AVERAGE overclock on K8 is quite a stretch.

Much like 2.8ghz is an AVERAGE OC for a C2D. Experienced guys with good cooling go higher, but your average joe will be lucky to see 3Ghz. Doesn't stop the INTEL fan club raving about 4Ghz C2D's, even though I've only seen 20 or so guys out of hundreds manage it.

I agree with you on the '06 parts being better OC'ers though, definately.

[SOLDNER-MOFO64]

In the end, with the game of one-upping each other, we are the winners. We get better and better products from both companies and lower price points.

No arguing with that.....COMPETITION FTW

[vitaminc]

Much like 2.8ghz is an AVERAGE OC for a C2D. Experienced guys with good cooling go higher, but your average joe will be lucky to see 3Ghz. Doesn't stop the INTEL fan club raving about 4Ghz C2D's, even though I've only seen 20 or so guys out of hundreds manage it.

I agree with you on the '06 parts being better OC'ers though, definately.

we all know its the internet and everyone can OC over 50% prime95 24/7 stable on most of their processors. or not.

The average C2D are not hitting 4GHz, but more like 3.2-3.5GHz. The average K8 X2 are not hitting 3GHz, but around 2.6-2.8. that is if you exclude the kamakazi screencapture runs.

[Serge84]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_n3wvsfq4Y

[Serge84]

Show me BENCHMARKS. NOT PROPAGANDA.

Thats not AMD's style. AMD is not that other company. They show benchmarks on release. I was never much for benchmarks anyways because they mean nothing in the real world, thats why i don't use benchmarks myself usouly only a validation and cpu speed, with memory speed, timings, and so forth.

[ether.real]

I thought it was a fairly entertaining and informational video. The epitome of infotainment?

[ScythedBlade]

yea ... but they're not hands on benchmarks XP

[Serge84]

Well we seen photos of the physical parts so its not just a pipe dream man. Its out there in AMD's hands just as a real working CPU is. But remember this is not 2003. Leaks happen for lack of security. Or from people with (ES)'s that don't care what happens to them when AMD gets mad for showing off their product too early. We are not in the same time frame. They took better steps this time around so there wouldn't be any leaks from the inside.

Atleast to delay the spread. AMD doesn't intensionally leak information. It happens because some people can't keep their mouths shut in the company. They can bend the rules a bit but breaking them is not so good. But we'll see.

[oicurafox2000]

Well we seen photos of the physical parts so its not just a pipe dream man. Its out there in AMD's hands just as a real working CPU is. But remember this is not 2003. Leaks happen for lack of security. Or from people with (ES)'s that don't care what happens to them when AMD gets mad for showing off their product too early. We are not in the same time frame. They took better steps this time around so there wouldn't be any leaks from the inside.

Atleast to delay the spread. AMD doesn't intensionally leak information. It happens because some people can't keep their mouths shut in the company. They can bend the rules a bit but breaking them is not so good. But we'll see.

Wow,if I had a product that was supposed to outperform the competitors product by 40%,I would be leaking my information to the public in a heartbeat.

If we don't start seeing leaked benchmarks from AMD soon,I'll lead me to believe their product isn't quite up to par.

I don't need KL8-10 or whatever to beat conroe by 40%,I just want it to compete.

[Serge84]

What happens when your backed to a corner little rat agenst the Liger (Biggest baddest cat in all the world) eh? XDD Can you say 16-ways? 32 cores on one board, 8 sockets. Thats what direct connection 2 does. Nobody can compete agenst that monster. What use would 2 quad cores be agenst 4 or even 8 on one board? Thats a lot of zeros in front of that % sign. lol AMD is the Liger and the little rat is that other company.

More chips on one board means less rack space less servers more doe saved on power overall giving atleast XXXX% more performance for half the server space.

[oldblue]

Wow,if I had a product that was supposed to outperform the competitors product by 40%,I would be leaking my information to the public in a heartbeat.

Often companies don't do this because they want to avoid the "Osborne effect." This is when the hype for future products causes demand for current products to drop off. When this happens, you have to slash the prices on your current products just to sell them.

However, if your new product doesn't really compete with your current products but does compete with your competitor's product, you want to talk it up a lot.

I think AMD is in both situations now with rev. H. On one hand, they want to hype up Barcelona because they currently have nothing to compete in the quad-core space, and they want to make potential quad-core customers delay purchasing decisions until rev. H is released.

On the other hand, if they hype it up too much they risk hurting their current dual core sales. Eventually their dual core prices will be so low anyway that the Osborne effect can be expected to be small.

With every X2 price drop, they get closer to the point at which it makes sense to start hyping rev H. I think they're close to that point already. I find it interesting that the most recent dual-core price cuts are rumored to take place on February 12th. On the same date, AMD will be giving a talk at ISSCC about Barcelona. Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part, but that would seem like a good time to release the first benchmarks.

I do find it suspicious that recently they seem to be trying to hype rev. H with no real data to back it up. The longer they keep this up, the worse it looks for rev. H.