Nothing Here
Nothing Here
Last edited by leonarderman; 05-29-2009 at 08:51 AM.
This a dual core for $120 being unlocked to Quad Core? 0_o
Please tell me this is a joke.
Perkam
^^ according to Fud its $100
Was any stability tests ran though? the locked cores might of been untested or just defective. Cool either way though.
EVGA X58 Classified
Intel i7 965
Corsair Dominator 1600mhz 3x2gb
Nvidia GTX 295
It takes the crown of cheapest quad-core on the market from X3 720 BE![]()
www.teampclab.pl
MOA 2009 Poland #2, AMD Black Ops 2010, MOA 2011 Poland #1, MOA 2011 EMEA #12
Test bench: empty
how can amd make a quadcore for 100 dollars. this is just stupid.
nevertheless its cool.![]()
Oh my oh my. i5 what?
If ACC can unlock Callisto to 4 cores and it happens to be 4 stable cores(in majority of cases),then new Phenom II X2 will become THE CPU of choice for enthusiasts given the great performance,4 cores for the price of 2,extremely low price and no cold bug! Awesome value.![]()
Nope,the 2 cores did not meet the frequency or TDP targets so they "turned them off" and launched a dual core. Usually this happens when the wafer that was meant to be "tuned" for high performance yields a number of dice that fail to meet the targeted specifications.There is also a "tune for low power" option that AMD uses for EE Opterons and Phenoms with "e" letter in product model number.
Anyhow,no matter what it is(DC,Tri or QC) amd does make money on every Deneb die they sell.The cost is roughly 50$ (total) per chip,so you can see they do not lose money because they sell it with a loss.They lose money because their server sales slowed down last 2 quarters(nehalem and economic crisis) and they pay off the credit they took to buy ati.
SweClockers.com
CPU: Phenom II X4 955BE
Clock: 4200MHz 1.4375v
Memory: Dominator GT 2x2GB 1600MHz 6-6-6-20 1.65v
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair IV Formula
GPU: HD 5770
Losing money or not, they might get MY money soon enough, since Intel decide not to ever decrease the price of Q9650 and no other 45 nm Core2 Quad with 9x multi is available and affordable from them.
Where are you getting your $50 cost figure from? I hope you are not making this figure up.
If they don't have a separate mask for Duals, and when one takes into account Duals currenty sell in far greater number than quads, then AMD's yield of Quads must be pitiful or they have been forced into using perfectly good quads as low ASP duals.
Either was it doesn't bode well for them.
If you weren't such a committed AMD fan, Informal the hypocrite would be highlighting this post, but you are safe.Go find a clue.
Seems kinda like a good publicity stunt following how their tri core unlocking helped boost their sales.
It's a good idea if it works but I also heard of issues with not only stability but unlocking the extra core burning out the chip with x3 to x4. Therefore this seems even more dangerous with x2. But if it works yay.
Besides saving the parts that don't meet quad or tri core standards and selling them seperately whether than just throwing them out is a wonderfully smart business decision in my mind.
Hm. MY question is: Do I spend $ on this and an AMD board? Do I just upgrade to Intel Quad using my current 775 board?
This is BS (as an idea I mean). It would be better of being sold as 150W QC than a DC of any kind.
I hope you're wrong, at that price, after retail margins, transport and VAT, they'd be left with no cash per chip, rather a loss.Anyhow,no matter what it is(DC,Tri or QC) amd does make money on every Deneb die they sell.The cost is roughly 50$ (total) per chip
so you can see they do not lose money because they sell it with a loss.
LOL badly put man"One does not loose money because he sells at a loss"
(ye ye we all know what you meant)
BZZZZZT! Wrong.
It would be utter chaos if AMD/Intel just decided to change TDPs on their chips willy-nilly.
Imagine HP's reaction when 1/4 of their quad core desktops using an OEM cooling solution that was specced for 125W TDP start coming back with overheating issues or blown PWM...
In fact, one of the most LIKELY reasons for the cores to be turned off is an inability for that chip to meet the desired clock speed target in the desired power envelope.
Please note: I am not here to provide any kind of official NCIX support on these forums.
For faster (and official) service please contact me at Linus@ncix.com, or please contact our customer care team at wvvw.NCIX.com (Canada) or wvvw.NCIXUS.com (America)
Heatware: http://heatware.com/eval.php?id=25647
Hiper HPU-4M880, Q6600@3.6Ghz 1.5V, Abit IP35-E, 2x2GB OCZ Dominator PC8500, [COLOR="Blue"]XFX 6950Watercooled
Your hope has nothing to do with it.It's an "insider" info I got back in the day of 65nm wafers.The picture hasn't changed much,if at all,on 45nm node(it can only be cheaper).
I see you are going strong on your bitter road there ... One more to add to the list of personal attacks made by C.Boga.
Read my previous post to see why AMD is not losing money on this chip.
@alfaunits
You didn't understand one important bit when it comes to "tuned for performance".If a die fails to meet the targets and was made on the wafer with before mentioned optimization,it will fail either as high TDP part or a low EE part.AMD does have certain TDP segments and it can't go beyond them due to design constraints on the motherboard level.
And sorry i put it badly at the end,I see you get what I wanted to say.
You upgrade to a better CPU in your existing s775 board,an easy solution.
Last edited by informal; 05-28-2009 at 11:42 AM.
This was kind of expected, no real surprise. Now if somone could mod a bios so we can sellect the cores we want, the odds of making a good tripple core would be great.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Holy smoke! Worth a try for such little money! To the OP, what CPU is it exactly?
Asus Crosshair V Formula-Z | FX 8350 | 2x4GB Trident-X 2600 C10 | 2x ATI HD5870 Crossfire | Enermax Revo 1050watt | OCZ Vertex 3 60GB | Samsung F1 1TB
Watercooling: XSPC Raystorm | EK 5870 Delrin fullcover | TFC X-changer 480 w/ 4x Gentle Typhoon | DDC2+ Delrin top | EK 200mm res | Primochill LRT 3/8 tubing
Case: Murdermodded TJ-07
sub 9 sec. SPi1M 940BE 955BE 965BE 1090T
Core I7 920 4.2 ghz (21x200) 1.35 volts / Asus P6T / Corsair XMS 1333mhz @ 1600mhz / EVGA GTX 285 SSC (724 core/1634 shaders / 1508 mem) / Modified ThermalTake Armor
Swiftech Apogee, MCW-60, Swiftech 655, Black Ice GTX 360
Bookmarks