AMD64 mobiles OAKVILLE (754 90nm)

[trans am]

You may already know this, but to those that don't know,
I called AMD today and they said the Mobile AMD64 90nm Oakville cores will be for socket 754. Also they told me the amd64 754 for desktops will stop or have already stopped production. 754 will be for semprons and existing amd64 754 cpus. The lev. 1 cache amd 64's have been phased out except for FX line. I couldn't get a straight answer when I asked if the FX55 will be 130nm or 90nm. My guess is 130nm and then switch again to 90nm. Eventually all amd processors will be 90nm including Semprons. I guess, if you have a 754 board that supports mobiles, but you want a 90nm processor without getting 939 mobo, then the Oakville is the answer.

[pik-ard v1.1]

oakville? how much cache? speeds? hows it different from newcastle, winchester, and whatever else is already around?

amd's official roadmap
oakville is on that, but doesnt give specs...

[Dojo | Warlord]

AFAIK Oakville is just a 90nm Mobile Newcastle... (?)

[pik-ard v1.1]

winchester is the 90nm newcastle i believe.

[Dojo | Warlord]

Originally posted by trans am
Eventually all amd processors will be 90nm including Semprons.

Yes, the Palermo core is going to be the 90nm Sempron on the desktops. Georgetown and Senora on the mobile front. Senora being the Low-Voltage core.

[trans am]

Originally posted by pik-ard v1.1
oakville? how much cache? speeds? hows it different from newcastle, winchester, and whatever else is already around?

it will be 512mb lev. 2 cache lower voltage. it's different from newcastle because it's 90nm. newcastle and clawhammer are all 130nm. it uses strained silicon and uses less power.(maybe will even o/c higher)

winchester is 90nm but only for 939. The Oakville is technically for laptops, but that hasn't stopped us from using them in desktops as long as the motherboards support them. Now it's just a matter of finding them.

[pik-ard v1.1]

uhhh... newcastle was for 754, AND 939...

there were barton desktop chips, and mobiles(low voltage)...

why dont they just call it a winchester?

[trans am]

Originally posted by pik-ard v1.1
uhhh... newcastle was for 754, AND 939...

there were barton desktop chips, and mobiles(low voltage)...

why dont they just call it a winchester?

that's a good point.
I'm guessing they want to keep the winchester just for desktop 90nm 939. look at the amd roadmap.

i think oakville is 35w

Different names makes it easier to distinguish instead of having 5 different clawhammers for example. claw hammer 512 L2, Clawhammer 1mb L2, Clawhammer 1mb L2(939 FX) clawhammer 1mb mobile 62w. Clawhammer DTR etc.

[pik-ard v1.1]

well first off, the 512kb L2 has to have a different name... as different cache (be it physical, or mearly that half of it has been turned off) leads to different core names.

i mean, either have the newcastle be different names, or let the winchester, and oakville be the same, as it appears to be they are going two split ways with the same circumstances...

EDIT: god(or ya know... whoever) help anyone trying to understand me...

[trans am]

Originally posted by pik-ard v1.1
well first off, the 512kb L2 has to have a different name... as different cache (be it physical, or mearly that half of it has been turned off) leads to different core names.

i mean, either have the newcastle be different names, or let the winchester, and oakville be the same, as it appears to be they are going two split ways with the same circumstances...

EDIT: god(or ya know... whoever) help anyone trying to understand me...

I don't understand? The 512k L2 clawhammer had half of it's L2 cache disabled but it kept the same name.

[pik-ard v1.1]

what 512kb clawhammer?

[ocmyface]

maybe hes referring to the 3400+ with 512k L2... but thats a newcastle...

maybe hes confused, CH is always 1mb right?

[trans am]

Originally posted by ocmyface
maybe hes referring to the 3400+ with 512k L2... but thats a newcastle...

maybe hes confused, CH is always 1mb right?

A long time ago, before newcastles came into the picture, there were clawhammers with half the L2 cache disabled. I think there was a 3200+ version and a 3000+ claw with only 512K L2 cache.

[Shade00]

I don't know if they ever made the 3200+ as a cut-down Clawhammer, but there are still a bunch of half-CH 2800+ and 3000+ chips floating in the retail channel.

[Eversor]

i don´t think well see 939 cpu´s for mobiles, so i think it´s right to assume socket 754 will live past 4000+ thru mobile cpu´s.

For the same reason intel hasn´t dual channel chipsets for centrinos, amd shouldn´t migrate mobiles to 939 cpu´s.

[pik-ard v1.1]

Originally posted by trans am
A long time ago, before newcastles came into the picture, there were clawhammers with half the L2 cache disabled. I think there was a 3200+ version and a 3000+ claw with only 512K L2 cache.

what your thinking of, is that people were calling the 3200+ w/ half cache clawhammers, before we knew they were called newcastles.

[Shade00]

Originally posted by pik-ard v1.1
what your thinking of, is that people were calling the 3200+ w/ half cache clawhammers, before we knew they were called newcastles.

For a while, the chips with 512k cache *were* Clawhammers with half the cache disabled. It took AMD a little while to transition to the Newcastle core.

[pik-ard v1.1]

isnt it the same thing? just a different name?

[Mariachi]

better hurry up before the clawhammers are gone for good.. i'm glad I bought mine

[LilGator]

way too many codenames, someone make a chart LOL

[pik-ard v1.1]

http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/

close enough?

[ocmyface]

i remember during the transition of S940 FX to S939 FX AMD saying that the latest FX chips will always cost the same whe n a newer version comes out and the old ones will fade out, i wonder if the price will remain around the 800-900 mark when 90nm is introduced...

FX57 will be one hell of a chip to own

[trans am]

Originally posted by LilGator
way too many codenames, someone make a chart LOL

Desktop A64 754 Clawhammers
2800+: ADA2800AEP4AP 1.5V (CO rev, F48h) <- ClawHammer, 512 KB L2, 1.8 GHz, x9 (512 KB L2 "disabled")
3000+: ADA3000AEP4AP 1.5V (CO rev, F48h) <- ClawHammer, 512 KB L2, 2.0 GHz, x10 (512 KB L2 "disabled")
3200+: ADA3200AEP5AP 1.5V (CO rev, F48h) <- ClawHammer, 1 MB L2, 2.0 GHz, x10
3400+: ADA3400AEP5AP 1.5V (CO rev, F48h) <- ClawHammer, 1 MB L2, 2.2 GHz, x11
3000+: ADA3000AEP4AR 1.5V (CG rev, F4Ah) <- ClawHammer, 512 KB L2, 2.0 GHz, x10 (512 KB L2 "disabled")
3200+: ADA3200AEP5AR 1.5V (CG rev, F4Ah) <- ClawHammer, 1 MB L2, 2.0 GHz, x10
3400+: ADA3400AEP5AR 1.5V (CG rev, F4Ah) <- ClawHammer, 1 MB L2, 2.2 GHz, x11
3700+: ADA3700AEP5AR 1.5V (CG rev, F4Ah) <- ClawHammer, 1 MB L2, 2.4 GHz, x12]

Yeah, shade was right, it wasn't the 3200+ I was thinking of. It was the 3000+ and the 2800+ that were cutdown clawhammers. But Clawhammers nonetheless.

[pik-ard v1.1]

where'd you get that info?

[m0nk33y]

im kinda noob, but what makes the clawhammer better then new castle?? i might buy an athlon 64, and i want to oc but not sure which core is better