BaronMatrix :
They didn't up 65nm because they couldn't stop making 90nm. Now that they are taking out the 90nm tools they can do higher clocked Brisbanes without competing with themselves.
Nice try, but incorrect. Why would AMD keep making 90nm parts? You yourself said isn't not cost effective. And it will only slow down their 45nm conversion.
They didn't up 65nm because they increased the gate oxide by 25%. Maximum clockspeed (at the same thermals) will be LESS than at 90nm.
Even if you think that's FUD.. what is the highest SKU AMD plans to sell on 65nm Brisbane?
Here's their 90nm parts:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_13041%5E13076,00.html
6400+ 3.2 Ghz 90nm SOI 2MB socket AM2 125W
6000+ 3.0 GHz 90nm SOI 2MB socket AM2 125W
5600+ 2.8 GHz 90nm SOI 2MB socket AM2 89W
Where are they planning to go on 65nm?
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=9899
The AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ will be the first to jump on the new 65nm K8 bandwagon with a 65W TDP. The previous Windsor-based chip of the same featured an 89-Watt TDP. AMD will also add 100 MHz to the core frequency of the Athlon 64 X2 5600+, now rated at 2.9 GHz. Total L2 cache will be halved in the move to the Brisbane core, and the updated Athlon 64 X2 5600+ chips will feature only 1MB of L2 cache. Availability of these processors is scheduled for Q1 2008.
AMD's higher-end Athlon 64 X2 6400+ and Athlon 64 X2 6000+ will both be discontinued.
Boy... that sure sounds to me like they held off the transition to 65nm so it wouldn't compete with the 90nm part. They don't want to compete with themselves to badly, they'll discontinue the fastest parts to do it!