AMD Sempron without 64bit = big mistake (UPDATED)

TheRod · Jun 10, 2004

<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040610024204.html" target="_new">Click!</A>
<A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com/tips00596/" target="_new">Click again!</A>

Good news! AMD Sempron will be available for SocketA platform. But will it only be renamed Athlon XP or they will actually make faster rated Sempron for SocketA. If a new core come to SocketA, it might become good overclockers.

Bad news! AMD Sempron WILL NOT support 64bit A couple of months ago, I didn't bother about the fact that AMD planned to launch 32bit only socket754 CPU. I tought that AMD would only move the XP line to the Socket754 to slowly "kill" the SocketA market. But, now, the market have changed. Intel will get 64bit-enabled CPU soon. If AMD don't offer 64bit in all their new CPU, it will be very weird! AMD claimed that 64bit was the FUTURE with the last year launch of the AMD64 line of CPU. Now, they will tell their customer, keep buying 32bit CPU, we make cheap one for you! And forget about this 64bit thing, it will not be out soon and will not offer you advantages. I can't believe it!

AMD must make Sempron 64bit ready to stay on top and to keep pressure un Intel. If Intel enter the 64bit market with low-budget 64bit CPU (see Celeron) AMD will get a big slap in their face.

And if it's possible, AMD should anable 64bit on SocketA too with Sempron. This would be a very unique move. But i'm not sure it's technogically possible to do this.

UPDATE (2004-06-16):
AnandTech is giving interesting details about the WHY and WHEN of Sempron :
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=2083" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=2083</A>

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...Edited by TheRod on 06/16/04 07:39 AM.

trooper11 · Jun 10, 2004

ok first of all, none of that says sempron wont have 64bit enabled on chip. the xbit article said its sitll unknown so you cant say it wont happen. secondly, celerons wont have 64bit enabled on them for quite sometime, well into 2005 for sure, if at all during that year. amd wants to get its new value line running and entrenched, they will migrate to 754 then in q1 or q2 '05 ,when s939 numbers are suppose to outpace s754 parts, they will transition sempron there as well. now this could mean dual core or thier k9 will be on a new socket, which i highly doubt, or they are getting all chips on one socket.

anyway, here is an INQ that seems to suggest it will have 64bit:

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=16424" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=16424</A>

so it could be they will have 64bit, but no one can say right now.

TheRod · Jun 10, 2004

I really wish AMD will not make the huge mistake of not enabling 64bit on all their new processors.

I agree with you that it's not 100% sure that they will or will not support it. But, you must agee that it would be really stupid for AMD to not release 64bit Sempron. This would be a step back for them if they do so. AMD were the first with x86 64bit and they must keep pushing it in the market, and making entry-level products 64bit-ready would be a clear message that 64bit is THE way to go.

And this would help AMD System Integrator selling low-cost system with a "64bit ready" marketing campaign.

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

trooper11 · Jun 10, 2004

yeah i mean i would say its smarter to have 64bit enabled. but i can see why they might not. logically, anyone buying a sempron wont be buying windows xp 64bit edition anytime soon, so they wont even take advantage of it.

TheRod · Jun 10, 2004

but i can see why they might not. logically, anyone buying a sempron wont be buying windows xp 64bit edition anytime soon

But system integrators would have the opportunity to build and sell low cost 64bit system. This is marketing!

Have you ever wonder why people are still buying Celeron? Because they looks great with their 2.4/2.6GHz speed label. Enthousiasts knows that Celeron 2.4 is not faster than a P4 1.8, but most buyers don't know this. It's the same thing with 64bit. Many people will surely think that 64bit computers are "faster" than 32bit computer. We call this : Marketing for the masses!

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

Snorkius · Jun 10, 2004

AMD and marketing is almost an oxymoron

If I found the hidden fountain. Drank the wisdom from it's deep.
Would I have the time to save me. Would I have them both to keep...

DonnieDarko · Jun 10, 2004

isn't it the same with most companies in the computer world?

TheRod · Jun 10, 2004

AMD and marketing is almost an oxymoron

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

trooper11 · Jun 10, 2004

*sigh* some people kill me. id like to see some of you do better with the resources amd has. good lord what do you want. amd has to focus on hardware, they relie on 3rd parties and oems to do the marketing. i have always hated seeing people come up to bash this aspect, well suprise amd doesnt have deep pockets like intel.

i do think 64bit on the semprons is a good move to allow oems to market better, and it could very be that they do that. obviouls it wont be on socket a, but i bet you it will on 754 or 939. until then, lets cut amd a bit of slack on the marketing end of things.

TheRod · Jun 10, 2004

some people kill me. id like to see some of you do better with the resources amd has. good lord what do you want. amd has to focus on hardware, they relie on 3rd parties and oems to do the marketing.

I agree with you, my main point is not bashing AMD for their marketing. In a technology point of view Sempron MUST be 64bit enabled CPU. This feature will become a strong sale point even if marketing is near zero. Because 64bit is becoming a BUZZWORD for PC buyers. People starts to ask questions about it, because in the last they see all those adds about AMD 64bit CPU, they wonder what is that? How it works? Is this good? etc...

For the marketing stuff, I lknow that DEEP pocket makes the difference, I work for an ISP/Carrier in Canada. Our main competitor is Bell Canada which have millions of residential customers that gives them millions in income every months. Their marketing power is so strong compared to our 500 employees - under 100 millions $CA/year sales. It's hard to be competitve in term of marketing when your main competitor have so much money/market share. We have to rely on service quality, etc...

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

P4Man · Jun 11, 2004

I really don't see your logic. If semprons are 32 bit only, this will just help AMD is cashing in a premium price for the A64's. It will also avoid marketing disasters like "64 bit cpu's are slower then 32 bit ones" when comparing 64 bit semptron with 32 bit P4's.

Also, why do you think celerons don't support hyperthreading ? Its not like it doesnt work on them... its just another way for intel to differentiate P4 from Celeron. Considering K8 based Semptrons with just 256kb will probably still be excellent performers, more than fast enough for most of us -very much unlike Celerons- it makes sense to differentiate them from A64's this way. Especially since intel won't ship 64 bit celerons anytime soon. It will even take very long before all shipping P4s are enabled with it. You really can't blame AMD for trying to make a buck and not selling you a fast, 64 bit enabled CPU for ~$50.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

TheRod · Jun 11, 2004

I really don't see your logic. If semprons are 32 bit only, this will just help AMD is cashing in a premium price for the A64's.

AMD will still cash with Athlon 64 even if Sempron are 64bit enabled. Sempron are there to replace Duron, they will probably get lower speed rating.

It will also avoid marketing disasters like "64 bit cpu's are slower then 32 bit ones" when comparing 64 bit semptron with 32 bit P4's.

Sempron will not fight against P4 they will fight against Celeron. They will surely be competitive with them in term of performance and having 64bit would be a major advantage over Celeron.

Considering K8 based Semptrons with just 256kb will probably still be excellent performers, more than fast enough for most of us -very much unlike Celerons- it makes sense to differentiate them from A64's this way.

AMD will not have any problem to differentiate Sempron and Athlon 64. Less cache and lower speed will surely make them slower than Athlon 64.

You really can't blame AMD for trying to make a buck and not selling you a fast, 64 bit enabled CPU for ~$50.

It's not a question of blaming them to not selling me 50$ CPU with 64bit. I would actually not buy it, I need more raw power (gaming,encoding,etc...). The problem is that AMD is promoting 64bit like crazy in the last year and this technology is now becoming accepted. Windows 64bit is on his way, most important hardware company have 64bit drivers in beta stage.

AMD chose to push 64bit to the desktop a year ago, they can't go back. They decided to gives their customers and potential customers an x86 CPU with 64bit capabilites. They wanted to cut the Intel leg's off and force them to go the 64bit route too in the AMD way. Of course, Intel power and market share put them in a comfortable position. But, they will have to give 64bit support to customers. Because when Microsoft will release Windows XP 64bit edition and Intel don't have CPU to run it, AMD will surely benefit from this.

Many potentiel customers will turn on AMD not because it's AMD, but just because they will want the newest 64bit OS. And customer that will not have a load of money will probably be tempted to get a low cost 64bit system and Sempron 64bit would surely be the number choice among average customer that want 64bit Windows.

At Windows 64bit launch if only 1 company have a low-cost 64bit offering, this company will surely gain market share in this market. If the average customer get a good experince with their system when they will upgrade, they might ask for the same brandname CPU. So both AMD and Intel need to be ready for the Windows 64bit launch. AMD is ready in mid/high range, Intel is not ready yet, but will probably be with mid/high range too at the time of the Windows 64bit launch. The actual 64bit fight is in the low-end market.

Today's Intel clearly dominate that market because of the "more MHz is better" rule. But with the emergence of 64bit, this might become a strong selling point : "64 bit is better than 32bit".

And we must not forget that many apps. will benefit from the 64bit Windows on day 1, others might lost speed too. But, I'm pretty sure there will be games/apps. with 64bit optimisation, like today's SSE/HT optimized software, that will benefit from this technology.

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

P4Man · Jun 11, 2004

Thats a long post, but its short on arguments I'm afraid

>AMD will still cash with Athlon 64 even if Sempron are
>64bit enabled. Sempron are there to replace Duron, they
>will probably get lower speed rating.

You mean, like everyone buying cheaper AXPs and not A64's today ?

>Sempron will not fight against P4 they will fight against
>Celeron. They will surely be competitive with them in term
>of performance and having 64bit would be a major advantage
>over Celeron.

Indeed. So much so, it might well be a bit too competitive against lower end A64s as well. If there where a 1.6-1.8 GHz sempron with AMD64 available today, it would be my chip of choice.. Now I'm torn between a A64 2800+ and a AXP 2500+ as a standard recommendation.

>AMD will not have any problem to differentiate Sempron and
>Athlon 64. Less cache and lower speed will surely make them
>slower than Athlon 64.

so what.. ? Even if it performs noticeable worse, it will still be considered fast enough for most people, and probably a large majority (myself included) wouldnt even consider the A64 anymore (unless you're a die hard gamer or something) if it supports 64 bit software as well. It will turn the A64 into a sort of "FX" chip, while AMD really wants you to buy A64's, no semprons.

What it boils down to is this: would more people buy a (64 bit) sempron over a A64 than people would buy such a chip over a Celeron? I'm fairly certain A64 sales would be impacted *significantly*, while Celeron would hardly suffer (there is no point in buying a celeron over an AXP today, so why would these people suddenly grow a brain ?).

> I would actually not buy it, I need more raw power
>(gaming,encoding,etc...).

By the time K8 based sempron launches, it will probably be comparable to a A64 2800+~3000+. That is still a lot of computing power, even for gamers and people encoding, and it would be sufficient for most. If you don't have to worry about 64 bit cathing on or being usefull, such a chip would be a no brainer IMHO. Again, A64 would suffer tremendously.

>AMD chose to push 64bit to the desktop a year ago, they
>can't go back. They decided to gives their customers and
>potential customers an x86 CPU with 64bit capabilites. They
>wanted to cut the Intel leg's off and force them to go the
>64bit route too in the AMD way

Guess what.. they succeeded ! Windows is on its way, Intel is on its way, AMD got their prize and there is no turning back. Now its time to cash in on this, and giving 64 bit capability away is not the way to do it.

>Many potentiel customers will turn on AMD not because it's
>AMD, but just because they will want the newest 64bit OS.

If they really want that, the $180 price tag of the A64 2800+ today shouldn't scare them away. Its not like intel will have a cheaper 64 bit capable product. If they don't want to spend $180, the K8-sempron is most likely still a far better choice than the Celeron.

>But, I'm pretty sure there will be games/apps. with 64bit
>optimisation, like today's SSE/HT optimized software, that
>will benefit from this technology.

Yep, but guess what ? You have to pay extra at intel if you want to benefit from SSE3 or Hyperthreading as well, which obviously makes sense. If you have a feature that people really want, enough to consider switching manufacturers, giving that feature away for free on your cheapest product really isnt a sensible business tactic. This might have made sense to increase the installed userbase and increasing the chances of MS and other developpers actually supporting it (think 3DNow!), but with MS Windows and Intel's backing now, its already guaranteed to succeed. AMD doesn't need to seed the market anymore, just concentrate on making bucks and a 32 bit sempron makes perfect sense in this regard IMHO.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

Cybercraig · Jun 11, 2004

Guess what.. they succeeded ! Windows is on its way, Intel is on its way, AMD got their prize and there is no turning back. Now its time to cash in on this, and giving 64 bit capability away is not the way to do it.
____________________________________________________________

This would indicate that AMD figures 64bit implementation is a lot farther off for the average guy than we think. I can't see any other reason for investing a nickel in a 32bit roll-out now. Maybe the Semperons will be A64 throwaway wafers that aren't making the cut. I can't see the logic here.

"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds. Now, let's eat!

addiarmadar · Jun 11, 2004

If it will not have the 64bit ability, that would mean it is marketed for the low-budget consumers. It it is 64bit that would mean a new mobo anyways. The question is will the 32bit Sempron be better than the Athlon Xp Barton...

AMD defiantely plans to release a 64bit version but maybe later on to reap the profits of the existing 64-bit chips such as the recently released socket 939.

Mobile Barton 2500+ @ 2420mhz 11x220 1.7v
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro to XT(420/730)

TheRod · Jun 11, 2004

Thats a long post, but its short on arguments I'm afraid

Scuze me! I've not met your standard.

everyone buying cheaper AXPs and not A64's today ?

NOt averyone is buying XP chips, but many people do, because they don't have other low price alternatives. I don't think users will not buy A64 if the Sempron line performs between Athlon XP 1800+ to 2800+ (same range as current Celeron). Socket754 will become a more attractive choice to low/mid-range market. People still buy XP chips because they are affordable. If AMD gives users the choice between Athlon XP and Sempron (with or without 64bit) with equivalent performance people will probably turn to Socket754 but if Semron are 64bit capable, the choice would be obvious. No one would ever recommend Athlon XP CPU since Sempron would be as fast and 64bit ready.

Now I'm torn between a A64 2800+ and a AXP 2500+ as a standard recommendation.

Most enthousiasts like us still recommends Barton 2500+ because they can all be overclocked to 3200+ speed and they are much cheaper than A64 2800+. But, would you recommend anyone to buy an Athlon XP 3200+ that is not faster than the A64 2800+ and it's not supporting 64bit? Never.

Even if it performs noticeable worse, it will still be considered fast enough for most people, and probably a large majority (myself included) wouldnt even consider the A64 anymore (unless you're a die hard gamer or something) if it supports 64 bit software as well. It will turn the A64 into a sort of "FX" chip, while AMD really wants you to buy A64's, no semprons.

I don't agree with you. Of course, some buyer's would turn to low-cost Sempron, but most of them would have not bought A64 anyway, they would have bought Athlon XP. If Sempron come with 64bit support, this will only kill the Athlon XP market. Have you noticed that most PC store don't sell P4 slower than 2.8GHz now? Average users are willing to pay that price for CPU's.

If a "crippled" CPU (Celeron, Duron, Sempron)is enough for your need and you are educated enough to understand their performance. It's fine go and buy one. But average buyers buy based on price tag and buzzwords. They want "Intel", "AMD", "3.0GHz" or "1Meg Cache" because someone told them or they have heard something about that...

would more people buy a (64 bit) sempron over a A64 than people would buy such a chip over a Celeron?

I would simple answer to this that everything with Intel logo certainly get an advantage over AMD in most people mind. Which is sad.

Now its time to cash in on this, and giving 64 bit capability away is not the way to do it.

They would not necessarly give it away... But I understand the fact that AMD might want to keep 64bit in the mid/high-end market. But, this can been from another perspective : why AMD would not push 64bit to the low-end before Intel to show their customer they believe in this technology and they really think users deserves CPU that can last long and will not need to be replaced when Windows 64bit will be there.

If they really want that (64bit Windows), the $180 price tag of the A64 2800+ today shouldn't scare them away. Its not like intel will have a cheaper 64 bit capable product.

Today's average customers don't know much about Windows 64bit, but when the OS will be out, if tehy can find decently priced 64bit machine (based on Semron 64bit) they will probably buy it compared to a Celeron system at the same price tag.

When Windows 64bit will be out, who will still recommends to buy 32 version of the OS if the hardware is able to run the 64bit version?

You have to pay extra at intel if you want to benefit from SSE3 or Hyperthreading as well, which obviously makes sense. If you have a feature that people really want, enough to consider switching manufacturers, giving that feature away for free on your cheapest product really isnt a sensible business tactic.

Giving away stuff is never the way to go, but havaing an advantage over the competition for the same price is a good way to go. AMD is not giving 64bit, their A64 are priced equally to P4 that have HT/SSE3. AMD could also not give AMD64 on Sempron, they could set their price to 10/20$ more than equally rated Athlon XP or Sempron for SocketA. Sempron would still be competive with Celeron.

AMD doesn't need to seed the market anymore, just concentrate on making bucks and a 32 bit sempron makes perfect sense in this regard IMHO.

If AMD will do so, I will not blame them, they will want to make money. But what I'm afraid of is if average people will be interested in 32bit Sempron. Most of them will stick to Intel's logo.

We could go on and on with this, we will see upon offical release/reviews and after sales numbers...

I really wish to see them with 64bit, if they are not I'll be a bit disapointed.

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

TheRod · Jun 11, 2004

Why does everyone thinks that 64bit Sempron would cut AMD profits? Did Duron cut Athlon XP profits?

The question is will the 32bit Sempron be better than the Athlon Xp Barton

A one million dollars question! It would be a bit weird for AMD to launch faster CPU on a dying platform. On ther other hand, it might become a viable upgrade for current Duron/Athlon XP owner.

But I have big doubt/concerns about Sempron on SocketA. How AMD can make an integrated memory controller CORE work on a SocketA, these core are very different in architecture. Have they disgned it to work without the integrated memory controller? Or, in worst case scenario. Sempron for SocketA will only be "renamed" Athlon XP with a new rating that reflects the new reality. Athlon XP 3200+ would become Sempron 2800+...

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

trooper11 · Jun 11, 2004

see what the problem here is, we arent normal consumers, so we cannot say what they would do. the sempron is aimed at the duron segment, thats not a very decerning segment of consumers. those are the people that order a dell with a celeron just becuase dell tells them to, and its dirt cheap. its nto about any features celeron has, its price. sempron, if not 64bit enabled, will gian the same share, people will but it for how cheap it is, not neccesarily its features. even person i know that is in that segment, doesnt knwo anyhting about hyperthreading, sse2, or even the speed of thier system, they dont care, they just bought it cuase dell bundled crap with it lol.

belive me, sempron wont suffer if it lacks 64bit. it snot like intel would be attacking sempron head on. that segment is a quieter segment, the real fights occur in the mainstream.

TheRod · Jun 11, 2004

TODAY'S ADS :
DELL Celeron 2.4GHz - 499$
HP XP2500+ - 499$

ADS OF THE FUTURE :
DELL Celeron 3.0GHz - 499$ loaded with Windows XP 32bit
HP Sempron C30+ - 499$ loaded with Windows XP 64bit

Maybe Average Joe will understand something and will get the Sempron with 64bit! But, well... I don't think this will happen anytime soon!!!

--
What's the AMD Mobile Athlon 64 overclocking potential? It's huge! Humm... Maybe not that huge...

addiarmadar · Jun 11, 2004

Duron was a lower to the Athlon XP, less chache. AMD has a very interesting marketing strategy of releasing the new stuff that are same thing over and over again. They will make you buy the current and drop it and re-release it again with a diffent face.

I can see the marketing value of releasing a new CPU on an older platform to give the people with those platforms that idea that they can still upgrade with that platform but in reality that they will get the same damn thing they already have but the illusion is there. This may seem stange but to those that understands marketing tatics this is an ingenious plan.

Mobile Barton 2500+ @ 2420mhz 11x220 1.7v
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro to XT(420/730)

chuck232 · Jun 11, 2004

I really doubt Sempron will have 64bit as much as I'd like it to. How would they differentiate between it and Newcastle 754?

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6482578" target="_new">3D Mark2K1 Compare</A>

P4Man · Jun 12, 2004

>Scuze me! I've not met your standard.

Don't worry, few do

>NOt averyone is buying XP chips, but many people do,
>because they don't have other low price alternatives.

That is not the point, they are buying AXP and not A64 in spite of the lack of 64 bit support, and with price differences not being that big at all, especially when comparing >2500+ to A64 2800+.

> don't think users will not buy A64 if the Sempron line
>performs between Athlon XP 1800+ to 2800+ (same range as
>current Celeron)

I think you're being far too generous to celeron here

prescott celerons aside, they perform between an Athlon 700 and axp 1800+ for the most part.

> People still buy XP chips because they are affordable. If
>AMD gives users the choice between Athlon XP and Sempron
>(with or without 64bit) with equivalent performance people
>will probably turn to Socket754 but if Semron are 64bit
>capable, the choice would be obvious. No one would ever
>recommend Athlon XP CPU since Sempron would be as fast and
>64bit ready.

Again, I think you're missing the point. Sempron will replace Athlon XP afaik. Duron is as good as dead, and AXP serves as the value solution nowadays, sempron will take its place. Enabling 64 bit would make it look like a high end solution, and definately eat into low end A64 market.

> But average buyers buy based on price tag and buzzwords.
>They want "Intel", "AMD", "3.0GHz" or "1Meg Cache" because
>someone told them or they have heard something about that..

Exactly, so when they see the price difference between the 64 bit computers (be it P4 or A64) and the cheaper Sempron/Celerons, they will consider "do I want to spend more on this "64 bit thing". I'm fairly sure a lot would. If sempron would be 64 bit enabled, I have no doubts it would sell pretty well, heck, I would probably want one, but it would steal more sales from A64 as Celeron IMHO. Don't forget many customers hardly consider something that doesn't have an intel cpu, and in the corporate market AMD is nowhere. An AMD64 enabled sempron will not change this more than it would change the mind of AMD-buying customers that would otherwise consider paying the price premium for an A64. At least, that is my firm conviction.

>why AMD would not push 64bit to the low-end before Intel to
>show their customer they believe in this technology and
>they really think users deserves CPU that can last long and
>will not need to be replaced when Windows 64bit will be
>there.

Cause AMD is a business, and exists to make money just like intel. And they would rather have you buy a 32 bit sempron today, and a 64 bit A64 tomorrow. Or have you pay a premium for A64 today.

> But what I'm afraid of is if average people will be
>interested in 32bit Sempron. Most of them will stick to
>Intel's logo.

Assuming sempron offers comparable bang/buck over celeron as AXP does today, there would be *plenty* of reason to choose it over a celeron. 64 bitness would just be another argument, but I'm not sure if its big enough to lure typical/loyal intel customers to AMD. At least not in the same degree it would canabalize A64 sales.

>I really wish to see them with 64bit, if they are not I'll
>be a bit disapointed.

Why ? because you think it would be worse for AMD, or because you feel you are missing out on a "steal" ? Are you dissapointed there is no hyperthreading on celerons ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

P4Man · Jun 12, 2004

>But I have big doubt/concerns about Sempron on SocketA. How
>AMD can make an integrated memory controller CORE work on a
>SocketA, these core are very different in architecture.
>Have they disgned it to work without the integrated memory
>controller? Or, in worst case scenario. Sempron for SocketA
>will only be "renamed" Athlon XP with a new rating that
>reflects the new reality. Athlon XP 3200+ would become
>Sempron 2800+...

As I understand it, Sempron will just be a new marketing name that will apply to both current AXP's (or derivatives like Thorton) on socket A and future K8 based, socket 754 chips that will basically be A64's with part of the cache and AMD64 disabled. There is no way K8 would work on socket A, and it seems like a wasted effort to design a K7 based chip with ondie memory controller that works in S754. Maybe, just maybe S754 semprons will be a "new" chip, for instance without SOI, but a bulk silicon implementation, and designed from the start with only 256Kb cache, but I really doubt it will be anything completely new. I am quite certain those chips will support AMD64 until the moment a laser beam or microcode cuts that functionality, just like HT on celerons.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

MrPanther0 · Jun 12, 2004

They would/will differenitate between the A64 and Sempron the same exact way they did with the XP and Duron. Simply lower the cache and clockspeed.

I dont see whats so hard about this.

endyen · Jun 12, 2004

May I add a couple of points?
The Sempron will be sold to emerging markets. ( China, India, Easern Europe) where any reasonable chip, at a low price will be well recieved. They dont want anything that adds to the cost.
The Sempron will be made from cores that lack full functionality. If a core lacks mem controller, or the added registers, just make it into a Sempron.

AMD Sempron without 64bit = big mistake (UPDATED)

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Share this page