Blog site Tracking AMD reveals that according to several sources these will be the first Barcelona-based Opteron model numbers and clockspeeds to launch
Check out more at http://trackingamd.blogspot.com/2007/02/barcelona-model-numbers-revealed.html
I see a red x
Here's the chart.
I know frequency aint worth squat no mo' but DAMN THOSE ARE LOW FREQUENCIES!!!!
that'd be funny if they did, everyone has been waiting forever for k8l now, but anyway, barcelona's the core, k8l the arch, so even if they kill barcelona, their still gonna use k8l over k8
This is the thing I've been pointing out all along. Penryn clocks are going to be 3.8 GHZ and upwards.
you mean budapest?
Here's the chart.
I know frequency aint worth squat no mo' but DAMN THOSE ARE LOW FREQUENCIES!!!!
Here's the chart.
I know frequency aint worth squat no mo' but DAMN THOSE ARE LOW FREQUENCIES!!!!
Nope!This is the thing I've been pointing out all along. Penryn clocks are going to be 3.8 GHZ and upwards.
Expect Penryn to be available in Q1 2008.Barcelona will give AMD, at best, a small performance lead over Conroe for, at best, 6 months. From Q4 2007 onwards Barcelona is going to eat Penryn dust.
This is not true! But it is 20% faster clock for clock!Conroe is ~30-40% faster than K8 clock-for-clock.
That is FPU performance, not overall CPU performance.AMD claims K8L = 1.8x K8
Your math is plain wrong and your prediction has no sense:Lets do some math:
3 GHz K8 performance index: 1.0
Penryn @ 3.8 Ghz: 1.0 * 1.4 * (3.8/3) = 1.8
K8l @ 2.4 GHZ: 1.0 * 1.8 * (2.4/3) = 1.44
My prediction: Penryn > K8L by 25%.
Bear in mind that the 1.8X multiplier for K8L is actually just the best case claimed FP performance by AMD.
Yes. But most of them know that K8L will lost the battle against Penryn but don't want to admit it forth.AMD fanbois pinning all their hopes on Barcelona are in for a nasty surprise :lol:
Nope!This is the thing I've been pointing out all along. Penryn clocks are going to be 3.8 GHZ and upwards.
Expect Penryn to be available in Q1 2008.Barcelona will give AMD, at best, a small performance lead over Conroe for, at best, 6 months. From Q4 2007 onwards Barcelona is going to eat Penryn dust.
This is not true! But it is 20% faster clock for clock!Conroe is ~30-40% faster than K8 clock-for-clock.
That is FPU performance, not overall CPU performance.AMD claims K8L = 1.8x K8
Your math is plain wrong and your prediction has no sense:Lets do some math:
3 GHz K8 performance index: 1.0
Penryn @ 3.8 Ghz: 1.0 * 1.4 * (3.8/3) = 1.8
K8l @ 2.4 GHZ: 1.0 * 1.8 * (2.4/3) = 1.44
My prediction: Penryn > K8L by 25%.
Bear in mind that the 1.8X multiplier for K8L is actually just the best case claimed FP performance by AMD.
Yes. But most of them know that K8L will lost the battle against Penryn but don't want to admit it forth.AMD fanbois pinning all their hopes on Barcelona are in for a nasty surprise :lol:
We estimate that the highest production speedgrades will be released at 3.6 GHz, which can be achieved at 900-950 mV core voltage. The cache size has little impact on the idle power consumption of the Pentium M - because of the implementation of selective clock gating - the nominal idle power consumption is expected to be lower than 10 W (SpeedStep enabled). The TDP will most likely be around 35W (Core2 Duo) and 70W for the quad core version that, like in the case of Conroe, combines 2 dies on a single package.
No, AMD isn't claiming a performance lead over K8, Wombat, they're claiming 1.8 and 1.4 over CLOVERTOWN.
I think what will steal the public from intel is if amd manages to somehow get ht out of the way for overclocking, and get it's cpu to clock past 4ghz like conroes can.
Here's the chart.
I know frequency aint worth squat no mo' but DAMN THOSE ARE LOW FREQUENCIES!!!!
you mean budapest?
Anyway, if ocing on k8l sucks, I'm switching to intel, even if they do get a 40% lead, if they still have the 3.2ghz barrier, they're screwed for when teh k+high gate design comes in to double the efficiency of the 45nm proccessors