Tolliman X3 gets a name

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
we'll so far i like the quad-core. its awsome. i did a prim95 test and never went over 107F with 4 running full load. which i think is good. unless i am wrong but amd will make its cpu better it just takes some time.

Brian
 

Duopoly son. 😉

Speaking of duopoly, imagine M$ and EA combined *shock and horror*
 

They don't have time!
 
very ture lol. but still amd it lacking. we cant make then hurry up only they can do that. i look it as if amd really wanted a quad-core they would have done. i think maybe they are being lazy or something. i mean i dont keep up on computer news until now. i never did before but now i do. because i have my new computer so i try to keep up on it
 
AMD is not going anywhere.For a company as small as AMD,taking such risk is the American way period.They have come close to bankruptcy be and survive.Besides Intel needs a company to kick around til it gets bet again.AMD will smoke Intel in 09.naive errr native will mature then
 




I'll just say you can get more Barcelona dies from 65nm 300mm than Opteron dies at 90nm 200mm.
 
The folks over at VR-Zone have some more K10 news. It seems that AMD has listened to people who said that the origina naming convention was too complex. They have now changed all desktop chip names except Phenom FX.

The part formerly known as Phenom GP will now be Phenom 9-Series.
The part formerly known as Tolliman X3 will now be Phenom 7-Series.
The part formerly known as Kuma X2 will now be Athlon 6-Series.

So rather than Phenom GP-7100, it's just Phenom 7100, 7200, etc.

http://resources.vr-zone.com//newspics/Oct07/09/Phenom.gif

http://resources.vr-zone.com//newspics/Oct07/09/PhenomFX.gif

AMD as you can see has also released final speeds and shipping dates. MSI has already announced their Phenom and Opteron boards so there will be boards. ASUS is said to be right behind so we may get a nice amount of 9500s and 9600s with boards in November. The Sapphire board used at WCG should also be ready. If all the features demoed in the BIOS by the Inq are there, it will be a godsend. The board allows turning off unused slots, mem dividers, etc.


From VR-Zone:

Phenom 9600 and 9500 clocked at 2.4GHz and 2.2GHz respectively will be the first quad-core Phenom processors to hit the market in Nov. Phenom 9700 clocked at 2.6GHz will come along slightly later in Dec. A faster iteration of the quad-core Phenom will come along in Q2 2008 while DVT samples will be available in Q1. Most likely, it will be called Phenom 9800 and clocked at 2.8GHz.
 
They're still 1 year behind Intel... I'd prefer to have an AMD system, but technology moves too fast to buy something that's already a year behind.
 


I wouldn't necessarily say that AMD's manufacturing process is a joke at all. AMD has been able to get 800 more MHz out of their 90 nm process on similar chips with little to no increase in TDP, which is NOT a trivial feat. The first 90 nm dual-cores went up to 2.40 GHz and had 110-watt TDPs. The current 90 nm duals go up to 3.20 GHz with a 125-watt TDP and the 3.00 GHz unit has an 89-watt TDP.

What AMD lacks in manufacturing is the ability to do process shrinks and ramping as fast as Intel does. This is not all that surprising since AMD has two main fabs with one at 90 nm and one at 65 nm. Intel has roughly a dozen big fabs with several at 65 nm and a couple at 45 nm. They have the fab capacity to shut one down, install new tooling, and then ramp while AMD has to be very careful with transitioning as they need the fab to remain somewhat operational during the retooling period.

And as far as stubbornness goes, I am pretty sure you're referring to AMD not making dual-die MCM multi-core chips. This is also not surprising as AMD's IMC platform is not nearly as amenable to it as Intel's FSB platform is. It's as easy to put two dies in one socket as it is two dies in two sockets with an FSB. An MCM with an IMC is a little trickier to accomplish. The best way to accomplish that is by having one IMC per die (two per CPU) and a wide backside bus between the two dies (such as HT 3.0). This necessitated a redesign of the die to accomplish- specifically the independent 64-bit IMCs per die and HT 3.0- and AMD waited to incorporate this into the 10h rather than port it to the K8. They had to redesign the core anyway, so why not make a quad-core version while they were at it?

I think neither camp is more stubborn than the other. Intel is finally getting rid of the reincarnation-of-RDRAM FB-DIMMs and the FSBs in their servers, both of which are overdue. And AMD has 8-core dual-die MCMs in their roadmap as well.

What will be interesting to see is how Intel handles its first IMC chips...
 
You claimed that you were once a software programmer for Microsoft, yet you still haven't demonstrate that. Simply spreading mis-information, and use "because I was a software programmer from M$", is not an act of heroism, but an act of irresponsibility. As I said, you're embarrassing yourself.
Click to expand...

Spreading [strike]mis[/strike]information is SOP for MS programmers. They all want you to Get the Facts: http://www.microsoft.com/canada/getthefacts/default.mspx

Sorry, couldn't resist 😀
 
Somehow, I'm not excited. Barcelona was supposed to be out last spring, was officially announced a month ago, and is finally barely starting to be avialable now. And I've still seen no real reviews of it in comparison to Intel's chips, overclocking, game performance, etc. Just the canned reviews handed out on Sept 10. Ok, maybe something exists that I haven't taken note of, but nothing on Tom's or Anandtech.

So I need to build a computer in the next month or so because my present one will be going to my son for use in his business. So what are my choices for that build? Maybe a Phenom based chip will be out next spring, maybe not. That leaves me with either building a slow, dated AM2 system or building a fast, modern Intel system. Of course, I could try a near mythical Barcelona which hasn't been shown much and is more of a server chip rather than a gaming one. Guess I'll have to think this over. Yeah, right.
 
Cool! ... so where are the f*king processors already? :??:
Click to expand...


Is it November? No? Then they're not out yet. If only my lowly Turion wasn't more than fast enough or my 4400+ wasn't screaming through VMs I'd be worried. I can stay where I am for another year. I'd rather they had Newegg volume when they launch so I'd advise them to take their time.
 
They're still 1 year behind Intel... I'd prefer to have an AMD system, but technology moves too fast to buy something that's already a year behind.
Click to expand...


What does that even mean? What's a year behind? Quad core? AMD beat Intel to 1GHz, mainstream 64bit OS', Dual Core servers, native quad, IMC, Coherent Bus. It seems like you all want to live vicariously trough a company that would gladly leave you with a nub in place of your arm and leg.

That's kind of weird.
 
Good. Hopefully they will bump up the speed by then, and fix the yield issue.

Because clock for clock, Phenom is not going to perform similarly to Core 2, while dissipating more heat.

I'm getting really tired of this hoopla and no show.
 
What does that even mean? What's a year behind? Quad core? AMD beat Intel to 1GHz, mainstream 64bit OS', Dual Core servers, native quad, IMC, Coherent Bus. It seems like you all want to live vicariously trough a company that would gladly leave you with a nub in place of your arm and leg.

That's kind of weird.
Click to expand...

...and I remembered AMD charging 300 USD for a X2 3800... :sarcastic: :sarcastic:

AMD's a year late on 45nm, a year late on quad core, a year late on HK/MG, a year late on "tick-tock" strategy....

As I said, AMD64 doesn't mean much to most people, as they're still using x86. Native quad cost them 0.6 billion per quarter, lowered stock, possibility of going bankrupt, and nothing else.

Time to look at the future, Baron, i mean, Christian.
 



YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR YIELD IS. NEITHER DO I. DELETED
Did you notice that?

I hope their yields are better than industry standard, Intel also.
 
Amd made a huge mistake buying ati, the concept is solid but the price was too high. AMD is only going to get back in the game with dirt low prices which they can't do or very impressive new technology which they don't have.

The future is not so bright that they have to wear shades. :pt1cable:

TC :ange:
 




Wow, I didn't see the post you quoted. I guess whoever said that wasn't here last year when I posted some sample code that everyone and their mother Googled. I wonder if they felt stupid when it turned out to be mine? I was an automation programmer in test at Micorsoft. Now I mostly do websites.
 


You're right, I don't. But I can guess, based on the data available, right?

Based on AMD's own slide, current 65nm Barcelona are yielding at 30%, maybe a little more. Then AMD came out and said, "look, we really can't make 2.5Ghz Barcelona now, but 2.0Ghz will do". After a while, AMD said, "hey, let's launch a new processor that was never on the roadmap."

Don't you think 30% yield has a little merit now?
 
Good. Hopefully they will bump up the speed by then, and fix the yield issue.

Because clock for clock, Phenom is not going to perform similarly to Core 2, while dissipating more heat.

I'm getting really tired of this hoopla and no show.
Click to expand...


DELETED. NO ONE KNOWS WHAT AMD\Intel's yields are. Any algorithm is theoretical and materials science changes the effectiveness of litho. I heard one place say that both companies sat around 75% or higher, depending on process maturity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom