x2 3600 specs

[reconviperone1]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

 

[ajfink]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

This was sort of already discussed.

The old one did happen - mostly in the Asia-Pacific region. There was a 2Ghz 256Kb of cache model, on 90nm. The new one is 1.9Ghz 512kb of cache but on 65nm.

As to the overclocking, these are probably the worst of the bunch from all the bins in AMD's first 65nm runs and would most likely OC poorly. Add to that that the first runs of AMD's 65nm process haven't overclocking any better than 90nm and you can see the problems that may arrive.

Most everyone expects overclocking and clock speed issues to lessen once AMD nails 65nm. Consider this a sort of warm-up run.

 

[BaronMatrix]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

 

[quantumsheep]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

 

[ajfink]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

They encoded rather well.

Keep in mind it will be a completely different processor from the old Gallatins, hehe. It should do pretty well all-around to increase performance.

 

[quantumsheep]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

They encoded rather well.

Keep in mind it will be a completely different processor from the old Gallatins, hehe. It should do pretty well all-around to increase performance.

I'm concentrating there on the word "Should"

 

[ajfink]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

They encoded rather well.

Keep in mind it will be a completely different processor from the old Gallatins, hehe. It should do pretty well all-around to increase performance.

I'm concentrating there on the word "Should"

Only time and benchmarks will tell,

 

[1Tanker]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

Maybe AMD just did this to show that they can still release "suprises"...sort of keep some hope burning. :?

 

[quantumsheep]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

Maybe AMD just did this to show that they can still release "suprises"...sort of keep some hope burning. :?

Or maybe they realized they had absolutely nothing competing at the low end dual core market? Intel has plenty (Pentium D9** etc) whereas AMD has only had the lower-midrange x2 3800+.

 

[BaronMatrix]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

 

[1Tanker]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

Maybe AMD just did this to show that they can still release "suprises"...sort of keep some hope burning. :?

Or maybe they realized they had absolutely nothing competing at the low end dual core market? Intel has plenty (Pentium D9** etc) whereas AMD has only had the lower-midrange x2 3800+.Yeah,but the x2 3600+ would have done a reasonable job of that at 2.0GHz with 2x256....as reviews showed it was nipping at the heals of the x2 3800+. Now i'd like to see comparison review between the 3.....
1. x2 3800+
2. x2 3600+(2.0+2x256)
3. x2 3600+(1.9+2x512).

 

[quantumsheep]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

However, L3 is shared therefore it will thrash.

Wasn't there a fair amount of speculation before Conroe came out that it would suffer major cache thrashing because of the shared L2? I highly doubt that the Thrasing in the Kuma will make for a major loss in performance.

 

[1Tanker]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

However, L3 is shared therefore it will thrash.

Wasn't there a fair amount of speculation before Conroe came out that it would suffer major cache thrashing because of the shared L2? I highly doubt that the Thrasing in the Kuma will make for a major loss in performance.No, but we can have a hell of a lot of fun teasing about it...paybacks are a bitch.

 

[qcmadness]

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

A relatively small L3 cache (e.g. 2MB) will not hide the latency much as the L2 cache size is already big enough (e.g. 512KB).

Also the speed of L2 cache is only nearly triple of that of main memory (~32GB/s vs ~13GB/s for 2.0GHz K8 system). It does not make sense for a "slow shared L3 cache" except for "core-to-core data exchange".

 

[qcmadness]

Yeah,but the x2 3600+ would have done a reasonable job of that at 2.0GHz with 2x256....as reviews showed it was nipping at the heals of the x2 3800+. Now i'd like to see comparison review between the 3.....
1. x2 3800+
2. x2 3600+(2.0+2x256)
3. x2 3600+(1.9+2x512).

I would like to see it also
But I think the performance will be in this order:
x2 3800+ > x2 3600+ (90nm) > x2 3600+ (65nm)

 

[1Tanker]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

They encoded rather well.

Keep in mind it will be a completely different processor from the old Gallatins, hehe. It should do pretty well all-around to increase performance.Wouldn't the IMC quash most of the benefits of L3, as it does with L2?

 

[ajfink]

Apparently AMD engineers found L3 advantageous, and I don't think any of us are about to argue that they would know about what works best in their chips.

I can see AMD reducing the L2 latency back to what it was and having some decent L3 cache. Add to that the increased HypterTransport links in AM2+ and I can only scratch my head at why AMD thinks their chips need so damn much high-speed memory and bandwidth.

 

[ajfink]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

They encoded rather well.

Keep in mind it will be a completely different processor from the old Gallatins, hehe. It should do pretty well all-around to increase performance.Wouldn't the IMC quash most of the benefits of L3, as it does with L2?

I think it will generally reduce the need for accessing RAM.

 

[qcmadness]

Apparently AMD engineers found L3 advantageous, and I don't think any of us are about to argue that they would know about what works best in their chips.

I can see AMD reducing the L2 latency back to what it was and having some decent L3 cache. Add to that the increased HypterTransport links in AM2+ and I can only scratch my head at why AMD thinks their chips need so damn much high-speed memory and bandwidth.

Opteron series shine not only by its high computing power in single chip, but also with the high chip-to-chip bandwidth.

I have heard that HTT 1.0 for 8-way Opterons is now saturated. With quad-core K8L, I think the bandwidth is to be raised again.

 

[ajfink]

Apparently AMD engineers found L3 advantageous, and I don't think any of us are about to argue that they would know about what works best in their chips.

I can see AMD reducing the L2 latency back to what it was and having some decent L3 cache. Add to that the increased HypterTransport links in AM2+ and I can only scratch my head at why AMD thinks their chips need so damn much high-speed memory and bandwidth.

Opteron series shine not only by its high computing power in single chip, but also with the high chip-to-chip bandwidth.

I have heard that HTT 1.0 for 8-way Opterons is now saturated. With quad-core K8L, I think the bandwidth is to be raised again.

Valid point - at 8S I can see problems.

 

[BaronMatrix]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

However, L3 is shared therefore it will thrash.


Kind of like C2Q?

 

[evilr00t]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

However, L3 is shared therefore it will thrash.


Kind of like C2Q?
Where can I get a C2Q with L3 cache?

 

[ajfink]

The new specs for the athlon x2 3600 are great, i remember it was initially going to be 2ghz and 2x 256 cache, i posted that they should have made it 1.8ghz with 2x 512 cache, and they released at at 1.9ghz with 2x 512 cache at 65mm, thats gonna be a hell of a overclocker(if your into that sort of thing). Good job amd

I can't wait to see the Kuma version with Shared L3.

What would an L3 cache bring to the table in terms of performance? I remember the old Gallatin P4 had an L3 Cache and it didn't bring about any real performance increases.

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

However, L3 is shared therefore it will thrash.


Kind of like C2Q?
Where can I get a C2Q with L3 cache?

Yeah it would be great for hacking some Gibsons.

 

[BaronMatrix]

Well, I didn't want to list all of the improvements Kuma will bring but L3 will help latency issues tremendously. The latency between L2 and L3 will be less than between L2 and main memory.

It will be interesting to see how these OC. I think they will at least get to 2.6GHz with little added voltage. The 5000+ gets to 3GHz and the lower clocked X2s tend to clock as high proportionately.

A relatively small L3 cache (e.g. 2MB) will not hide the latency much as the L2 cache size is already big enough (e.g. 512KB).

Also the speed of L2 cache is only nearly triple of that of main memory (~32GB/s vs ~13GB/s for 2.0GHz K8 system). It does not make sense for a "slow shared L3 cache" except for "core-to-core data exchange".


There are two and four core models, aren't there? L3 is one of the things that makes 8+ sockets more cache coherent. Shared L3 means they will optimize the prefetch similar to the way C2D does to alleviate calls to main memory. We don't yet have specs on the L3 latency so it's impossible to say. The ZRAM initiative did receive a speed bump and drop to 65nm.


AMD was wise to buy into this tech and it should show real improvements in L3 speed and density while being very power efficient.

 

[reconviperone1]

Wasnt famaliar with kuma, just googled it, very impressive, hope they can deliver on time.