backtop


Print 22 comment(s) - last by maddoctor.. on Sep 3 at 1:32 AM


AMD has managed to squeeze 6 cores operating at 2.1+ GHz out of a mere 40 watts of power, an industry leading performance. The new processors, just introduced, will take on Intel's more power hungry six-core Dunningtons and AMD's other higher power six-core designs. Likely in a different price bracket, but also marginally a competitor is Intel's "Gainestown", a Nehalem-based four core Xeon. AMD promises it will debut a new six-core Opteron architecture by next year, though.  (Source: IT News Online)
AMD remains a tough competitor to Intel in the server market

While Intel has dominated AMD in the consumer CPU market, thanks to its Conroe, Penryn, and Nehalem multi-core architectures, AMD has remained quite competitive in the server market.  AMD's has been pricing its Opterons competitively with Intel's Xeon server processors.

Intel still enjoyed the upper hand, though, thanks to Dunnington -- its 7400 series of six-core Xeon processors.  These low power processors brought improved power performance and are built on a 45 nm process.  However, they were based on the Penryn architecture and thus lacked Nehalem's hyperthreading and DDR3 support, outstanding features of Intel's desktop Nehalem-based i7 processors.

Now AMD has moved to cut Intel's advantage, releasing a low power edition of its own six-core 45 nm processors.  Previous six-core Opterons (developed under the codename "Istanbul") have weighed in at 75 W for the ACP, while the new processors consume a mere 40 W.  TDP of the new processor is estimated to be approximately 65 W.  The processors beat Intel's Xeons in power consumption, while matching them in pure clock speed.  Processors clocked at 1.8 GHz (Opteron 2419 EE) are set to launch.

Pricing and availability of this new model has not been officially announced yet.

The Istanbul architecture does trail the Dunnington Xeons in pure memory speed, with an 800 MHz clock, versus memory speeds of up to 1066 MHz on Dunnington.  However, it makes up for this somewhat with its HyperTransport Assist technology and HyperTransport 3.0 technologies, which speed up data transfer from memory.

The processors are drop in replacements for the four-core Shanghai processors, released late last year.  The new six-core processors actually use less power than the four core processor, and improve per-watt performance by a reported 31 percent.  This helps ease the financial pain of upgrading, by negating the need to upgrade to a new power supply to add more processing cores.

AMD hints that more good things are in store.  AMD Server/Workstation Product Marketing Manager Andy Parma says that next year the company will unleash Lisbon six-core processors, which he says will feature architectural improvements, and even lower power consumption -- delivering six cores at less than 40 watts. 

Of course, these processors will feature tough competition from likely Nehalem-based Intel Xeons codenamed Gainestown which debuted earlier this year.  Eight-core (16 threaded) Xeons are also reportedly on the way and may be landing before the end of the year, albeit at likely a lofty price.  Expect Intel to price Dunnington processors competitively to counter the new Istanbul processors as well.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Wrong article
By micksh on 9/1/2009 10:12:10 AM , Rating: 4
Opteron 2373 EE and Opteron 2377 EE were announced in April and actually have 4 (four) cores.

The 6 core CPU that author had in mind when writing this article is Opteron 2419 EE. It has much lower, 1.8 GHz speed and 40 Watt is ACP, not TDP. Will cost $989 in quantities of 1000.




RE: Wrong article
By LTG on 9/1/2009 10:33:07 AM , Rating: 4
So let's summarize here:

1) Article wrong, chip maxes out at only 1.8Ghz
2) Headline leaves out it's 65w TDP
3) Intel already has chips that would beat it's performance/watt

The Nehalem Xeon L5520 runs at 2.26GHz at only 60w TDP, and would outperform the brand new AMD product. Especially if you look at the cripped memory clock in the AMD.

AMD FTL?


RE: Wrong article
By Belard on 9/1/2009 12:48:08 PM , Rating: 2
I like AMD CPUs and chipsets and GPUs...

Their Server class CPUs have been top notch and still do very well.

But this? Whats the point of buying a SLOW 6core CPU? Yeah, power usage is important... but it has to do the work too.

Its already been shown that Intels Quads are faster and use less power than AMD's 6-core CPUS... So now they have the power down to an acceptable level, the slow CPU is even slower?

Sorry AMD... not there yet, but you've gotten better.


RE: Wrong article
By flipmode on 9/1/2009 4:18:23 PM , Rating: 4
Sometimes you need more cores rather than more performance per core, as in you can handle more lightweight tasks at the same time, and within a pretty darn small power envelope.

Dunno, just a thought. Cloud computing services don't seem to need that much horsepower, but they will need a lot of threads.


RE: Wrong article
By iocedmyself on 9/2/2009 11:58:25 PM , Rating: 2
Yes it has been shown that intel quads perform better than the 6 core amd chips because the software only ends up addressing four cores. Though i don't imagine anyone running a high density server grid for things such as web services comprised of single socket boards....and if anyone thinks that likely..well then their isn't much point in trying to convince you otherwise. Point being that when you are running the istanbuls in a multi socket board (two, four or eight way) performance picks up considerably as those extra cores are addressed probably because the software sees it as a trio of quads rather than a trio of duals.

Last i checked (and i admit i haven't paid close attention to the industry news the past 6-8 weeks) Intel's i7 based server chips are limited to two-way configs (ie two socket boards). Where as AMD already has 2-4 and 8 way socket boards. hmmm i wonder which would fare better, 8 xeon cores....or 48 AMD cores...

well shucks that kind of math is just too dang ol' hard for me....


RE: Wrong article
By pwnsweet on 9/1/2009 10:20:19 PM , Rating: 2
With all the mistakes, what did you expect? It's a Jason Mick article dude.


RE: Wrong article
By johnsonx on 9/1/2009 10:53:28 AM , Rating: 4
This is the sort of stuff I'm talking about with my constant griping about Mick. Even something so simple as this he can't get right.


ACP V.S. TDP
By FireSnake on 9/1/2009 7:12:01 AM , Rating: 3
But, it is 65W TDP.

Still, a sweet baby ;)

AMD needs this, because (If sources don't lie) they will be late to 32nm.




RE: ACP V.S. TDP
By HotFoot on 9/1/2009 10:05:49 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I think AMD needs to drop the sour-grapes ACP crap. Intel chips haven't been hitting their TDP rating at average loading since the P4 days.

Two wrongs don't make a right and at this point AMD is eroding their credibility.


Marketing Manager?
By StraightCashHomey on 9/1/2009 8:04:17 AM , Rating: 2
AMD Server/Workstation Product Marketing Manager Andy Parma

They have one of those?




RE: Marketing Manager?
By rippleyaliens on 9/1/2009 9:24:13 AM , Rating: 2
SWEET AMD!! yah.. Oh wait.. Intel is at the BTDT (been there done that) stage.. Come on AMD, come STRONGG!!!!!!!!!!!!


RE: Marketing Manager?
By maevinj on 9/1/09, Rating: 0
One of these...
By Amiga500 on 9/1/2009 11:08:08 AM , Rating: 4
Comprises half of a 12 core Magny-Cours CPU that is due out shortly.

They had to get the power envelope down to 45W/65W (whatever way you look at it) for the larger chip to have any chance of staying within existing envelopes (75W/105W).




I will keep on hoping.
By William Gaatjes on 9/1/2009 3:42:47 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if this is the result of cherry picking or the result of process maturity. If it is the latter, i would be happy if they would use the process to produce a 5Watt low power athlon64 core. Couple it with a good performance/ energy efficiƫnt chipset and an x86 netbook/ entry notebook/tablet performer is born. A direct competitor for the Atom.




RE: I will keep on hoping.
By karielash on 9/2/2009 7:47:31 AM , Rating: 2
AMD Manufacturing process tends to provide ongoing improvements throughout the lifecycle of it's CPU's providing incremental improvements in the same architecture, so it is almost certainly likely to be due to improvements in process.


Got Favour from Intel?
By Muralidharan001 on 9/1/2009 6:56:35 PM , Rating: 2
This article implies to me that the author wants Intel to have Monopoly in every part and he has little hatred to AMD. AMD is trying to keep their business going and only one challenges Intel's monopoly(all markets).I never used AMD products thanx to AMD aggressive pricing that makes Intel price cuts.




RE: Got Favour from Intel?
By maddoctor on 9/3/2009 1:32:48 AM , Rating: 2
Intel fates is to be the ruler in technology. Don't tell anything about AMD, because they will be doomed.


Heats up?
By splint on 9/1/2009 2:43:56 PM , Rating: 2
For a 40W part, "Heats Up" is probably a bad choice if words...




TDP
By Army1156 on 9/1/2009 3:12:06 PM , Rating: 2
There's an issue with everybody's logic here; TDP numbers between AMD and Intel are calculated with different methodologies, and are thus not valid for comparison.

http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3606&p=2




By smilingcrow on 9/1/2009 3:00:08 PM , Rating: 5
But what's the goddam TDP of dem sneakers!


By twhittet on 9/1/2009 4:28:47 PM , Rating: 4
It doesn't matter what the TDP is - Nike and Adidas use different methods and therefore their TDP cannot be compared.


"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki