backtop


Print 78 comment(s) - last by Haul.. on Jul 14 at 4:24 AM


AMD July 2006 roadmap

AMD's old 2006 roadmap
New Athlon 64 FX, X2 and Semprons

DailyTech has come across AMD’s short-term processor roadmap for Athlon and Sempron processors. The roadmap only goes as far as Q3’07 but does reveal a few upcoming products. AMD’s Athlon 64 FX lineup will get a few speed bumps within the next few months. The first speed bump will come next quarter in the form of the Athlon 64 FX-64. This part will be a Socket AM2 part and have a 125-watt TDP. It will presumably have a 3 GHz clock speed, as AMD likes to bump the clock speed of the Athlon 64 FX lineup in 200 MHz increments. The Athlon 64 FX-64 will be AMD’s desktop flagship processor until Q3’07 when the Athlon 64 FX-66 arrives. This part will have a 125-watt TDP as well and presumably be clocked at 3.2 GHz unless AMD has some other trick. It will be based on the 90nm Windsor core and not the upcoming 65nm Brisbane core.

Slotted right below the Athlon 64 FX lineup will be a couple new Athlon 64 X2 processors -- many of the old 2x1MB L2 cache processors have been removed. On the upper end of the Athlon 64 X2 lineup is the upcoming Athlon 64 X2 5200+. It’s expected to arrive this quarter and replace the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ as AMD’s second fastest processor clocked at 2.6 GHz with 2x1MB of L2 cache. Athlon 64 X2 5200+ processors will only be available in 65-watt energy efficient models. The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ will be positioned as a mainstream part with the arrival of the Athlon 64 X2 5200+. The first quarter of 2007 will bring the first speed bump to AMD’s Socket AM2 produce lineup. This will come in the form of the 2.8 GHz Athlon 64 X2 5400+ and 5600+ models. The difference between the 5400+ and 5600+ models will be cache sizes, with the 5400+ coming with 2x512KB while the 5600+ has 2x1MB of L2 cache. Both models will have a TDP of 89-watts.  This is slightly unusual as AMD has been aggressively EOL'ing the 2x1MB parts.

Brisbane Athlon 64 X2 processors will slowly arrive in 2007 starting with the lower end models. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 4200+ and 4600+ will be the first Athlon 64 X2 products to be switched over to AMD’s 65nm Fab process in Q1’07. Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and 5200+ models will switch over to the 65nm processor in Q2’07 followed by 5400+ in Q3’07. All Brisbane based products will have a 65-watt TDP.

The AMD Sempron roadmap is pretty straightforward with the exception of a new target segment and 65nm Sempron. AMD is expected to target a new "Ultra Value" product segment with the revival of the Sempron 2800+ sometime this quarter. It’s unsure where the Ultra Value product segment sits price-wise but expect Ultra Value systems based on Sempron processors to fall south of the $500.

Lastly AMD is expected to move Sempron processors over to a 65nm Fab process around Q2’07. Sempron 4000+, 3800+, 3600+, 3500+ and 3400+ models will move over to AMD’s 65nm process first. Unlike the Athlon 64 X2 65nm move, AMD will have some overlap with 90nm and 65nm Sempron production. A new Sempron 4200+ is expected to launch in Q3’07 too.

AMD's previous roadmap is still available on DailyTech.


Comments     Threshold


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

uhm
By lamplamp on 7/6/2006 3:16:15 PM , Rating: 2
wheres K8L?




RE: uhm
By Knish on 7/6/2006 3:20:01 PM , Rating: 2
Dailytech keeps saying Q407 or 2008, and the rest of the world keeps saying the Brisbane is K8L. Considering K8L is going to use a new socket, I find it hard to beleive AMD would release AM3 in December after *just* releasing AM2.


RE: uhm
By Regs on 7/6/2006 3:42:16 PM , Rating: 2
AM2 has short term goals written all over it.


RE: uhm
By Tsuwamono on 7/6/2006 3:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
AM2 mobos work with AM3 processors though, so its not really short term.. its more like going from a A64 3000+ to a A64 3200+ on the same mobo.. its like a performance jump with chips. no difference


RE: uhm
By Regs on 7/6/2006 5:20:05 PM , Rating: 4
The jump to DDR2 support was strictly a short term goal. For market values and distinction. AM3 is the long term goal.


RE: uhm
By Griswold on 7/6/2006 3:45:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Considering K8L is going to use a new socket


That looks more and more like a false assumption if you consider what Henri Richard said in a digitimes interview and the last news bit about AM3.


RE: uhm
By Googer on 7/11/2006 2:50:26 AM , Rating: 2
The Interview with Henri Richard is four parts, I could only find part two.

http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/MailHome.asp?dat...


RE: uhm
By saratoga on 7/6/2006 3:55:00 PM , Rating: 4
Yeah theres no way the K8L is going to be coming out this winter. AMD will have enough trouble getting their 65nm production up and running smoothly, no way they'll want to launch a brand new core concurrently. They'll do their usual trick of launchng an older generation part to test out production, and then intro the new core when everything is working.

My guess is Summer/Fall 07 at the earliest.


RE: uhm
By JackPack on 7/6/2006 7:05:54 PM , Rating: 3
Brisbane is not K8L. Rev. G is just a dumb shrink.

It's already been confirmed by AMD in the Impress Watch interview with Dirk Meyer.

But there's always uninformed people like Knish running around here.


RE: uhm
By Viditor on 7/7/2006 4:04:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's already been confirmed by AMD in the Impress Watch interview with Dirk Meyer

Actually, it hasn't...if you read the original Japanese, it says that the Next Generation Architecture will be in 2008...but that is quite probably K10 (K8L is a modification of current architecture, not new architecture).


RE: uhm
By JackPack on 7/7/2006 4:30:05 AM , Rating: 2
I've read the original Japanese.

Rev. G = virtually no change

So K8L is not "next gen"? If so, what was it they revealed in May when they called it their Next Generation Processor Technology?


RE: uhm
By Viditor on 7/7/2006 5:23:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So K8L is not "next gen"? If so, what was it they revealed in May when they called it their Next Generation Processor Technology?

My bad...I hadn't noticed that AMD has changed the language about K8L. A few months ago, Dirk Meyer was saying that they have 2 upcoming releases...the first was to be a rebuild of current technology (K8L), the second was a new architecture from the ground up (K10).
If you look at the June PR, the timeling is still fairly evident.

From the June 1st release...
"AMD’s next-generation architecture for servers, workstations and desktops is planned to debut in mid-2007, and is expected to extend AMD’s leadership in platform performance-per-watt as well as its leadership in critical enterprise application performance. Products will include a quad-core design for servers, workstations and high-end desktops, and a dual-core design intended for mainstream desktop markets. These next generation processors will be built using AMD’s advanced 65nm Silicon-on-Insulator process, and include a broad range of functionality and micro-architectural improvements, including a unique new ability to dynamically alter the frequency of each core on the chip to match application workloads and thereby reduce overall power consumption. As a result, AMD expects to increase the performance-per-watt of today’s AMD Opteron™ processor-powered servers by approximately 60 percent through 2007, and by approximately 150 percent through 2008"
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoo...

The timeline appears to be
1. Servers/Workstation - 1st K8L Quad core at mid-year 2007
2. Desktop - K8L Dual and Quad core by mid-year 2007
3. Server K10? Quad Core - 2008 (150% improvement on perf/watt)

It's very hard to understand how AMD has released a PR in June on the K8L, but none of the "leaked" roadmaps seem to coincide with what AMD is saying...
Is AMD lying? Are the "leaked" roadmaps wrong? One of those must seem to be true...


RE: uhm
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:27:21 AM , Rating: 2
We will have to see, this looks to be the roadmap that I thought would happen the desktop is not going to utilize K8L technology till 2008 from the looks of things, with a launch of K8L in Servers in Mid 2007. Remember K8 itself debuted on Servers much earlier then it did on the desktop.

The way they worded it is that the architecture will be released in Mid 2007, but with that wording doesn't say that it will be in all 3 sectors at once. It could easily jsut be limited to Servers at first, then scaled down to Desktop later.


RE: uhm
By Viditor on 7/8/2006 8:22:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The way they worded it is that the architecture will be released in Mid 2007, but with that wording doesn't say that it will be in all 3 sectors at once

I think they were more specific than that...

"AMD’s next-generation architecture for servers, workstations and desktops is planned to debut in mid-2007"

But,

"AMD’s new mobile design is planned for the second half of 2007"


RE: uhm
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 2:25:06 PM , Rating: 2
"AMD’s next-generation architecture for servers, workstations and desktops is planned to debut in mid-2007"

Yes that statement is exactly what I mean, obviously AMD will have 1 Unified architecture for both desktops and servers,, but all that says is that it will be debuing in Mid 2007, but not in both intially necessarily..



RE: uhm
By Viditor on 7/9/2006 1:09:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
obviously AMD will have 1 Unified architecture for both desktops and servers,, but all that says is that it will be debuing in Mid 2007, but not in both intially necessarily..

I understand your point, and there's really no way for us to know either way...
It just seems to me that by splitting up the mobile sector release in H2 2007 from the servers, workstations and desktops, it appears that the first 3 platforms will be released mid 2007.

Either way, it doesn't seem to coincide with the "roadmaps" we've been seeing.


RE: uhm
By Viditor on 7/7/2006 4:02:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD will have enough trouble getting their 65nm production up and running smoothly

I doubt that...they've been producing ES parts on 65nm since last October, and they have already told shareholders that they will be launching 65nm at fully mature yields.


RE: uhm
By Phynaz on 7/6/2006 3:38:26 PM , Rating: 2
A year away.


RE: uhm
By NextGenGamer2005 on 7/6/2006 4:06:16 PM , Rating: 3
I think most of you are confused: K8L, at least in 2007, is NOT for desktops. Sorry, but it just isn't. K8L will make its appearence as the second-generation, 65-nm, quad-core Socket F Opteron in the 2H 2007 (the first-gen 65-nm quad-core is supposed to be out in Q1 2007). Socket AM2 will not see any quad-core or any K8L-derived processors in 2007. That's why the AMD prez recently said desktops would be receiving a new architecutre in 2008; he is referring to the same K8L that will be in used in the Opteron lineup in 2007.

One more thing: I highly doubt AMD would release a 3.20GHz Athlon 64 FX-66 on the current 90-nm process. This has got to be a 65-nm product. And because of that, I have a hard time believing any of the other releases/details as well.


RE: uhm
By Tom Tom on 7/6/2006 10:59:20 PM , Rating: 2
Very impressive deductions. If these roadmaps are authentic my take is that AMD is reserving all thier initial 65nm capacity for the big Os. It makes sense to go after the high margin server market especially when Intels stuffing the desktop and notebook channels like crazy tryin to get rid of the old shiz. Also I think were gettin pretty presumptuous about the supposed levels of performance from Intels new parts. Ive been reading some conflicting reports on thier performance levels allready. The NDAs havent even expired yet.


RE: uhm
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:29:49 AM , Rating: 2
I think that an FX-66 on the 90nm process would be like within the realm of possibility but for the timeframe it doesn't look likely.

This looks like exactly what went on with the Winchester transistion, the new node of production for lowe end only, and a slow and gradual rampup to the highend over time.


RE: uhm
By maverick502 on 7/6/2006 3:44:23 PM , Rating: 2
In one whole year all we are going to see is an increase of 400MHz in processor speed...seems like things are really slowing down.


RE: uhm
By saratoga on 7/6/2006 3:55:45 PM , Rating: 3
Only if you won't consider Intel :)

Tough time ahead for AMD I guess.


AMD = Intel in Prescott days?
By Niv KA on 7/6/2006 5:21:24 PM , Rating: 2
Is it just me or is the AMD A-FX now the new Intel Prescott P4s?

Worse performance and more heat... Prescotts of the future!

All we need now is 80% marketshare for AMD


RE: AMD = Intel in Prescott days?
By ZmaxDP on 7/6/2006 10:58:10 PM , Rating: 2
Not exactly,

It is true to say that these new FX chips will have the highest TDP out of Intel's and AMD's CPUs for a while (Once Intel really does stop selling Pentium 4s and Pentium Ds).

However, AMD has much lower TDP processors available that are their mainstream processors. The FX line is for a very small part of their sales and those people are more than aware of the TDP and the associated concerns.

Also, AMD has been innovating in this area for a long time and Intel has finally caught up, largely due to pressure from AMD. Hopefully we're seeing the beginnings of a cycle similar to what happens in the discrete graphics area. Each company will outperform the other when they release their new architecture, and in between new architectures they will have incremental improvements like AM2 is for AMD. Not a major performance boost, but a platform improvement.

I don't think it is quite fair to call the FX the next Prescott as it was the higher performer at lower TDP for a while. It is just an aging processor architecture for a small market segment that is nearing the end of its lifespan. Prescott was never really a better performer or a lower TDP part. It has always been flawed and Intel's 80% market share made it a best seller anyway.

Just trying to keep things in perspective!


RE: uhm
By Googer on 7/11/2006 2:46:23 AM , Rating: 2
3.2 on 90nm????
By toyota on 7/6/2006 6:07:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD’s desktop flagship processor until Q3’07 when the Athlon 64 FX-66 arrives. This part will have a 125-watt TDP as well and presumably be clocked at 3.2 GHz. It will be based on the 90nm Windsor core and not the upcoming 65nm Brisbane core.


how in the hell will they get 3.2 out of 90nm?? i thought most fx cpus could barely oc to 3.0.




RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Khenglish on 7/6/2006 8:23:41 PM , Rating: 2
With good cooling, like the tower 120 the fx62s consistantly are getting to around 3250mHz. (go to Xtremesystems) They need a voltage increase after 3gHz, and the stock cooling can't handle that.

It looks like AMD is screwed overall. 2.4gHz Conroes outperform the fx62, and they overclock far beyond what the fx62 can reach. What happened to the boasts that AMD's 65nm process would bring a 40% transistor performance (clockspeed) increase?


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By animedude on 7/6/2006 11:32:56 PM , Rating: 2
Unless Intel is releasing a lot of conroe, it wouldn't screw AMD. Many articles stated that Intel is only accounting the NGMA 20% of their supply until the end of the year.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By JackPack on 7/7/2006 4:07:00 AM , Rating: 2
Except Intel is much larger than AMD.

20% of the 40 million processors Intel ships per quarter is quite a lot from AMD's POV.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Viditor on 7/9/2006 8:06:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
20% of the 40 million processors Intel ships per quarter is quite a lot from AMD's POV

It isn't 20% of all their processors...it's up to 20% of just their mid-high end desktop processors (P4s and PDs, not Celerons). That's a very small percentage of Intel's shipments.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Viditor on 7/9/2006 8:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
BTW...I should add that currently AMD ships more chips in this segment than Intel does.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By coldpower27 on 7/9/2006 8:20:45 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm interesting if true, where did you acquire this information, and a direct link please..

You talking AMD ships more desktop processors then Intel I seriously doubt that. Though it would depend what exactly you mean by "segement"


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Viditor on 7/9/2006 8:47:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You talking AMD ships more desktop processors then Intel I seriously doubt that. Though it would depend what exactly you mean by "segement"

You got it in one...Intel ships a massive number of Celerons (they are the business platform of choice) and mobiles (still ~80+% of the market), and they even ship a large number of PDs/P4s for servers (they do very well in the low-end server realm thanks to Dell). But, for mid-high end desktops and mid-high end servers, AMD has been creaming them.
So overall desktops still belong to Intel (thanks to Celeron) by a large margin, but the mid-high end is close to 60% AMD...

I will do what I can about a link tonight (I'm on Australian Eastern time)...


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By coldpower27 on 7/9/2006 9:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm, interesting points, though I am going to have to remain skeptical on this until you provide satisfactory documentation on where your pulling these figures from.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Griswold on 7/7/2006 5:15:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What happened to the boasts that AMD's 65nm process would bring a 40% transistor performance (clockspeed) increase?


If you look really careful at that roadmap, you'll see that these FX' are not 65nm parts. From a profit PoV, it doesnt make sense starting with 65nm FX parts instead of much higher low to mid range volumes. There is little doubt that these initial 65nm mainstream parts will easily overclock to 90nm FX clockspeeds, if thats really what you want.

On a side note, increased "transistor performance" doesnt translate 100% to clock speed.



RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Viditor on 7/9/2006 8:10:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
how in the hell will they get 3.2 out of 90nm??

AMD has a new process for silicon straining that reduces power requirements near 40%.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Questar on 7/10/2006 8:49:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD has a new process for silicon straining that reduces power requirements near 40%.


Compared to non-strained silicon. They didn't say how it compares to their current process.

BTW, it's an IBM process, not AMD.


RE: 3.2 on 90nm????
By Viditor on 7/11/2006 4:03:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Compared to non-strained silicon. They didn't say how it compares to their current process

They did actually...and btw it's a joint development and not and IBM only process. It was developed by both AMD and IBM engineers at East Fishkill, and presented at the IEEE meeting by AMD.


65 nm for mainstream makes sense
By fxyefx on 7/6/2006 5:28:28 PM , Rating: 2
When I first saw the roadmap, I thought, “wait… that doesn’t make any sense; why wouldn’t AMD start the migration to 65 nm on their upper end models, as they can barely squeeze anymore performance out of 90 nm?” It looks like AMD is only going to manage to squeeze out a tiny performance increase for the whole year of 2007. It makes a lot of sense to start 65 nm chips in the mainstream, though: this is by far the largest volume market, and popping the chips out at 65 nm will allow them to cut prices significantly. AMD will have to resort to what they did back with the Athlon XP – focus solely on offering better performance at similar price points, without being able to keep the performance crown.




RE: 65 nm for mainstream makes sense
By m666guy on 7/6/2006 6:59:46 PM , Rating: 2
They aren't converting their flagship products because their 65nm production wont be as mature and they don't want to be faced with poor yields because expectations for the percentage of chips that can do x.xghz might not be met. It is similar to what ati did with the x850 series. Their were several x800's that used the 110nm process but their flagship parts used the older more mature 130nm process.


RE: 65 nm for mainstream makes sense
By Viditor on 7/7/2006 3:57:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
They aren't converting their flagship products because their 65nm production wont be as mature and they don't want to be faced with poor yields

AMD is launching their 65nm at already mature yields (this was noted at the Conference Call last quarter).


RE: 65 nm for mainstream makes sense
By Phynaz on 7/7/2006 9:50:50 AM , Rating: 3
Of course that depends on the definition of the terms "launch" and "mature".

Wall Street is saying AMD is having problems at 65nm, and that's why AMD stock has taken a pouning - No 65nm means they can't compete with Intel on price and still make a profit.


RE: 65 nm for mainstream makes sense
By Viditor on 7/10/2006 12:35:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Wall Street is saying AMD is having problems at 65nm, and that's why AMD stock has taken a pouning

Ummm...I have yet to read a single analyst that syas that, could you find a link please?
Every analyst I have read (or spoken to) has said that they are expecting 65nm to be excellent.


RE: 65 nm for mainstream makes sense
By Phynaz on 7/10/2006 12:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have yet to read a single analyst that syas that, could you find a link please?


Private reseach reports from a full service invenstment house. Not stuff that's published on the web.


By Viditor on 7/11/2006 3:59:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Private reseach reports from a full service invenstment house. Not stuff that's published on the web

I get about 12 of these...not one of them has been even slightly worried about AMD's 65nm. Which investment house?


By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:40:02 AM , Rating: 2
You also have to remember this matches what AMD did with the 90nm transition, so it makes alot of sense doing it this way.

High volume parts transistion first, and overtime ramp and surpass the clockspeed of 90nm parts, eventually.


By Doormat on 7/6/2006 8:55:02 PM , Rating: 2
I thought it looked odd too - at first I thought AMD is having problems with 65nm (maybe they are, who knows). But when you factor in Dell and the volumes they will require, it makes sense to go 65nm from the bottom up (as thats how the volume is) instead of top down. They wont worry about performance that much (I'm inclined to think after the past year, Intel will be more worried about catching its collective breath and moving ahead at a reasonable pace than putting the screws to AMD in terms of performance).


35W Devices???
By kirbalo on 7/6/2006 5:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
Uh...where did the 35W TDP 3500+ SC and 3800+ DC disappear to???




RE: 35W Devices???
By zrrrp on 7/6/2006 7:25:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Uh...where did the 35W TDP 3500+ SC and 3800+ DC disappear to???


Those are SFF parts, not "performance" or "mainstream" parts, which is what this roadmap covers. Check the leftmost column. :)



RE: 35W Devices???
By kirbalo on 7/6/2006 8:04:33 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I would agree, but they have been talking all along about 3 different TDP's, 89W, 65W, and 35W...for those two parts, in 90nm...

The 62W TDP seems to have appeared in later news...


RE: 35W Devices???
By animedude on 7/6/2006 11:27:26 PM , Rating: 2
I saw 35W parts available in Akihabara, Japan.


5200 = 89 or 65w ?
By jak3676 on 7/7/2006 2:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
Just noticed that 5200+ turnes in to a 89w TDP part in Q3 07. It's listed as 65w TDP everywhere else


RE: 5200 = 89 or 65w ?
By coldpower27 on 7/9/2006 9:56:35 PM , Rating: 2

Well you got to understand AMD just bins for lower voltage on the 90nm parts to achieve lower TDP, by then production of 65nm processors of Brisbane cores can easily tkae the place of the 90nm 65W TDP part at their standard voltage.

This way AMD can get better yields on older 90nm cores and target lower price points by NOT having to bin for such low voltage.


RE: 35W Devices???
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:37:38 AM , Rating: 2

62W has always been available for Athlon 64's, there Low Power Parts are 35W.

For the Athlno 64x2 they get these TDP envelopes on AM2, 125W for the FX, 89W for the high performance parts, 65W for mainstream, and 35W for low power parts.


something not right here
By johnsonx on 7/7/2006 12:39:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
On the upper end of the Athlon 64 X2 lineup is the upcoming Athlon 64 X2 5200+. It’s expected to arrive this quarter and replace the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ as AMD’s second fastest processor clocked at 2.6 GHz with 2x512KB of L2 cache. Athlon 64 X2 5200+ processors will only be available in 65-watt energy efficient models. The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ will be positioned as a mainstream part with the arrival of the Athlon 64 X2 5200+.


The 5000+ is already 2.6Ghz and 2x512k of cache. The way that's worded, it implies the 5200 is also 2.6Ghz with 2x512k cache; thus how would it earn a 5200+ rating? Either way, we're still in the dark about what the 5200+ will be. By AMD's numbering history a 5200+ would be 2.6Ghz w/2x1mb cache, but AMD just got done yanking all the 2x1Mb cache cpu's. I suppose it could be 2.8Ghz w/2x512k cache, but that would previously have been numbered 5400+ and would also be almost too close to the uber-expensive FX-62. Of course the FX-64 is coming soon after the 5200+, so maybe that's ok.

DT, any clarification on what the 5200's attributes will be?




RE: something not right here
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:48:50 AM , Rating: 2
This could work, with the price of the 5000+ at 401US after the price drops, then 5200+ will be over 500US, this is fine for a 2x1MB part as AMD has been selling 2x1MB cores at this level for sometime now.

They just yanked all the 2x1MB parts for prices below 400US.


RE: something not right here
By Anh Huynh on 7/8/2006 2:05:15 AM , Rating: 2
Its 2x1MB


RE: something not right here
By MacGuffin on 7/8/2006 4:34:59 PM , Rating: 2
I just noticed that Newegg has the 4000+, 4400+ & 4800+ CPUs back in stock. I thought AMD was 'scrapping 2x1MB' CPUs a few weeks ago when it asked retailers to pull them off their listings. Now that these CPUs are back in retail, I guess 2x1MB isn't gonna die after all. So this settles the 5200+ argument I started. It will be 2.6GHz with 2x1MB L2.


RE: something not right here
By johnsonx on 7/9/2006 7:53:27 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure those lower model 2x1Mb cache CPUs are a "get'em while they last" deal. All of AMD's roadmaps still say those are gone. I think last order date for those was 6/28/06, so it's quite reasonable that NewEgg would still be able to get some.


uh...
By Motley on 7/6/2006 3:53:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
On the upper end of the Athlon 64 X2 lineup is the upcoming Athlon 64 X2 5200+. It’s expected to arrive this quarter and replace the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ as AMD’s second fastest processor clocked at 2.6 GHz with 2x1MB of L2 cache.


Maybe they should work on first releasing the Athlon 64 X2 5000+. According to their "Roadmap", it was supposed to be released in Q2, 2006, but we're already in Q3.




RE: uh...
By m666guy on 7/6/2006 4:52:56 PM , Rating: 2
it was launched with am2 it is a 2.6ghz 512kb*2 core.


RE: uh...
By MacGuffin on 7/7/2006 5:14:42 AM , Rating: 2
I just searched on PriceGrabber:
AMD AM2 4200+ = 35 Sellers
AMD AM2 4600+ = 26 Sellers
AMD AM2 5000+ = 1 Seller...and not even in Stock. (Monarch)

The 5000+ is like the new 7800GTX 512MB ;-)


bad for customer
By trivik12 on 7/6/2006 5:37:58 PM , Rating: 2
I hope this roadmap is way off the mark. Else 2007 would be least interesting from a customer perspective. If AMD has only 3.2ghz 90nm as its flagship desktop proc. Intel need not releasing anything more than Core 2 duo x6800. if prices stay flat then customers lose the most.

I am sure AMD would release something more than 4x4 to compete against kentsfield.Otherwise they have basically given up high end desktop segment.




RE: bad for customer
By Griswold on 7/7/2006 5:09:54 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, for the tiny segment of high performance enthusiasts. Thats not where the candy is though.

Trees still grow from the bottom up. :)


RE: bad for customer
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:43:27 AM , Rating: 2

This isn't so bad, Intel is releasing the X6900 in Q4 2006, which will have 3.2GHZ as well.

In addition we will probably get Kentsfield at 1 grade down, 2.93GHZ most likely, in Q1 2007.

It hard to say what Intel will do, further on then that, will they start shifting Quad Core to upper performanc variants? Will they release a few parts on 1.33GHZ FSB..


AMD
By rqle on 7/6/2006 5:49:50 PM , Rating: 3
I like AMD more when they were under 20% market share.

256k X2 = Half ass-althlon or Super Sempron? feels more like half empty to me. =(
Sucks for overclocker who buys normal athlon x2 instead of FX to overclock, we now have to reach insane level to match our previous s939.




RE: AMD
By Anh Huynh on 7/6/2006 7:28:11 PM , Rating: 2
Yields will theoretically improve over time.


If Brisbane is K8L.....
By mendocinosummit on 7/6/2006 3:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
then why would they be only releasing low end X2's. I am cool with that, because that is all I'll evey buy, but doesn't the flagship usually get the new core also. I would expect to see the FX64 or FX66 a 65nm brisbane if that is K8L. So when will we see K8L, 2008?




RE: If Brisbane is K8L.....
By coldpower27 on 7/8/2006 1:34:54 AM , Rating: 2
Brisbane is not K8L, the first core based on that is likely the server Quad Core in Mid 2007, and in 2008 only will you see a revision of this architecture for desktops.

The flagship will eventually get the new core also once the 65nm process becomes mature enough, remember AMD released a Athlno FX 55 on Clawhammer 0.13 micron while they had their Winchester 90nm parts for the mainstream, it wasn't till San Diego in April/May 2005 that the FX line finally transistioned to 90nm.

K8L for desktops at least is likely to come in 2008.


Mobile Chips
By haring on 7/6/2006 10:40:48 PM , Rating: 2
For months they were talking about the DeskTop & Server Line Chips,why they are not into the Mobile line,as their rival has producing more n more Mobile Chips with more options. Since,AMD has started manfacturing new only Turion X2 with current new tech. line.So,when can we expect a full new choice of Mobile Chips.




RE: Mobile Chips
By animedude on 7/6/2006 11:37:28 PM , Rating: 2
AMD's lip is tight. They aren't revealing anything about their new mobile architecture. AMD hired a lot of engineers during the last two years, and splited into two design teams. So we will be seeing something new from them soon.


The return of the 2x1MB L2 Cache parts?
By MacGuffin on 7/7/2006 5:29:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
upcoming Athlon 64 X2 5200+. It’s expected to arrive this quarter and replace the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ as AMD’s second fastest processor clocked at 2.6 GHz with 2x512KB of L2 cache.


Pardon my comprehension skills but does this line (2.6GHz with 2x512KB L2) talk about the 5000+ or 5200+? Is the 5200+ just a lower-TDP version of the 5000+ or it has the increased cache (i.e. 2x1MB L2)?




By jak3676 on 7/7/2006 2:04:15 PM , Rating: 2
Just looking at the roadmap it looks like 5200 would have to be a return of the 2x1mb. I don't think it could be a 2.8GHz, as there is also a 5400 and 5600 on the roadmap, and these would have to be 3.0GHz and 3.2GHz. I don't think so. 5200 also couldn't be just a drop in TDP (to 65w) as they are scheduling a 5000 with 65/89w in Q3.

AMD is likely bringing back the 2x1mb cores, at least at the higher end. Do chips with faster clock speeds benifit more from larger caches than slower chips? It seems odd that AMD would go back to a concept they just dropped. Maybe they never meant to drop the 2x1mbs, just that they weren't needed (or price competative) at the lower clock speeds.

Looking at the roadmap, my best guess is that
5000 = 2.6 and 2x512
5200 = 2.6 and 2x1mb
5400 = 2.8 and 2x512
5600 = 2.8 and 2x1mb

AMD likes to keep both a speed step and a cache boost between their highest mainstream CPU and their FX series, so this makes sense.


no skt 939 love
By inthell on 7/6/2006 4:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
no 65nm for 939 oh well thats to be expected i guess.




a week later...
By Haul on 7/14/2006 4:24:29 AM , Rating: 2
A week later and still no one has noticed that this article is mislabeled as the June 2006 roadmap instead of July? Mistakes happen by writers all the time, but shame on you readers :)




woo
By joex444 on 7/6/06, Rating: -1
"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki