backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 52 comment(s) - last by Justin Case.. on Feb 9 at 3:55 PM


DailyTech's AMD Quad-Core Opteron Reference
Quad-core clock speeds and model names unveiled in AMD's latest Opteron road map

AMD’s latest Opteron product roadmap unveils details on the upcoming quad-core Opteron products. Upcoming quad-core AMD Opteron processors will be available in the Opteron 8000-series, 2000-series and 1000-series.

Quad-core AMD Opteron 8000-series and 2000-series will initially use the Barcelona core. AMD will ship quad-core Opteron processors in SE, vanilla and HE models.

All Opteron 8000 and 2000-series processors include SE, vanilla and HE models share similar attributes. Each processor core will have access to its own 512KB of L2 cache for a combined total of 2MB. L3 cache is new to the Barcelona-core Opteron models -- a shared pool of 2MB of L3 cache is available to all four cores.  

Barcelona-based Opteron 8000 and 2000-series Socket 1207 processors will have three HyperTransport links, though at launch the processor will only support HyperTransport 1.0 instead of the faster HyperTransport 3.0 bus. Other notable features of Barcelona quad-core processors include support for registered DDR2-667 and AMD-V technology. Quad-core Opteron 8000 and 2000-series processors will use the same socket F as its dual-core counterparts.

At the top of the quad-core Opteron chain are six Opteron SE processors – three Opteron 8000 and three Opteron 2000-series. The AMD Opteron 8272 SE and 2272 SE are clocked at 2.6 GHz while the middle-of-the-line Opteron 8270 SE and 2270 SE are clocked at 2.5 GHz. There is also a lower speed Opteron 8268 SE and 2268 SE clocked at 2.4 GHz.

The Opteron SE models will have the highest thermal data power ratings in AMD’s quad-core lineup. AMD currently rates the Opteron SE models with 120W TDPs. It is unknown when AMD will launch its Opteron SE processor lineup, however, production is expected to begin in Q3’2007 for the Opteron 8270 SE, 8268 SE, 2270 SE and 2268 SE. The Opteron 8272 SE and 2272 SE will enter production later in Q2’2008.

Moving into the middle of the AMD Opteron line-up are eight vanilla Opteron 8000 and 2000-series processors. AMD Opteron 8266 and 2266, 8264 and 2264, and 8262 and 2262 are clocked at 2.3 GHz, 2.2 GHz and 2.1 GHz respectively. These models will enter production in June 2007 with a mid-2007 launch date.

AMD expects to launch vanilla Opteron 8268 and 2268 models clocked at 2.4 GHz like to the Opteron 8268 SE and 2268 SE models too, though the vanilla Opteron 8268 and 2268 will enter production 3-quarters later than the SE models. Vanilla AMD Opteron models will have slightly lower TDP ratings at 95W instead of the 120W of Opteron SE models.

Four Opteron HE models will be available for the low power inclined. The Opteron 8260 HE, 2260 HE, 8258 HE and 2258 HE have 2.0 GHz and 1.9 GHz respective clocks. These low power Opteron HE models have 68W TDPs. Expect the Opteron HE models to enter production in Q3’07.

AMD’s Budapest core is behind the Opteron 1000-series processors. Budapest will drop into AMD’s single processor socket AM2 platform and be compatible with current HyperTransport 1.0 motherboards and upcoming HyperTransport 3.0 compatible motherboards (socket AM2+). HyperTransport 3.0 support aside, the Budapest-based Opteron 1000-series have 4x512KB of L2 cache, 2MB of L3 and support for AMD-V technology like the Opteron 8000 and 2000-series. Unlike the multi-processor capable offerings, Opteron 1000-series processors support unregistered DDR2-800 memory.

There will not be as many quad-core Opteron 1000-series models this time around, unlike the Opteron 8000 and 2000-series line-ups. Two SE and three vanilla Opteron 1000-series models complete AMD’s quad-core Opteron lineup. The Opteron 1270 SE and 1268 SE have 2.5 GHz and 2.4 GHz respective clocks. AMD does not have a 2.6 GHz Opteron 1000-series model planned now. Nevertheless, the Opteron 1000-series SE models have 120W TDP ratings.

The three vanilla Opteron 1000-series models include the Opteron 1266, 1264 and 1262 clocked at 2.3 GHz, 2.2 GHz and 2.1 GHz respectively. These models have a lower 95W TDP rating.

Expect AMD Opteron 1000-series models to enter production in Q4’07 with an undetermined launch date.


Comments     Threshold


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

Smallest performance increase ever
By photoguy99 on 2/6/07, Rating: 0
RE: Smallest performance increase ever
By lplatypus on 2/6/2007 1:50:30 AM , Rating: 3
AMD has already done this recently with the 65nm Athlon 64 X2 4800+(2.5GHz) vs 5000+(2.6GHz).

The record is probably held by Intel though: remember the 3000MHz vs 3066MGz Pentium 4's?


RE: Smallest performance increase ever
By Calin on 2/6/2007 2:43:35 AM , Rating: 2
There were also the Pentium !!! 900 and 933 (on 100MHz and 133MHz bus) to be taken into account - which is less than 4%


By Hare on 2/6/2007 3:39:04 AM , Rating: 2
Back then the bus was the bottleneck. Getting 133mhz instead of 100mhz is a more than 4% performance increase depending on the usage of the processor.


By nah on 2/7/2007 6:49:23 AM , Rating: 2
;)


By aka1nas on 2/6/2007 1:59:04 AM , Rating: 2
My guess is that they need a lower model to justify charging more for the top model. That and they probably aren't willing to go above the TDP limits they are hitting already for a server proc and they can't currently ramp up clocks higher otherwise.



RE: Smallest performance increase ever
By coldpower27 on 2/6/2007 8:39:38 AM , Rating: 2
Intel has done the 2.5GHZ to 2.6GHZ 400FSB P4 to my knowledge.

But in terms of the same product line, this may be one of the smaller increments in a long time.

This allows increased product granularity so there are more stepping stones between SKU for pricing.

As well for a heavily aware SMP app, the difference between the 2.5GHZ - 2.6GHZ Dual Core could be as much as the difference between the 2.4GHZ and 2.6GHZ Quad Core.


RE: Smallest performance increase ever
By photoguy99 on 2/6/2007 9:25:59 AM , Rating: 2
>Intel has done the 2.5GHZ to 2.6GHZ 400FSB P4 to my knowledge.

No, never by Intel before and never by AMD before has there been two cpus where the only difference is a 4% clock speek bump.

There have of course been cases <4% when cache, FSB, or architecture has also changed, but never the case where spending more money bought you only 4% clock.

Also the Intel quad you note is 2.4->2.66 rather than 2.4->2.6. I guess the 0.06Ghz starts to matter when were talking only 0.1Ghz product changes now from AMD.

The funny thing to me is 4% is close to the statistical margin of error for some benchmarks. :)


RE: Smallest performance increase ever
By coldpower27 on 2/6/2007 10:33:11 AM , Rating: 2
Never really eh, considering the existence of the 2.5GHZ and 2.6GHZ 400FSB Pentium 4's I would have to disagree with you.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpe...

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpe...

You have never actually done any research have you.

So like I said already done by Intel with the 2.5GHZ and 2.6GHZ FSB400 Pentium 4's.


By photoguy99 on 2/6/2007 2:43:13 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, I stand corrected for correcting you. You da man (or woman possibly).

At least that now that Intel has done it I can't be marked an AMD basher for saying this: It's a stupid idea.

For the consumer it offers no value to split hairs at this level. Sure I understand from a marketing perspective it makes sense, but that benefits AMD and Intel, not consumers.





By Nanobaud on 2/6/2007 1:26:01 PM , Rating: 2
Well, how about different SKUs for the same processor binned for different TDP?


By mino on 2/6/2007 2:47:12 PM , Rating: 2
Athlon XP 2200+ 1.8GHz
Athlon XP 2100+ 1.73GHz
= 3.85%

go figure


By leidegre on 2/7/2007 5:07:46 AM , Rating: 2
Well, it's a good hint avrage for most things, but seriously, there is more to it than that.

AthlonXP (1.8GHz) == Athlon64 (1.8Ghz)?

Hmm, I recall myself upgrading from the AthlonXP to the Athlon64 processor, and gained about double the previous performance.


amd rush
By DaRkFib3r on 2/5/07, Rating: 0
RE: amd rush
By Goty on 2/5/2007 10:53:32 PM , Rating: 2
How is this a rush? It seems like a reasonable product launch to me.


RE: amd rush
By DaRkFib3r on 2/5/2007 11:10:13 PM , Rating: 1
Its just that if they waited a couple more months intel would of gotten more of the server market with their quad core xeon processors.

AMD are pretty behind with releases, it may have to do with its manufacturing ability.


RE: amd rush
By Justin Case on 2/9/2007 3:37:14 PM , Rating: 2
Not really, they're pretty much sticking to their roadmap. Intel released a couple of products ahead of their planned dates (by 3 months, more or less), but with extremely low availability, so they're also pretty much sticking to their roadmap. In other words, there's absolutely nothing new here.

AMD is still gaining market share in the server segment (and will continue to do so for the forseeable future). Intel's quad-core releases are aimed mainly at workstations / "power user" segment (single socket, and a subset of the dual-socket market). To regain the 4S and 4C/2S markets they need CSI; their CPUs are bandwidth limited. The faster FSB helps, but isn't enough. But 1S is where most of the money's at, so that's where Intel needs to regain (or at least stop losing) share.

Since the K7 days AMD moves from one process to another gradually, so they never have big performance jumps.


RE: amd rush
By JackPack on 2/6/2007 3:59:30 AM , Rating: 2
Look at the "Production" and the "Lanuch" dates of the first parts.

That's one hell of a rush.

Basically, AMD marketing is trying to squeeze and claim a mid 2007 launch. You can probably guess whether we'll see a paper or silicon lanuch in mid '07.


RE: amd rush
By Viditor on 2/6/2007 9:49:43 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Look at the "Production" and the "Lanuch" dates of the first parts


That's not a rush, it's impossible...
I would bet that DT has made an error.
The second week of June IS mid 07! Maybe they meant shipping rather than production (because I believe production has already started in Jan 07).

It takes 3 months from production start to deliver the first chip...


RE: amd rush
By coldpower27 on 2/6/2007 10:35:53 AM , Rating: 2
Well Mid 2007 would be from April 1st to August 31st 2007, SO if AMD can get shipping product by Late August they are still in the clear for Mid 2007.

If production is in Early June, they should be able to make a Late August Launch.

The thing this is different from the earlier projected timetable of Q2 2007 for the Server level Quad Cores.