Print 66 comment(s) - last by PrinceGaz.. on Jul 12 at 7:36 AM

100MHz granularity, DDR2-800 for all

DailyTech has come across an AMD update that outlines minor upgrades 65nm processors will receive. Athlon 64 X2 and Sempron processors will be getting 65nm Fab process treatments. Single-core AMD Athlon products will remain on a 90nm Fab process with no foreseeable 65nm future. With the new 65nm Fab process AMD will be able to increase frequency increases of 100MHz increments unlike the 200MHz increments of current products. This will be interesting as AMD can theoretically abandon all 2x1MB parts in favor of 2x512KB parts with 100MHz frequency differences. DDR2-800 support will be brought to all 65nm processors including the Sempron. This should bring welcomed performance improvements to the AMD Sempron product lineup.

New 65nm products will be compatible with existing motherboards as long as proper BIOS are available to identify the new CPUID and take advantage of the new features. Production of 65nm AMD Athlon 64 X2 products are expected towards the end of the year in December. AMD Sempron processors will begin sampling in Q1’07 while production is expected to begin in Q2’07. All 65nm products will be Socket AM2 based only and remain based on AMD’s K8 architecture and are not related to AMD’s upcoming K8L architecture. As previously reported, AMD Athlon 64 FX products will continue to use a 90nm Fab process in the near future.

Comments     Threshold

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

Who Cares?
By zombiexl on 7/10/2006 2:34:13 PM , Rating: 3
AS an AMD fan I'm really turned off by the fact that AMD doesnt seem to have anything to compete with Intel's next offering.

Does AMD really think that simple being able to move in 100mhz increments and adding ddr2 to the semperon are good enough responses to Intel?

Honestly I'd liek them both to have chips that perform similar so that we can all benefit from a price war..

RE: Who Cares?
By Goty on 7/10/2006 2:41:18 PM , Rating: 5
Well, there is one advantage to AMD not being quite as competitive anymore: we're probably going to get a pricing structure similar to that of the AthlonXP days. If that turns out to be the case, I'll probably stick with AMD for the fact that I'm a broke college student. AMD may suffer in the short run, but I doubt anyone can predict exactly how things are going to shape up down the road.

RE: Who Cares?
By zombiexl on 7/10/2006 2:55:00 PM , Rating: 2
I'm all for a bargain. I usually buy based on price vs. performance. I'm waiting for Intel to launch before I decide what I'll buy, but I'm also concerned that AMD still seems to think their dual cores are worth 2x as much as intel's.

RE: Who Cares?
By Hare on 7/10/2006 6:20:55 PM , Rating: 2
That's because they are (for now). Pentium D is a terrible chip (heat performance per mhz).

RE: Who Cares?
By DallasTexas on 7/10/2006 7:01:53 PM , Rating: 1
"..That's because they are (for now). Pentium D is a terrible chip (heat performance per mhz)..."

Possibly. In comparison to Core2 DUO, it seems like AMD now has it's own "PentiumD" - AMD64 X2 !

WOuld you now say that the X2 is then a "terrible chip" by comparison? ...I didn't think so.

RE: Who Cares?
By zombiexl on 7/10/2006 10:14:41 PM , Rating: 2
The X2 is great(now), but how will it stack up against Core2. Early reports dont look good. The price/performance crown seems to be ready to move over to Intel for at least 6-12 months.

RE: Who Cares?
By Locutus465 on 7/11/2006 12:25:19 PM , Rating: 2
Possibly. In comparison to Core2 DUO, it seems like AMD now has it's own "PentiumD" - AMD64 X2 !

Not quite, the Pentium D was simply an inefficient design. From an era when Intel was under the impression that they'd win over the compitition with better marketing rather than technology.

The X2 is a solid design, but all indications are that Intel has learned their lessons and came up with something which is, apparently, better.

On the other hand, AMD may simply need to tweek the X2 to compete with Core2 (i.e. make it wider). Intel had to scrap netburst...

RE: Who Cares?
By Deathspawner on 7/11/2006 10:59:31 AM , Rating: 2
My D 820 at 3.92GHz hits 71ºC on water. So I agree.

RE: Who Cares?
By PrinceGaz on 7/12/2006 7:36:03 AM , Rating: 2
Jeez, if it didn't have to be a closed-loop system with specially treated water, you could hook it up to the water-mains and use it as your home's water-heater. The water coming out of the water-block is probably about as hot as normal household hot water!

RE: Who Cares?
By bamacre on 7/10/2006 3:02:27 PM , Rating: 5
This may not be pointed at you inparticular, but lately I've seen this from AMD fans...

In comparing Pentium D 900's to AMD X2's, "The Pentium D's are cheaper, but the X2's are faster, so I'll go with the X2."

In comparing AMD X2's to Intel C2D, "The C2D is faster, but the X2's are cheaper, so I'll go with the X2."


RE: Who Cares?
By smitty3268 on 7/10/2006 3:13:08 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, I have seen that as well. Of course, I've seen the same kind of switch occuring in Intel fans in the opposite direction. :)

Right now I think I'd recommend the 900's for a cheaper machine and wait on anything more expensive. In a few months, though, the X2 should be looking good for the cheaper machines while Conroes are used for higher end machines.

RE: Who Cares?
By bamacre on 7/10/2006 4:28:08 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I think so, too. It really depends on how these price drops work out and the real pricing/availability of the C2D's. The cheapest C2D's may be much better options than the X2's, but we just won't know until we see stuff on the shelves and their included price tags.

AMD is really going to have to get that X2 3800+ down in price to compete with the cheapest C2D. Even then, the higher clocked X2's are going to have some extremely tough competition with C2D.

Nevertheless, AMD's single cores are easy recomendations. Intel really has nothing to compete with AMD here, not on price nor performance. The 3800+ single core is already a great buy for $140 shipped (ZZF). It's a hell of a lot faster than a Pentium 630/631, and significantly cheaper.

But it is really nice to see some good competition for the dual core cpu's because that is where the eyes are focused. Consumers have needed this kind of competition for a long time. I guess we can thank Intel for finally bringing a top notch product to the table, and also AMD, for forcing them to do so.

RE: Who Cares?
By smitty3268 on 7/10/2006 5:07:11 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, AMD totally owns the single core market. The problem is that I would have a hard time recommending anyone to get a single core cpu right now except for the $500 boxes. I think we're in a transition period right now and in a year or two anyone without dual core is going to be missing out.

RE: Who Cares?
By cgrecu77 on 7/10/2006 10:08:58 PM , Rating: 2
for MOST home users a single core is better than a dual-core ... Most people only do trivial stuff with their computers, for example I recently upgrade my wife's box from a celeron to a A64 3200+ and she complained that it "feels" slower ...
The only place where home users need all the power is games and all evidence indicates that multi core will be useless for gaming in the near future ...
Of course, if the difference in price would be minor than dualcore is better, but as it is now, a A64 3700+ at $150 is a much better solution than X2 3800+ at $300 ...

RE: Who Cares?
By coldpower27 on 7/10/2006 10:30:45 PM , Rating: 2
This situation will not hold much longer, for typically usage a Pentium 4 with HT will be better for most task and fell more responsive.

July 23rd bring price cuts for Intel's Pentium 4's as well. Some will be under 100US.

RE: Who Cares?
By ElJefe69 on 7/11/2006 4:47:19 AM , Rating: 2
everything a dual core system does is faster in a windows environment. no lag, no stops, blips, crap popping up, little loads to slow you down, all computers should have been dual processor or dual core from the start. I remember a dual pentium pro machine on windows NT. was a sick thing to watch back then.

RE: Who Cares?
By AMDfreak on 7/10/2006 4:23:04 PM , Rating: 2
That's probably the case for the real fanboys. However, despite my name I'm builing a conroe system next. This will be my first Intel CPU since the 486, but I'm looking for max performance for the money and conroe is it.

RE: Who Cares?
By Tom Tom on 7/10/06, Rating: 0
RE: Who Cares?
By Nocturnal on 7/10/2006 3:16:54 PM , Rating: 2
You know honestly, I don't ever see the prices becoming so low like the Athlon XP days. I think AMD's ego is too big for that. They think they're the hot stuff right now and that they can charge whatever they want and people will still buy. That is why I'm jumping ship and moving over to Conroe. I just don't see this happening. They may prove me wrong but I don't see it happening anytime soon. Yes, I know that price cuts are just a few weeks away but still, they plan on making the 3600 X2 @ $150 and then what? The X2 3800+ still at $250ish? No way, that's just ridiculous.

RE: Who Cares?
By Loc13 on 7/10/2006 4:07:39 PM , Rating: 2
If i remember correctly, there's NO 3600 X2. And they're cutting the X2 3800+ will be cut down to around $160 the day after Conroe launches. That's a VERY GOOD DEAL, by the way. Please do your research before you write.

RE: Who Cares?
By coldpower27 on 7/10/2006 4:52:31 PM , Rating: 2
The official price of the X2 3800+ will be 169US, so more like ~ 170US.

The E6300 will be 183US, so it will quite the match there.

RE: Who Cares?
By kamel5547 on 7/10/2006 5:47:24 PM , Rating: 2
Well at the moment there is no 3600 however it has been announced. "The AMD Athlon 64 X2 processor will run at 2.00GHz and will contain 512KB of level two (L2) cache (256KB per core), while being made for the AM2 form-factor."

RE: Who Cares?
By MacGuffin on 7/10/2006 2:53:18 PM , Rating: 3
Neoseeker posted an article today (

They say,
Given that the K8L will not be available until at least Q1 2008, AMD's only logical response to Intel's upcoming Conroe is to lower prices and pursue its 4x4 (dual processor) initiative.

I want to know what they are smoking if they think 4x4 is a viable option for the mass market. Last time I checked, it required two FX CPUs?

RE: Who Cares?
By smitty3268 on 7/10/2006 3:09:06 PM , Rating: 2
Presumably (at least I hope) they are aware that it will only be for the very high end, and intend on making regular A64's good enough to compete against mainstream Conroes.

However, it isn't exactly unheard of. Look at Apple's highend machines. They currently do the same thing but with G5's.

RE: Who Cares?
By mlittl3 on 7/10/2006 3:32:24 PM , Rating: 1
I agree. AMD is doing all the wrong things. They aren't even moving the FX CPU's to 65 nm which should eventually end of cheaper and have lower power consumption. 2006 is the year of AMD (C2D will not ramp until 2007). 2007 will be the year of Intel crushing AMD.

RE: Who Cares?
By rushfan2006 on 7/10/2006 3:43:31 PM , Rating: 2
Your right WHO DOES CARE.....if AMD loses out this year and Intel is on top or vice versa...I don't own stock in either company, people that I care about don't depend on either company for a paycheck. What would concern me is if one would year after year smash the other so bad they it pretty much is the monopoly (re: old Intel days anyone?) and I only care then because CPU prices will skyrocket faster than gas prices

My point to this post -- buy what you like for your budget and the goals of the system you are building, not to be trendy or whatever.

Its beyond silly to me that people have blind allegiance to a company like they personally built the company up or something.

RE: Who Cares?
By DigitalFreak on 7/11/2006 8:24:10 AM , Rating: 2
Fan boys must die!

RE: Who Cares?
By Tom Tom on 7/10/2006 5:48:22 PM , Rating: 2
Funny Zombie, you dont sound like an AMD fan. Hmm intersesting an Athlon X2 at 65nm in August. Did you hear Hanns Depp say that there would be a 40% increase in transistor performance going from 90nm to 65nm. I think thats something for any AMD fan to get excited about.

RE: Who Cares?
By Questar on 7/10/2006 8:36:45 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, you're stupid.

That was reagrding the new IBM SOI process vs a chip that doesn't use SOI. It was never compared to current SOI based chips.

Also, 40% transistor performance != 40% CPU performance.

RE: Who Cares?
By Tom Tom on 7/10/2006 9:00:53 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Who Cares?
By Questar on 7/10/2006 9:15:57 PM , Rating: 2
Be carefull who you call stupid.


But the third generation of strained silicon is expected to provide a 40 percent improvement in transistor performance, Deppe said.

Third generation, not 65nm.
40% compared to what?

At least I can read.

RE: Who Cares?
By Tom Tom on 7/10/2006 10:31:28 PM , Rating: 2
Explain this for me

45nm will most likely involve incremental enhancements to our second or third generation 65nm high-performance technology, which is expected to be industry leading in terms of performance and power efficiency for our product space.

RE: Who Cares?
By zombiexl on 7/10/2006 10:25:58 PM , Rating: 2
Funny Zombie, you dont sound like an AMD fan.

Considering 3 of 3 of my desktops are AMD based and only my laptops (one which was purchased by my company, and the other that was too good of a deal to pass up) are Intel.
So.. I'd beg to differ.

Although I have no allegience to either company, I have been using AMD exclusively (better performance/price) for many years in machines I build. My last intel was an OC'd dual celeron on a BP6, and was one for 4 machines and the only Intel I had at the time.

This time around I may have to consider Intel. It doesnt mean I dont like AMD, i still thank them for forcing Intel to start bing innovative again.

As for the article you mention, no I havent read it. Maybe I'll look it up when I have more time.

RE: Who Cares?
By Locutus465 on 7/11/2006 8:44:22 AM , Rating: 2
K8L is going to be AMD's answer to Conero... Personally, I don't veiw this as being much different from when ATI was controlling the GPU market, then nVidia suddenly released the gForce 6800. Now things have more or less evened out in that market, and they will once again in the CPU market. Of course I guess it's easy for me to be ok with this as I upgrade my system to an x2 not too long ago, and was planning on not doing a serious upgrade for a couple years anyway.

AMD isn't threatened
By TheDoc9 on 7/10/2006 5:03:00 PM , Rating: 2
The thing is, these core cheaps are barely, barely going to make up 25% of intels shippments by years end (If I remimber correctly). By then AMD is realeasing the first Iterations of the K8L, which will most likely directly compete with the core2.

AMD has been down in the trenches for many years, don't think they don't have something planned in retaliation.

RE: AMD isn't threatened
By cnimativ on 7/10/2006 6:54:30 PM , Rating: 1
K8L is slated for release in end of 2007/early 2008.

what you talked about is merely a die shrink of current rev.F (AM2) chips.

RE: AMD isn't threatened
By coldpower27 on 7/10/2006 10:33:10 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed with the K8L part for desktops, I don't think there will be anything derived from this architecture till 2008.

RE: AMD isn't threatened
By Viditor on 7/11/2006 6:39:51 AM , Rating: 2
K8L is slated for release in end of 2007/early 2008

K8L is slated for mid 2007

RE: AMD isn't threatened - DUNNO ABOUE THAT
By DallasTexas on 7/10/2006 6:55:07 PM , Rating: 1
"...these core cheaps are barely, barely going to make up 25% of intels shippments by years end (If I remimber correctly).."

You remember wrong. Intel has already reached the 50% crossover point between 65nm and 90nm shipments. I'm afraid AMD will be swimming in Intel core2 chips by the end of the year. Tell that to pukin Hector Ruiz.

"..By then AMD is realeasing the first Iterations of the K8L, which will most likely directly compete with the core2..."

I think you are now starting to make crap up. See a doctor. There is no sight of K8L till, like 2008, most likely. It's painful, I know, but that where the blue pills come in. In fact any 65nm in 2006 will be , like 3 parts, in order to claim they shipped 65nm in their annual report. AMD is SOL for at least 12 months.

"..AMD has been down in the trenches for many years, don't think they don't have something planned in retaliation..."

I agree AMD knows what a trench looks like. I don;y know about the other part of your comment. I think they will put some new lipstick on hypertransport and hope for the best.

By saratoga on 7/10/2006 7:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
You remember wrong. Intel has already reached the 50% crossover point between 65nm and 90nm shipments. I'm afraid AMD will be swimming in Intel core2 chips by the end of the year. Tell that to pukin Hector Ruiz.

Intel 65nm chips != Core2. Intel sells 65nm P-M and P4 deriviates as well.

RE: AMD isn't threatened - DUNNO ABOUE THAT
By smitty3268 on 7/10/2006 7:49:50 PM , Rating: 2
It was Intel's own slides a couple of weeks ago that had the 25% number, so I would assume that is an optimistic goal. Most of those 65nm parts are PD 900s.

RE: AMD isn't threatened - DUNNO ABOUE THAT
By DallasTexas on 7/10/2006 8:36:00 PM , Rating: 2
Yep. I guess I jumped the gun on Core2's volumes so I'm wrong on that. I had not seen those slides but will look for them in my company. I optimize compilers for both Intel and AMD chips so I get to see some roadmap info. If I had to guess, I would say that that availabilit if Core2's in the 4Q of this year is not a problem - esp as the industry is growing slower than either AMD or Intel planned.

It's a gonna be a BRUTAL 2Q for earnings for both companies.

By Questar on 7/10/2006 8:40:20 PM , Rating: 2
It's a gonna be a BRUTAL 2Q for earnings for both companies.

Q3 looks to be even worse. I see AMD in the red.

By Oderus on 7/11/2006 12:21:11 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like you should see the doctor. It's a shame to see how quick people jump at the opportunity to slam someone just because they don't agree.

By nserra on 7/12/2006 6:20:22 AM , Rating: 1
I optimize compilers for both Intel and AMD chips

Looking at your post is more like:
I optimize for Intel to perform faster, and,
I optimize for AMD to slow it down as much as I can.

By Merglet on 7/10/2006 11:20:23 PM , Rating: 2
Wow you really don't like AMD, do you? "pukin Hector Riaz"? Hypertransport with lipstick? Do you work for Intel or were you fired by AMD? Sheesh.

RE: AMD isn't threatened
By Questar on 7/10/2006 8:39:34 PM , Rating: 4
The thing is, these core cheaps are barely, barely going to make up 25% of intels shippments by years end (If I remimber correctly).

That's a matter of demand, not supply.

RE: AMD isn't threatened
By Kim Leo on 7/11/06, Rating: 0
100Mhz increments
By Doormat on 7/10/2006 3:12:28 PM , Rating: 2
The 100Mhz increments only seem to be for price point issues. From 2.2Ghz, 2.3... up to 2.8Ghz is seven models with prices from $150 up to say, $600. This is better than their situation now where they have the 3800, 4200, 4600, and the 5000 with bigger price gaps. Intel can be seen doing the same thing with their new Core Solo and Core Duo chips (T1350 at 1.83Ghz and a T2250 1.73GHz). Adding more products into the lineup for better price granularity.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By ziggo on 7/10/2006 3:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
I dont really see the point. If all the increments are on the same core, I have never had a problem overclocking the lower clocked chips well up into the higher end.

My old socket A 1800+ ran at 2400+ for 2 years, and my s939 3000+ has been running at 2.4ghz on stock cooling for over a year. If you are intelligent enough to build a system and debate the merits of having a 2.2Ghz over a 2.3Ghz you are smart enough to know that a minimal overclock is going to get you to 2.3 anyway.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By mlittl3 on 7/10/2006 3:37:04 PM , Rating: 2
DIY builders have never ever mattered when it comes to marketing products. Products are marketed to the mass market obviously. Enthusiasts some times get catered to in the form of products like EE and FX CPUs but even these are laughable. System builders will just report the model numbers and charge $50 more for a 3700+ over a 3600+. It's that simple.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By ziggo on 7/10/2006 3:53:09 PM , Rating: 2
But that many increments seems excessive for system builders to create product lines for. The "Mass-market" wants good-better-best, and 100mhz increments isnt significant when you consider that the increment is about 1/20th of the clock speed.

I know I dont run the world, but I would use 400mhz increments. Reduce the lines of product to produce, and simplify everyone's life including the system builders who now only have to deal with 3 proccessors to offer.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By smitty3268 on 7/10/2006 5:15:25 PM , Rating: 2
Here is why they're doing it:

Virtually all of the cpus they produce now can run at 2.6GHz, but only a small percentage of people are willing to pay as much as AMD is charging for that speed. So those chips are underclocked to run at 2.4Ghz, 2.2, 2.0, and so on and given corresponding price reductions. But say someone is willing to pay a little more than a 2GHz part costs but unwilling to go up to the cost of a 2.2GHz part. In that case, AMD would like to be able to clock the cpu to 2.1Ghz so they can get more money for the exact same part.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By hwhacker on 7/10/2006 3:31:31 PM , Rating: 2
While that is AFAIK market-speakly correct, I do believe 4x4 (which should be called 2x2 or 2x4 when quad cores are available) will accept lower-level cpus. It's the only feasible option to compete or exceed Conroe, seemingly until at least K8L (which itsself will have to take on Nehalem).

If you take a couple cheap X2's, each with their own memory bus using two dimm slots apiece, which from slides looks like the way it will work, it should be able to to compete with Core2Duo at a similar price for cpus. Considering Intel mobos are expensive as hell, even the mobos could be competitively priced as well. If those conditions are met, surely they have a chance. I think that's what they're eluding to.

If you're right though, and it's just FX cpus (which I don't understand how they could force ONLY fx's to work) for graphic workstations...You're absolutely right. They must be smoking something, C2D will dominate.

As for 100mhz increments...Does this mean the mem controller will now fully support 1/2 multis? 'Cause that's what it seems to mean...and well, that kicks ass. Am I the only one that's been waiting for that?

RE: 100Mhz increments
By mlittl3 on 7/10/2006 3:39:23 PM , Rating: 2
News reports indicate only FX CPUs will work in the 4x4 motherboards but I too wonder how they will prevent X2 CPUs from working since they are exactly the same except for the CPUID (which probably answers our question).

RE: 100Mhz increments
By wyrmrider on 7/10/2006 7:21:53 PM , Rating: 2
to work in a 4x4 one cpu must have two hypertransport ports to talk to the second cpu and the i/o
4x4 is currently asymetrical not smp
there is no i/o on the second socket (hopefully maybe later second HT or an HTX link
do all x2s have two HT links? do the 512's- the 1mb's?
FX's are really 100 series opeterons (if I remember correctly)
and have the requisite two HT links per cpu- are they on the same core?
are the fx/s and 1mb x2/s on the same core?
I recommended to AMD at the Tech tour the necessity for low cost cpu availability for acceptance for 4x4
can they "unlock" an existing second ht link?
or will the core with the second ht HAVE to be used
They did not have the answer to that question.
I think limiting 4x4 to fx only is a BIG mistake
lots of apps could benefit - those with high memory but limited computation needs and those that might use a co-processor and just need an inexpensive i/o processor- and others
anyone remember the dual celeron hack? worked like crazy for no $$$ same dual xp's
Since we also want to see HTX ports on single socket MB/s all cpu's should have 2 or more ht links (except perhaps sempron)
any other ideas why 1mb parts are gone for now?
perhaps they will return 4x4 enabled :)


JBW I would like to see the ECC be available on all cpu's- let the customer decide if they want to spend for ECC RAM and just plug it in

RE: 100Mhz increments
By defter on 7/11/2006 3:24:22 AM , Rating: 2
While that is AFAIK market-speakly correct, I do believe 4x4 (which should be called 2x2 or 2x4 when quad cores are available) will accept lower-level cpus.

The problem with this approach is that it would kill low-end Opteron 2xx sales.

For example, currently cheapest dual core 2-way capable Opteron costs $355 on pricewatch. If 4x4 would accept low-end X2s, then many who want a cheap quad-core server/workstation would just plug in 2x$150 X2-3800+s and save over $300 in the process.

Thus AMD has a big problem. If they limit 4x4 to FXs, it won't be very useful against Conroe. If they allow cheap X2s to be used with 4x4, they would lose a lot of Opteron sales that are bringing them a nice profit currently.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By emboss on 7/11/2006 4:59:52 AM , Rating: 2
Easy: they split AM2 like they have with socket 940. You will be able to buy 2-way AM2 Opterons, and the FX simply becomes a rebadge of an AM2 2-way Opteron. 2-way Opterons will cost the same on AM2 and 940, with the FX coming in at the usual $1K price point. You won't be able to run a "normal" 1-way AM2 in a 2-way configuration, exactly as you can't run a 1xx S940 Opteron in a 2-way configuration (or a 2xx Opteron in an 8-way configuration).

The only problem is that they split their 2-way Opteron sales across two (or three, once socket-F comes in) platforms, which reduces economies of scale a little. The only reason I can think of why they'd be doing this (as opposed to using socket-F for 4x4) is that there's some problem with the socket-F platform, such as the number of pins requiring another PCB later on the motherboard. With AM2 they may be able to get away with fewer layers, therefore a cheaper board. Probably means that there will be a fairly small number of socket-F 2-way boards, with the majority of such boards being 4-way or higher.

RE: 100Mhz increments
By mlittl3 on 7/10/2006 3:34:25 PM , Rating: 2

This is the inquirer story showing more Yonah increments at 1.73 GHz in case anyone says they never heard of it.

Enable new features?
By Tanclearas on 7/10/2006 5:17:50 PM , Rating: 2
So a BIOS update would be required to "enable new features". I wonder if that is just in reference to the 100MHz increments.

RE: Enable new features?
By Master Kenobi on 7/10/2006 5:35:48 PM , Rating: 1
It's really irrelevant, all the enthusiasts will likely jump to the Intel train, if the hardware sites can show that Conroe can overclock well. If its shown Conroe doesnt overclock well, it will be a low adoption rate among the enthusaists, but who cares, they only make up a small percentage of the market. Intel is looking for all the morons who run out and buy HP, DELL, Sony, Whatever and see OMG 2.1GHZ TEH WINNAR!

RE: Enable new features?
By hwhacker on 7/10/2006 5:47:34 PM , Rating: 2
We already know Conroe overclocks well, with ~430-something fsb on a good motherboard w/o mods. 3.5-3.8 avg on air and stock volts. :P

Enthusiasts don't wait for HW site reviews, they are already looking for (and in some cases ordering/receiving) their E6600-E6700's. ;)

I've never understood the "mainstream" arguement. If you're on this site you probably want the best, or the best for your dollar. You're of course entitled to your opinion though.

Here is hoping 4x4 is a viable platform though, as it seems AMD's only hope until 2008. It may even be needed then (K8L 4x4) to compete with Nehalem.

RE: Enable new features?
By saratoga on 7/10/2006 7:20:36 PM , Rating: 2
We already know Conroe overclocks well, with ~430-something fsb on a good motherboard w/o mods. 3.5-3.8 avg on air and stock volts. :P

I call bull shit. How many people have stable 3.8GHz Conroe systems with stock voltage and air cooling?

RE: Enable new features?
By Khenglish on 7/10/2006 8:28:29 PM , Rating: 3
No, he's completely right. Almost every chip with stepping 5 reaches 3.7gHz, and with some extra voltage 4-4.1 is stable on air. With LN2 there is at least one stable 5gHz chip (Coolaler at XS), and he ran superpi 1M at 5.266gHz and got a time of 9.828s.

AMD could still compete
By raven3x7 on 7/10/2006 3:29:42 PM , Rating: 2
With clear indication from Intel that core 2 duo processors will have limited availability for some time to come, AMD might not be able to keeep the performance crown, but they should have no trouble competing with Intels lower-mid end(Pentuim D) if they lower their prices enough. On the other hand Rev.G might have improvements AMD hasn't yet talked about.
About 4x4 AMD could add more HTT interconnects to the Athlon64 X2 in Rev. G, in order to make it available to their mainstream platform and this could be a viable short-term solution for the mid-high end , particularly if we start seeing more multithreaded applications and games. Imagine a dual Athlon64 X2 4200 setup for like 400 Euro. We'll have to wait and see i guess

.5 dividers?
By lifebread on 7/10/2006 5:41:48 PM , Rating: 2
this possibly imply that AMD will support .5 dividers and CPUs with odd multipliers can run DDR2 full speed at 800MHz

"This is from the It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh
Related Articles
AMD June 2006 Product Roadmap
July 6, 2006, 2:52 PM
AMD Announces More K8L Details
June 1, 2006, 2:02 PM
Gearing Up For AMD Revision G
May 24, 2006, 5:35 AM
Introducing AMD's AM2 Platform
May 22, 2006, 11:41 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki